Uganda President Yoweri K Museveni with commanders, officers and men of the UPDF 2nd Division at Makenke, Mbarara. Photo courtesy President Twitter
KAMPALA, April 19 (NNN-NEWSVISION) – The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the Constitutional Court age limit ruling, effectively quashing an appeal to nullify the decision.
It was a 4:3 decision by the panel of seven judges led by Chief Justice Bart Katureebe, whose judgement was the difference.
The Constitutional Court judgement that was being challenged in the Supreme Court ruled that the lifting of the presidential age limit was constitutional, giving President Yoweri Museveni the leeway to contest in 2021.
Museveni can run as president beyond 75 years old
Basically, whatever the Constitutional Court ruled has remained intact.
The Supreme Court, the highest court of the land, has powers to uphold decisions from the lower courts, reverse them and to substitute judgments or to order for a new trial.
On Thursday, to begin with, Chief Justice Katureebe started off by apologizing for the delay in the delivery of the verdict, saying the case was complex.
“We reserved the judgement on notice but the case is complex. If you file 30,000 pages of pleadings, it takes alot of time because we are also humam beings who can follow victim. This time around I am the victim, I underwent surgery and I was supposed to go for a second, but I halted it to deliver this judgement,” he said.
Lady Jusctice Stella Arach Amoko:
Lady Justice Stella Arach Amoko was the first to deliver her judgement.
She rule that Article 102(b) does not form part of the basic structure doctrine of the Constitution and Parliament has powers to amend it because it does not destroy it, as the people retain power to elect the president of their choice.
Justice Stella Arach Amoko dismissed the appeal and exonerated the Speaker of Parliament, Rebecca Kadaga. She asked the parties to meet their legal costs.
She also said the petitioner Male Mabirizi’s complaint that he was evicted from the court seat lacked merit. The reason? He has yet to be called to the bar because he has not acquired a postgraduate diploma in legal practice.
Justice Eldad Mwangusya:
In his judgement, Justice Eldad Mwangusya said there was no bill for the President to assent to because there was no valid certificate of compliance. He allowed the petitioners’ prayer for nullification of the Constitutional Court ruling.
The judge struck out the Age Limit Act, citing procedural irregularities.
At this point, the morning session was done and court took a break with the ruling at 1:1.
After the lunch time break, the session resumed with the focus on Justice Rubby Opio Aweri next.
Justice Rubby Opio Aweri
Justice Rubby Opio Aweri upheld the lower court’s decision, saying that Article 102 did not fall under the basic structure of the Cconstitution — meaning it could be amended by the legislative arm of Government.
He said that a president elected has to complete his term even if he clocks the retirement age (of 75 before amendment).
He dismissed the appeal in a topsy-turvy session. The petitioners trailed 1:2 at this point.
Lady Justice Lillian Tibatemwa
Lillian Tibatemwa-Ekirikubinza allowed the appeal, thereby nullifying the age limit amendment.
She ruled that the certificate of compliance which accompanied the bill was defective because it contained unmentioned provisions and that the President had a duty to bring them to the attention of the Speaker before assenting to it.
However, she noted that amending article 102(b) of the constitution did violate the basic structure doctrine as it did not take away the sovereignity of people to elect their preferred president.
In regard to ‘smuggling of the bill’, Tibatemwa said the Speaker had no powers to determine the contents of the order paper, which has to be done by the business committee.
In a see-sawing affair it became 2:2.
Justice Paul Mugamba
Justice Paul Mugamba was the fifth judge to deliver his decision.
He ruled that the Speaker did not have justification to prioritise the motion by Raphael Magyezi, which he argued was hastily introduced onto the order paper.
He said there was proof on record that some legislators who were against the age limit reforms were unlawfully blocked.
The judge said the Constitutional Amendment Act, 2018 was struck down for having been passed in violation of the constitution and Parliament’s rules of procedure.
After his decision, the petitioners took the lead at 3:2.
Next up .
Justice Jotham Tumwesigye
Justice Jotham Tumwesigye upheld the Constitutional Court decision, saying the lower court justices did not err in law when they expunged the provisions of the bill which were not contained in the original Magyezi Bill.
“Parliament cannot do the same process over and over because it will be wastage of resources,” he ruled.
With Chief Justice Katureebe’s ruling the decider, it was now 3:3.
Then came the final nail in the coffin.
