Uganda Case Law

Busingye & Another v The Parliamentary Commission & Another

Busingye & Another v The Parliamentary Commission & Another (Constitutional Petition 4 of 2020) [2024] UGCC 23 (22 November 2024)

Court

Constitutional Court of Uganda

Case number

Constitutional Petition 4 of 2020

Judge

Kiryabwire, JCC, Mulyagonja, JCC, Gashirabake, JCC, Eva K. Luswata, JA/JCC, Kihika, JA /JCC

The Constitutional Court dismissed a petition challenging Parliament’s Shs. 10 billion supplementary appropriation to the Parliamentary Commission for MPs, holding the case raised no issue requiring constitutional interpretation.

• Jurisdiction Of Constitutional Court
• Interpretation Of Constitution
• Supplementary Budget Appropriation
• Parliamentary Powers
• Public Funds Accountability
• Constitutional-interpretation

Rtd Captain Amon Byarugaba and Others v Attorney General

Rtd Captain Amon Byarugaba and Others v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 44 of 2015) [2022] UGCC 11 (15 December 2022)

Court

Constitutional Court of Uganda

Case number

Constitutional Petition No. 44 of 2015

Judge

Monica K. Mugenyi, JCC, Kakuru, JCC, Musoke, JCC, Kiryabwire, JCC, Buteera, DCJ

The majority of the Constitutional Court held that the 1995 Constitution vests the administration of justice for civilians exclusively in the courts of judicature established under Article 129, which do not include military courts. Parliament's power under Article 210 to regulate the UPDF does not extend to conferring judicial power over civilians on military courts. Sections 119(1)(g) and (h) of the UPDF Act, to the extent that they purport to subject civilians to military law and trial by military courts, are inconsistent with the Constitution and thus null and void. Military courts are dis…

Source excerpt

• Military Jurisdiction
• Fair Trial Rights
• Judicial Independence
• Parliamentary Powers
• Disciplinary Tribunals

Wekoye v Attorney General & Anor

Wekoye v Attorney General & Anor (Constitutional Application No. 3 of 2014) [2014] UGCC 7 (21 March 2014)

Court

Constitutional Court of Uganda

Case number

Constitutional Application No. 3 of 2014

The Court found that while a prima facie case for constitutional interpretation was established regarding the validity of Rules 101 and 103 of the Rules of Procedure of Parliament vis-à-vis Article 86(1)(a) of the Constitution, the applicant failed to demonstrate irreparable damage that could not be compensated by damages. The Court reasoned that if the by-election proceeded and the Rules were later declared unconstitutional, the by-election could be nullified and the MP reinstated, thus negating any claim of irreparable harm. Since the first principle was satisfied but the second was not, an…

Source excerpt

• Parliamentary Powers
• Vacancy Of Parliamentary Seat
• Temporary Injunctions
• Constitutional Interpretation