Uganda Case Law

Adrapi v Drito and Ors (Consitutional Petition No. 9 of 2013)

Adrapi v Drito and Ors (Consitutional Petition No. 9 of 2013) [2021] UGCC 29 (25 May 2021)

Court

Constitutional Court of Uganda

Case number

Consitutional Petition No. 9 of 2013

Judge

Kasule, Ag JCC, Kakuru, JCC, Madrama, JCC, Obura, JCC, Musota, JCC

The Constitutional Court held that the petition did not disclose a cause of action for constitutional interpretation as required under Article 137(3) of the Constitution. The petitioner failed to allege any act, law, or omission inconsistent with or in contravention of a specific constitutional provision. The jurisdiction to determine questions of membership of Parliament, including disqualification and vacation of seat, is vested in the High Court under Article 86 and Section 86 of the Parliamentary Elections Act, not the Constitutional Court. The procedure for removal of a sitting Member of…

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction Of Constitutional Court
• Parliamentary Membership Disqualification
• Academic Qualification For Mp
• Procedure For Vacating Seat
• Cause Of Action In Constitutional Petition

Sembatya Vs Muwanga

Sembatya Vs Muwanga (Election Petition Appeal No. 34 of 2016) [2018] UGCA 5 (19 January 2018)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Election Petition Appeal No. 34 of 2016

Judge

Owiny-Dollo, DCJ, Kavuma, JA, Buteera, JA

The Court of Appeal held that the appellant's Finance Officer's Diploma, awarded by Uganda Management Institute before the establishment of NCHE, was valid and did not require equivalence by NCHE for purposes of nomination as a Member of Parliament. The Court found that the applicable law and circulars exempted such diplomas from mandatory equivalence, and UNEB's letter equating the diploma to UACE was sufficient. The Court further held that discrepancies in the appellant's names on academic documents were satisfactorily explained by statutory declaration, and there was no evidence that the d…

Source excerpt

• Academic Qualification For Mp
• Nomination Requirements
• Equivalence Of Academic Documents
• Statutory Declarations
• Name Discrepancies
• Powers Of Nche And Uneb

Mandera v Bwowe

Mandera v Bwowe (Election Petition Appeal No. 91 of 2016) [2017] UGCA 37 (20 October 2017)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Election Petition Appeal No. 91 of 2016

The Court of Appeal found that the appellant was academically qualified to stand for Member of Parliament, as the O' Level Certificate in question, though bearing the name Nandera Amos, was proven through statutory declaration and supporting affidavits to belong to Mandera Amos. The respondent failed to adduce credible evidence of another person named Nandera Amos, and the burden of proof remained with the party asserting the existence of such a person. The correction of the name by UNEB was validly based on school records and affidavits, and the statutory declaration sufficed to clarify the…

Source excerpt

• Academic Qualification For Mp
• Burden Of Proof
• Service Of Petition
• Statutory Declaration
• Name Discrepancy In Certificates

Acheng Vs Abongo

Acheng Vs Abongo (Election Petition Appeal No. 0058 of 2016) [2017] UGCA 16 (29 August 2017)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Election Petition Appeal No. 0058 of 2016

The Court of Appeal held that Achen Christine Ayo was qualified for election as Woman MP for Alebtong District and allowed the appeal.

• Academic Qualification For Mp
• Burden Of Proof In Election Petitions
• Role Of Administrative Bodies
• Forgery Of Academic Documents
• Judicial Review Of Electoral Process
• Election-petitions

Kawombe v Kafeero and Anor

Kawombe v Kafeero and Anor (Election Petition No. 5 of 2016) [2016] UGHCEP 59 (30 May 2016)

Court

Election Petitions of Uganda

Case number

Election Petition No. 5 of 2016

The court held that the petition was misconceived and incompetent because it was not brought in accordance with section 15 of the Electoral Commissions Act, which only allows appeals against decisions of the Commission made before or during polling. Since the declaration of results and gazetting of the 1st respondent as Member of Parliament had already occurred, any challenge to the election should have been brought under sections 60 and 61 of the Parliamentary Elections Act, not section 15. The petitioner failed to demonstrate that the petition arose from a decision of the Commission regardi…

Source excerpt

• Academic Qualification For Mp
• Jurisdiction Of Electoral Commission
• Procedural Requirements For Petition
• Interpretation Of Electoral Laws