Weeks back, social media was awash with very graphic and private details, details the public really did not need to know from a divorce judgment rendered by the Family Division of the High Court from the case of Ronald Twesigye Vs Susan Tusiime (FD Divorce Cause No. 037 of 2019).
The judgment made rounds online and generated widespread discussion on the private affairs of a couple involved in the divorce matter. After reading through the judgment, I was saddened by the extent of private details that were exposed to the public by our justice system.
Responsibility for this exposure lies with the parties themselves, their lawyers, and the justice system at large. That painful side of the judgment aside, as the saying goes, ‘When things go wrong, learn what they came to teach you.’
We must appreciate and quickly learn that we live in interesting times, shaped by social media and an internet that never forgets.
Beyond the discussion and opinions, what can we learn from this case? Divorce proceedings, by their very nature, are contentious; rarely are they civil.
The most contentious and problematic aspects of such proceedings relate to property and, where there are children, custody and welfare. From experience and hindsight, here are some safeguards.
Before entering into marriage, intending couples should consider drafting and signing a prenuptial agreement. From the outset, parties should agree on how they intend to deal with property acquired before, during, and at the dissolution or end of the marriage.
Generally, in Uganda, apart from matrimonial property to which each party to a marriage is entitled, any other property requires proof of financial contribution.
This position is supported by a number of recent divorce cases. Accordingly, where one does not intend to share certain property, having such property registered solely in one’s name may serve as a safeguard.
At the dissolution or end of a marriage, parties should, where possible, amicably agree on how to deal with property. In cases where property was jointly acquired, parties can execute a settlement agreement and have the matter filed in the Magistrates’ Court.
Such matters are less likely to be accessible to general public. This is because the magistrates’ court are not courts of record, thereby reducing public exposure of private affairs.
A second approach is the use of pseudonyms. Parties may apply to court to institute divorce proceedings without using their real names, instead using initials or other identifiers as permitted by law.
This is done after seeking leave of court and providing sufficient reasons. Such applications, and the proceedings that follow, may also be handled with a degree of privacy. Although this method is less known, it is provided for under the laws of Uganda.
These are some of the ways through which parties can protect their privacy during divorce proceedings, or even prior to them, especially in this era of social media and an internet that never forgets.