STYLE UP! Letter to JSC on ‘irregular & unprofessional’ conduct of the aptitude test of magistrate Grade 1
Dear editor,
The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is mandated with recruitment and regulation of judicial officers; it derives this mandate from the constitution of Uganda.
It has given me a lot of thoughts having seen how irregular and unprofessional the aptitude test of magistrate Grade 1 was conducted by JSC because I subscribe to the equity maxim that “justice should not be done but should be seen to be done”.
On the 4th April, 2023 as a budding advocate in waiting after successfully completing my bar course at law development centre last year, I was asked by my mentor who happens to be my elder brother to drive him to Makerere University where he was scheduled to do an aptitude test conducted by JSC for Magistrate Grade 1. I was excited by the invitation and I happily took it.
I was told by my brother along the way that he was in shift IV and he was sitting his aptitude at mid-day.
On arrival at Makerere University guest house at exactly 9am, we found a number of over 30 candidates reading through their notes as they discussed acts of parliament. I came to learn that most of them were for iii and IV shifts.
At around 10am, the 1st shift candidates who had sat their test joined them and discussed the aptitude questions one by one but they warned them that there was a possibility of changing the questions.
In my simple understanding, I knew that JSC mandated to recruit for the Judiciary would never allow such a mix up of candidates for an aptitude test.
I was very flaggerbasted when subsequent shifts (2&3) that sat the aptitude test came up claiming the test had not changed.
I also realised most of the candidates in the first shift who were free to mention their marks scored below 55% a few had between 55%-60%. Then I realized that as more shifts came out the performance improved to 70%.
I saw big groups with candidates that had sat the test discussing with candidates that had not yet sat the test. To some extent some candidates came out with papers with some aptitude questions.
At around 1pm it was my brothers’ last shift to sit the aptitude test.
Most were terrified that the test would be changed because most had discussed almost the entire questions in the aptitude.
I waited for 40 Minutes as they sat their test and the last shift candidates including my brother came out smiling that the paper had not changed and most of them had scored above 66%.
I was happy my brother had excelled but was very disappointed with the Judicial Service Commission.
I have always ranked it as the best service commission because it recruits for the Judiciary. I wondered how a reasonable service commission can have over seven hundred candidates sitting the same aptitude test in like five (6) hours and has no control and regulation on the mix up of candidates that have sat and those pending to sit the aptitude test every after forty (40) minutes.
I knew the aptitude test was to pick out the best candidates. I wondered whether this was representative of the competence of each candidate—very disappointed with the foregoing for once I had regrets why my name starts with Letter A not O.
I also know the mission of the Judicial Service Commission is to foster an accountable and effective judicial service through competence based recruitment.
Unless JSC had a strategy on how to rank candidates based on the shift used, the test results are not a true reflection of the competency of candidates.
Last shift candidates accessed the aptitude tests and read the answers.
I was told the results will be released in two weeks from the date of sitting; I look forward to seeing the performance of 1st shift compared with 3rd and 4th shifts.
The Judicial Service Commission can surely do better than this.
Wilfred Ahereza, Lawyer.
The views expressed here belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of the Red Pepper. Send your opinion, complaint, feedback, and letter to pepperopinions@gmail.com or call/text / WhatsApp 0777959024. Anonymous writers must indicate the reason.
About Post Author
