By: Isaac Christopher Lubogo
V. S. Naipaul’s Miguel Street is not merely a novel of caricatures; it is a philosophy of survival. In its pages, we meet men and women who endure the unbearable by turning tragedy into comedy, failure into folklore, and betrayal into daily routine. The lesson is haunting: when absurdity becomes ordinary, a people no longer distinguish truth from theatre, friend from foe.
Absurdity and Its Normalization
Naipaul’s characters normalize the ridiculous—boastful men who never deliver, dreamers who never act, cruelty cloaked in domestic comedy. In this, the absurd ceases to shock; it becomes custom. So too, in institutions, we risk mistaking noise for depth, personalities for principles, and momentary treachery for strategy. As Camus reminds us, “The absurd is born of this confrontation between the human need and the unreasonable silence of the world.” If we fail to confront it, absurdity colonizes our judgment.
The Treachery Problem
Treachery is rarely overt. It comes wrapped in gestures of loyalty, whispers of concern, or feigned zeal. To treat all as enemies is paranoia; to treat all as friends is naivety. The true path is what the philosopher Paul Ricoeur would call “hermeneutics of suspicion”: interpret actions with sobriety, weigh conduct over time, and demand verifiable commitments. As in Naipaul’s street, those who survive treachery are those who refuse to let feeling override discernment.
Emotion versus Judgment
Emotion is a warning light, not a steering wheel. To lead with anger is to stumble; to lead with procedure is to stand. Law is humanity’s invention to rescue reason from the whirlpool of passion. Thus, if the Uganda Law Society is to endure, it must master the separation of momentary sentiment from institutional custom.
Custom as the Soul of Institutions
Charisma can ignite a movement, but only custom sustains it. A society divided by the cult of personality soon collapses into factions; a society bound by rules, registers, and traditions becomes unbreakable. To galvanize the ULS is to reaffirm its customs—its transparent processes, its collective memory, its duty to the vulnerable.
Exile and the Possibility of Leadership
History reassures us: exile is not absence. If Lule and the Moshi exiles could prepare for state transition, then Ssemakadde can demonstrate that ULS leadership is not confined to geography but anchored in vision. In the digital age—when Kenya’s courts operated virtually through COVID-19—exile is no disqualification from stewardship. Leadership today is not physical presence but intellectual and moral clarity.
The Light of Ssemakadde
In this moment, Isaac Kimaze Ssemakadde has indeed given the ULS a new light. Yet light is not an end in itself; it is an invitation to walk. That light must be absorbed into custom, not dissolved in faction. To galvanize is to consolidate, not scatter; to unite is to channel differences into higher productivity.
Conclusion: Sanity in the Absurd
Naipaul taught us that absurdity unchecked becomes fate. The ULS must resist this by holding fast to sanity, sobriety, and structure. Let treachery meet transparency, let absurdity meet accountability, and let emotion bow before judgment. In this, the ULS shall not merely survive—it shall lead.
As Marcus Aurelius observed, “If it is not right, do not do it; if it is not true, do not say it.” In a world of absurd performances, such discipline is the only form of true leadership.