The idea of a Rotary Club going to court is unsettling and almost subtly ironic. These organizations are founded on camaraderie, kindness, and selfless service. Every banner has the motto, which is repeated at every gathering and is practically considered scripture. It was therefore more than just a legal dispute when five former members of the Rotary Club of Kampala Ssese Islands filed an application at Uganda’s High Court in Kampala. It was an indication that something had gone horribly wrong.
The applicants, which include attorneys Ronald Samuel Wanda and Robert Byamukama as well as Nelson Turyatemba, John Martin Sekwe, and Gladys Edwards Namala, are contesting their expulsion from the club on the grounds that the entire disciplinary procedure that led to their removal was erratic, unconstitutional, and based on procedural shortcuts that no just organization should allow. On April 28, 2026, their letters of termination arrived. The fracture had been developing for months by then.
If it weren’t for a single instance in November 2025, the entire situation might have remained a small internal dispute. Wanda, who works as an advocate, proposed Ivan Kasambeko, a fellow Rotarian, to be the club president for the 2028–2029 Rotary year. According to the application, Medard Muganzi, the Disciplinary Committee Chairperson at the time, publicly contested that nomination on the club’s official WhatsApp group. In response, Wanda, acting as Kasambeko’s attorney, referred to Muganzi’s persistent interrogation as “verbal diarrhoea.” He insists that it was a legitimate form of expression. It would later be revealed that the disciplinary committee disagreed.
What came next reads more like a series of decisions made with a predetermined conclusion than club governance. On February 14, 2026, the five members were suspended, barred from meetings and fellowships, and removed from WhatsApp groups before being informed of their true transgressions. According to Wanda, he didn’t find out about the specific accusations against him until about ten days after his suspension went into effect. The process seems to have advanced more quickly than the facts.
It is difficult to ignore the natural justice issue at the heart of this case. Wanda claims that Muganzi, who filed the complaint against him, participated in and presided over the disciplinary actions that resulted in his dismissal. That is not a technicality if it is true. It is a basic transgression of the rule—which predates most formal legal systems—that no one should be judged in their own cause. Two days after his suspension, Wanda filed an appeal with the Board Chairperson, but it was denied. According to his account, he was then forced to face the same structures that he had just contested.
There are additional details to be aware of. Wanda brought two attorneys with him when he appeared before the disciplinary committee. He says that even though the club’s own bylaws seem to permit representation, the committee refused to allow them to speak or make arguments on his behalf. Additionally, requests to call witnesses for cross-examination were turned down. Then there is the issue of composition: according to the applicants, certain meetings were held with just four committee members present, despite the bylaws requiring five, and two of those members were not properly nominated or approved.
How the club’s leadership will react is still unknown. Board chairperson Dr. Canon Charles Kahigiriza, club president Deborah Itwau Ongwech, and a number of members of the disciplinary committee are among the respondents who have not yet submitted their responses. The file belongs to Justice Bonny Isaac Teko. The initial hearing was scheduled for June 22, 2026.
Local club boards do have significant authority to cancel memberships, including for valid reasons, according to Rotary International’s own policies. It is a legitimate and actual authority. However, authority used without following the proper procedures is a completely different story. As this develops, it seems as though the club could win or lose the case solely on procedural grounds, and in any case, the reputational impact of this situation will take far longer to resolve than any court calendar.
