Da Dona
Senior Member
- Dec 16, 2025
- 159
- 159
More than 100 students at the Law Development Centre (LDC) have protested authorities,in a formal petition dated 23 March, they accuse the institution of enforcing unfair and punitive rules in the administration of its Bar Course examinations after they were declared to have failed(Daily Monitor)
UBC📸
The students argue that the current examination framework is rigid and inconsistent, particularly in the way it treats candidates who fail core subjects by small margins. At the centre of their grievance is LDC’s classification of examinable subjects into Category A (major/core subjects) and Category B (minor subjects), and the consequences attached to failure in each category.
Under the existing rules, a student who fails one or two Category A subjects is allowed to sit supplementary examinations. However, a student who fails three Category A subjects is automatically deemed to have failed the entire Bar Course and is required to repeat the whole academic year, regardless of how close they were to the pass mark.
According to the students, this rule is disproportionate and unjust, as it fails to account for marginal differences in performance and instead imposes a blanket penalty.
They contend that the policy creates unequal treatment among candidates. For instance, a student who fails three core subjects by a narrow margin is forced to repeat the year, while another who fails a combination of two core and one minor subject may be given an opportunity to sit supplementary exams and progress. This, they argue, undermines the principle of fairness and consistency in academic assessment.
In their petition, the students are seeking urgent intervention and reforms to the system. They are demanding that LDC allows them to sit supplementary examinations or, at the very least, permits them to retake only the subjects they failed instead of repeating the entire course. They maintain that the current system is punitive rather than corrective, placing unnecessary academic, financial, and emotional strain on affected students.
The matter has been escalated beyond the institution, with the students petitioning key stakeholders including the Attorney General, the Uganda Law Society, and the Parliament of Uganda, in a bid to secure broader intervention and review of the policy.
The stakes remain high, as the Bar Course at LDC is a mandatory requirement for anyone seeking to practice law in Uganda. Without completing it, law graduates cannot be enrolled as advocates or represent clients in court. As a result, the requirement to repeat the entire course not only delays entry into the legal profession but also imposes significant additional costs on students.
The students argue that the current examination framework is rigid and inconsistent, particularly in the way it treats candidates who fail core subjects by small margins. At the centre of their grievance is LDC’s classification of examinable subjects into Category A (major/core subjects) and Category B (minor subjects), and the consequences attached to failure in each category.
Under the existing rules, a student who fails one or two Category A subjects is allowed to sit supplementary examinations. However, a student who fails three Category A subjects is automatically deemed to have failed the entire Bar Course and is required to repeat the whole academic year, regardless of how close they were to the pass mark.
According to the students, this rule is disproportionate and unjust, as it fails to account for marginal differences in performance and instead imposes a blanket penalty.
They contend that the policy creates unequal treatment among candidates. For instance, a student who fails three core subjects by a narrow margin is forced to repeat the year, while another who fails a combination of two core and one minor subject may be given an opportunity to sit supplementary exams and progress. This, they argue, undermines the principle of fairness and consistency in academic assessment.
In their petition, the students are seeking urgent intervention and reforms to the system. They are demanding that LDC allows them to sit supplementary examinations or, at the very least, permits them to retake only the subjects they failed instead of repeating the entire course. They maintain that the current system is punitive rather than corrective, placing unnecessary academic, financial, and emotional strain on affected students.
The matter has been escalated beyond the institution, with the students petitioning key stakeholders including the Attorney General, the Uganda Law Society, and the Parliament of Uganda, in a bid to secure broader intervention and review of the policy.
The stakes remain high, as the Bar Course at LDC is a mandatory requirement for anyone seeking to practice law in Uganda. Without completing it, law graduates cannot be enrolled as advocates or represent clients in court. As a result, the requirement to repeat the entire course not only delays entry into the legal profession but also imposes significant additional costs on students.
