Uganda Schools Cannot Hand Over Children to Just Anyone

Schools occupy a position of deep trust. A parent leaves a child at the gate, in a classroom, or in a boarding facility with the expectation that the school will keep the child safe until the lawful parent or guardian takes over again. That trust is not only moral. It also has legal consequences. A recent Uganda High Court decision appears to send a clear reminder that a school cannot hand over a child to just anyone who asks, even where the request sounds urgent, familiar, or convenient.

The case of Ruzindantaro v The School Management Committee Bishop Asili Memorial Nursery and Primary School concerned a child who was released to a third party without the father’s consent. The Court addressed child rights, parental authority, and the responsibility of schools when they care for children. It reaffirmed that a school may act in loco parentis, meaning that it temporarily takes care of a child in place of the parent during school time or while the child is in the school’s custody. That temporary role does not make the school a substitute parent. It does not give the school power to ignore lawful parental authority or to create its own informal custody arrangement.

For parents and guardians, the decision is important because real family life is often complicated. Parents may be separated. One parent may be wealthier than the other. A parent may have travelled for work, missed school meetings, or disagreed with relatives. None of these facts, by itself, means that a parent has lost parental rights. Where a court order exists, it must be respected. Where there is no court order, the school should be careful not to assume that the louder relative, the more available parent, or the person who arrives first at the school has lawful authority to take the child.

The best interests of the child remain central, but that phrase should not be used casually. It is not a shortcut that allows a school, relative, or third party to decide matters of custody by instinct alone. The best interests of the child must be assessed according to law, the child’s records, the known parental arrangement, and any valid court order. A school may genuinely believe that it is helping a child, but good intentions can still lead to harm if the school releases the child without proper consent and without proper verification.

In ordinary terms, a school should know who is allowed to collect a child. A vague phone call, a hurried letter, or a message sent through another pupil should not be treated as enough where the person collecting the child is not clearly authorized. The safer approach is for the school to keep a written list of approved pickup persons, emergency contacts, and any restrictions communicated by a parent, guardian, or court. If the family circumstances change because of separation, divorce, travel, a custody dispute, illness, or another serious event, parents should update the school in writing and ask the school to acknowledge the update.

Record keeping may sound administrative, but in child protection it can be decisive. Schools should record the name of the person who collected the child, the time of release, the identification details checked, the reason for release, and the staff member who authorized it. These records protect children first, but they also protect schools from later uncertainty. A school that keeps careful records is better placed to show that it acted responsibly. A school that relies on memory, informal permission, or verbal arrangements may find itself exposed when something goes wrong.

The ruling also has a quieter message for schools caught in family disputes. Schools are not family courts. They should avoid taking sides between parents or relatives unless the law requires them to follow a specific order. Where there is confusion, the cautious response is to verify records, contact the registered parent or guardian, request written authority, and, where necessary, seek guidance from the relevant child protection or legal authority. It may feel slower in the moment, but a careful delay is usually better than an unlawful release of a child.

Parents can also take practical steps before a problem arises. They should give the school clear written instructions on who may pick up the child and who may not. They should provide current phone numbers and emergency contacts. If there is a custody order, guardianship document, or other relevant legal paper, the school should receive a copy and confirm receipt in writing. Where a parent fears that a child may be removed without permission, it is safer to communicate that concern early rather than after the child has already been released.

If a child is released without consent, the parent or guardian should act quickly and calmly. A written request should be sent to the school asking for the release records, the name of the person who authorized the release, the identity of the person who collected the child, and any documents or messages relied upon. Depending on the seriousness of the situation, the parent may need to report the matter to the relevant authorities and seek legal advice. Where rights have been violated, the parent and child may have legal remedies, including compensation in appropriate cases.

The wider lesson is that child safety is not only about fences, guards, and classroom supervision. It is also about lawful consent, identity verification, custody awareness, and respect for parental authority. A school that follows clear release procedures is not being difficult. It is doing what a trusted institution should do. In a society where many children spend long hours in school and many others live in boarding facilities, that responsibility is likely to become even more important.

Source note and disclaimer. This article is based on Ruzindantaro v The School Management Committee Bishop Asili Memorial Nursery and Primary School, Civil Suit 36 of 2022, [2025] UGHC 409, decided on 11 June 2025, as listed on ULII, and on public commentary summarising the judgment. It also refers generally to Uganda’s child rights framework, including the Constitution, the Children Act, and the Uganda National Parenting Guidelines. This article is public legal information only and is not legal advice for a specific family or school dispute.

Suggested citation

Ronald Serwanga, “Uganda Schools Cannot Hand Over Children to Just Anyone” East Africa Legal Insight (14 May 2026).