Wakilii

Paul Kafeero and Anor v Electrol Commision and Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 22 of 2006)

Constitutional Court · [2008] UGCC 53 · 2008 Petition Dismissed ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Constitutional petition under Article 137(3) seeking declarations and orders challenging the refusal to register a political party
Decision
Petition dismissed with costs; petitioners held not entitled to any declarations or remedies

The full judgment

Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.

Sign in to read the full judgment
Cited — treatment unverified cited in 3 (treatment unverified) Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions — always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Constitutional Court dismissed the petition. It held that the Electoral Commission's refusal to register the party "Kabaka Yekka" was justified and did not contravene Articles 72(1) or 29(1)(e), because the right to form political parties is subject to the Constitution and the Political Parties and Organisations Act. The name, drawn from the title of Buganda's cultural leader, was likely to arouse ethnic divisions and to imply the Kabaka's participation in partisan politics contrary to Article 246(3)(e), engaging sections 5(1)(a)-(b) and 16(1). The limitations imposed by those sections embody values of a free and democratic society and are constitutionally provided for under Articles 72(2)-(3) and 43, so they are justifiable.

Facts

The petitioners applied to register a political party under the name "Kabaka Yekka". The application was initially made before the Registrar General, who declined to register it and advised a change of name. The mandate to register political parties later passed to the Chairman of the Electoral Commission. After consulting the Attorney General of Buganda Kingdom, who objected on the basis that the name would infringe the law, the Chairman declined to register the party. By letter dated 17 February 2006 the Chairman reiterated advice to change the name because "Kabaka Yekka" was likely to be confused with the Kingdom of Buganda, contrary to sections 5(1)(a) and 16(1) of the Political Parties and Organisations Act 2005. The petitioners had members in nineteen districts across five regions and refused to change the name, contending the refusal violated their constitutional rights to form a party and to freedom of association. They brought this constitutional petition seeking declarations and an order directing registration.

Issues

  1. Whether the refusal of the Electoral Commission to register the political party "Kabaka Yekka" was inconsistent with and contravened Articles 72(1) and 29(1)(e) of the Constitution and was therefore null and void.
  2. Whether the observance and enforcement of sections 5(1)(a) and 16(1) of the Political Parties and Organisations Act 2005 placed limitations on the petitioners' rights beyond what is justifiable and acceptable in a free and democratic society.
  3. Whether the petitioners are entitled to the remedies sought in the petition.

Orders

  • Petition dismissed.
  • Costs of the petition awarded to the respondents.

Key headnotes

Constitutional Interpretation — Reading the Constitution as an Integrated Whole
Provisions of the Constitution concerned with the same subject must be construed as complementing one another and read as an integrated and cohesive whole, with no single provision considered in isolation.
Fundamental Rights — Liberal and Purposive Construction
Constitutional provisions conferring fundamental rights must be given a broad, liberal and purposive construction in favour of those on whom the right is conferred, unfettered by technicalities.
Political Parties — Registration — Right Subject to Constitutional and Statutory Regulation
The right to form a political party guaranteed by Article 72(1) is expressly subject to the Constitution; under Articles 72(2) and (3) a party must conform to constitutional principles and is regulated by the Political Parties and Organisations Act, so registration may lawfully be refused where the proposed party does not comply.
Political Parties — Party Name — Names Likely to Arouse Ethnic Divisions
Registration of a political party may be refused under sections 5(1)(a) and (b) and 16(1) of the Political Parties and Organisations Act where the proposed name uses words likely to arouse divisions on the basis of ethnic origin or tribe, or implies that a cultural leader is participating in partisan politics contrary to Article 246(3)(e) of the Constitution.
Limitation of Rights — Article 43 — Justifiable in a Free and Democratic Society
A limitation on a fundamental right is permissible under Article 43 where it embodies the values and principles essential to a free and democratic society and is provided for by the Constitution; statutory restrictions on party formation that protect national unity and cultural identity meet this standard.

Legislation cited (15)

  • Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.137(3)
  • Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.50(1)
  • Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.50(2)
  • Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.72(1)
  • Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.72(2)
  • Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.72(3)
  • Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.29(1)(e)
  • Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.43(1)
  • Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.43(2)(c)
  • Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.246(1)
  • Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.246(3)(e)
  • Political Parties and Organisations Act 2005 s.5(1)(a)
  • Political Parties and Organisations Act 2005 s.5(1)(b)
  • Political Parties and Organisations Act 2005 s.7
  • Political Parties and Organisations Act 2005 s.16(1)

Cases cited (7)

  • Attorney General v Salvatori Abuki (Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 1998)
  • Paul K. Ssemwogerere and 2 Others v Attorney General (Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 2002)
  • Major General David Tinyefuza v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 1 of 1996)
  • Attorney General v Major General David Tinyefuza
  • Zachary Olum and Another v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 6 of 1999)
  • R v Oakes [1987]
  • Smith Dakota Vs North Caroline 192 US 279 (1940)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.