Wakilii

Afric Co-operative Society Ltd v Inspector General Of Government & Anor (Misc Cause No. 52 of 2011)

High Court · [2011] UGHC 163 · 2011 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for judicial review seeking certiorari, declaration, and mandamus following Inspector General of Government's investigation report
Decision
Application for judicial review dismissed

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains 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 court dismissed the application for judicial review, finding that no matter was pending before court when the Inspector General investigated, the Attorney General was entitled to rely on the IGG report in exercising its discretion, and the prerogative remedies sought were not appropriate in the circumstances.

Outcome

Application for judicial review dismissed

Facts

The applicant society had assets and money frozen by government in 1978. It filed HCCS 84/1981 which was settled by consent judgment on 17 July 1989. The applicant was compensated for vehicles but claimed interest on frozen bank accounts remained unpaid. Negotiations between the applicant and Attorney General continued over many years regarding the outstanding interest. In 2003, the Inspector General of Government conducted an investigation and issued a report alleging the consent judgment relating to the interest claim was forged. The applicant only learned of this report in April 2011 when the Attorney General refused to make payment based on the IGG report. The applicant sought judicial review to quash the IGG report and compel payment.

Issues

  1. Whether the Inspector General of Government has authority to investigate or intervene in matters pending before Court
  2. Whether the Attorney General can be prevented by the Inspector General of Government from carrying out its constitutional mandate
  3. Whether the Inspector General of Government followed the rules of natural justice whilst investigating the matter
  4. Whether the applicant was entitled to the remedies prayed for

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Administrative Law — Inspector General of Government — Powers — Investigation of matters pending before court
The Inspector General of Government has no power to investigate matters pending before court under section 19(1) of the Inspectorate of Government Act 2002, but this prohibition does not apply where a court matter has been concluded by consent judgment and subsequent negotiations occur outside court proceedings.
Administrative Law — Attorney General — Constitutional mandate — Reliance on investigative reports
The Attorney General in exercising the constitutional mandate of advising government on legal matters may rely on reports from the Inspector General of Government and it is within the Attorney General's prerogative to determine what information to rely upon in providing such advice.
Administrative Law — Natural justice — Right to be heard — Investigative reports
While it contravenes natural justice for the Inspector General to present a negative report containing allegations of forgery and fraud without affording the affected party an opportunity to respond, such breach is curable where the Attorney General who received the report continues to have the discretion to review the decision after hearing from the affected party.
Judicial Review — Prerogative remedies — Certiorari — Investigative findings distinguished from decisions
A certiorari order is not available to quash an Inspector General of Government report which constitutes a finding from an investigation rather than a decision, as certiorari issues only to quash decisions which are ultra vires or vitiated by error on the face of the record.
Judicial Review — Prerogative remedies — Mandamus — Statutory duty
A mandamus order to compel performance of statutory duty is not available where no specific Act of Parliament is cited imposing the duty sought to be enforced, and the applicant relies only on a general constitutional mandate.

Legislation cited (12)

Cases cited (1)

  • Jet Tumwebaze v Makerere University Council & Others (Civil Application No. 78 of 2005)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Afric Co-operative Society Ltd v Inspector General Of Government & Anor (Misc Cause No. 52 of 2011) [2011] UGHC 163 (29 November 2011)
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.