Uganda Case Law

Mwenda and Another v Attorney General

Mwenda and Another v Attorney General [2010] UGCC 9 (25 August 2010)

Court

Constitutional Court of Uganda

Judge

Byamugisha, JA, Kavuma, JA, Mukasa-Kikonyogo, DCJ, Nshimye, JA, Engwau, JA

Sections 39 and 40 of the Penal Code Act, which criminalize sedition, are inconsistent with Articles 29(1)(a) and 43(2)(c) of the Constitution because they impose vague, overly broad, and unjustifiable limitations on the right to freedom of expression. The respondent failed to prove that these limitations are acceptable and demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society. The provisions catch a wide range of speech, including legitimate criticism of government and leaders, and create uncertainty about the boundaries of lawful expression, thereby infringing constitutional rights. The…

Source excerpt

• Freedom Of Expression
• Sedition
• Limitations On Rights
• Sectarianism
• Constitutional Review
• Criminal Defamation

Kamau v Rex

Kamau v Rex (Criminal Appeal No. 290 of 1950) [1950] EACA 94 (1 January 1950)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 290 of 1950

Judge

Nihill, C.J, Thacker J

Criminal appeal on seditious publications, recording of guilty pleas, and sentence variation. Convictions were upheld, but the appellate court varied the sentences.

• Sedition
• Seditious Publication
• Plea Of Guilty
• Sentencing
• Magistrate Procedure
• Penal Code Section 58

Rex v Luima and Others

Rex v Luima and Others (Criminal Appeals Nos. 35 and 37 of 1949, consolidated) [1949] EACA 33 (1 January 1949)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Criminal Appeals Nos. 35 and 37 of 1949, consolidated

Judge

Gray CJ, Nihill P, Pearson J

The Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa held that publishing a seditious publication under the Uganda Penal Code did not require extrinsic proof of intention or mens rea.

• Sedition
• Mens Rea
• Publication Offences
• Penal Code Interpretation
• Mens-rea
• Publication-offences