Uganda remains without a chief justice three months after the official retirement of Benjamin Odoki, as the search for his successor begins to prove complicated.

The Uganda Law Society is concerned over the delay, saying the leadership vacuum could precipitate a constitutional crisis if the post, and those of the deputy chief justice, the director of public prosecutions as well as the deputy director of public prosecutions are not filled.

As things stand, President Yoweri Museveni is under no legal obligation to announce his appointment within a set time.

Now voices from within the judiciary, including Justice Odoki, say there should be a time limit within which the president should respond to the recommendations of the Judicial Service Commission, which is tasked with recruiting judicial officers.

Some argue that failure or delay to appoint judicial officers compromises the independence of the judiciary by creating perceptions that eventual appointees occupy their offices less on the strength of their capabilities and more because of the benevolence of the appointing authority.

It also reinforces inefficiencies as absence of judicial officers increases the volume of cases that await hearing.

Lack of independence, cohesion, credibility, case backlog, and inadequate facilitation continue to blight the country’s judiciary, which, some analysts say, has emerged to play a critical democratising function as the final arbiter of more and more political contests arising from flawed electoral processes.

Thus, the job of designating a chief justice has ceased being as simple as it used to be.

Read: Judicial reforms: How will Uganda select its next judicial officers?

But political calculations, coupled with the need to balance power regionally and ethnically, have made Mr Odoki’s potential successors uncomfortable choices for President Museveni.

Following a call by the Commission for people to nominate qualifying candidates for the next chief justice, The EastAfrican has been reliably informed that three names — Justices Bert Magunda Katureebe, a member of the Supreme Court; Yorokamu Bamwine, currently the Principal Judge; and Peter C.R. Kabatsi, currently managing partner at Kampala Associated Advocates — have been submitted to the president.

The foremost factor that reportedly “disqualifies” all the three is that they hail from the same geographical region as President Museveni — the west.

Although it is not official policy, there has been an implicit understanding that the position of chief justice belongs to the east.

Practice has borne this out. All President Museveni’s appointments since British Justice Peter Allen swore him in 27 years ago have come from the east.

Justice Odoki, who comes from Busia, succeeded Justice Wako Wambuzi, who comes from Kaliro, who had succeeded Justice George Masika, who came from Mbale.

Although reference to tribal and ethnic biases in allocating government jobs is a ticket for criminal prosecution, the need for President Museveni to at least be seen to be an equitable distributor of national rents remains a pressing reality if he is to avoid accusations of concentrating key government posts in his tribal and regional backyard.

“There are silent concerns among power brokers within but also outside the judiciary that all nominees are westerners,” Nicholas Opiyo, a lawyer and regular political commentator, told The EastAfrican.

“These tribal and religious affiliations are realities of our political environment and the president, I think, takes them seriously or ought to take them seriously,” he added.

In the absence of the designated chief justice, Justice Steven Kavuma, the acting Deputy Chief Justice, has been placed in charge of the judiciary, which effectively makes him the acting Chief Justice. But the Uganda Law Society has protested this directive, arguing that it is unconstitutional.

“We contend that where there is no substantive Deputy Chief Justice to act as Chief Justice, a person holding the office of the DCJ in acting capacity cannot at the same time be an acting Chief Justice where there is no longer a substantive Chief Justice.

"The current DCJ is holding that office in an acting capacity and as such cannot also act as Chief Justice and to do so would be contrary to Article 133 (2) of the Constitution,” Ruth Sebatindira, the president of the law society, told reporters on July 2.

Those who know the three nominees well describe Justice Bamwine, a veteran judicial officer, as a tough and straight-talking jurist who would be difficult to sway to any one particular position; Justice Katureebe, formerly an Attorney General, as a principled man of impeccable record who, at one time, opposed the scrapping of term limits; and Mr Kabatsi, formerly a DPP and Solicitor General, as an astute lawyer with decades of varied legal experience under his belt.

“Part of what is now taking place are attempts to compromise the judiciary,” Bruce Kyerere, a former president of Uganda Law Society, told The EastAfrican.

“Names have been submitted [to the appointing authority] and they are known within the Judicial Service Commission, the staff of State House and anybody else close to the process. As you know how things are done in this country, you now have people claiming they have been assigned to vet these candidates, or even that they could put in a good word for them to the appointing authority if they can promise or provide some monetary reward in return.

For others, it is purely political. They want to be sure the eventual appointee shares the same political views as they do.

“The CJ sits on the Supreme Court, which handles constitutional petitions mostly challenging government actions and also presidential petitions. The deputy sits on the Court of Appeal, the second highest appellate court in the land. Both these positions are powerful. So you can imagine what level of compromise is taking place,” Mr Kyerere added.

But according to Elias Kisawuzi, the judiciary spokesperson, the search for a chief justice is still on and is a matter between the Judicial Service Commission and the executive.

“I don’t know why anyone would say so [that the executive is delaying appointments to compromise the judiciary]. I can’t comment on that, Mr Kisawuzi said.

“These posts are vital in the administration of justice in the country and we would like to see them filled as fast as is possible.”