Wakilii

Amongi & anor V Olara Otunnu & 2 Ors (Misc. Cause No. 035 of 2015)

High Court · [2015] UGHCCD 86 · 2015 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for judicial review by way of Notice of Motion seeking prerogative orders against party officials
Decision
Application dismissed with no order as to costs

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

Held that under the transitional provisions of the UPC constitution, a party president elected under the old constitution continues to hold office until new elections are held, even if the five-year term has expired. The court found that the first respondent remained the de facto president as no new elections had been conducted. The application for mandamus was denied where a roadmap for elections already existed. The court held that internal party disciplinary mechanisms under Article 24 of the party constitution must be exhausted before resort to litigation. Application dismissed with no order as to costs.

Outcome

Application dismissed with no order as to costs

Facts

The applicants, members of the Uganda People's Congress party, applied for judicial review seeking prerogative orders to compel party organs to hold elections for a new party president. They contended that the first respondent's five-year term expired on 4 March 2015, that he purported to resign, that he illegally delegated powers, and that grassroots elections conducted in 2011 and 2014 were improper. The first respondent assumed office on 13 March 2010 after the amended UPC constitution was adopted in November 2008 but before it was gazetted in January 2012. The first respondent denied resigning or delegating powers, and produced a roadmap for the 2016 elections. The applicants sought mandamus, certiorari, prohibition, declarations and injunctions.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants are entitled to mandamus to compel the mandated organs of the third respondent to call a delegates conference to organize elections in accordance with the law.
  2. Whether the first respondent's term of office expired.
  3. Whether the first respondent had powers to delegate his functions and what would be the legal effect of such delegation.
  4. Whether the first respondent resigned.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.
  • Each party to meet its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Judicial Review — Grounds for Judicial Review — Illegality, Irrationality, Procedural Impropriety
To succeed in an application for judicial review, an applicant must show that the decision or act complained of is tainted with illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety. Judicial review is concerned not with the merits of the decision but with the decision-making process.
Political Parties — Transitional Provisions — Continuation in Office Pending Elections
Where a party constitution provides that a president elected under a previous constitution shall continue to hold office for a term not exceeding five years from election and thereafter until new elections are held, the president remains de facto president after the five-year term expires if no new elections have been conducted.
Judicial Review — Mandamus — Refusal Where Alternative Remedy Exists
Mandamus will not issue to compel a party to call a delegates conference where a roadmap for elections already exists and is in the pipeline, as the essence of mandamus is to command the doing of something which the authority has omitted or refused to do.
Political Parties — Internal Dispute Resolution — Exhaustion of Party Disciplinary Mechanisms
A party constitution creates a statutory contract binding party members in the same way a memorandum and articles of association bind a company and its members. Internal disciplinary procedures prescribed by the party constitution must be exhausted before resorting to litigation.

Legislation cited (12)

  • Judicature Act s.33
  • Judicature Act s.36(1)
  • Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 r.3
  • Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 r.4
  • Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 r.6
  • Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 r.10
  • Political Parties and Other Organizations Act s.10
  • Political Parties and Other Organizations Act 2005
  • Political Parties and Other Organizations Act 2010
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.1
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.2
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.3

Cases cited (7)

  • Republic v Secretary of State for Education and Science ex parte Avon County [1991] 1 All ER 282
  • John Jet Tumwebaze v Makerere University Council and 3 others (Civil Application No. 253 of 2005)
  • Kuluo Joseph Andrew and 2 others v Attorney General and 6 others (Misc. Cause No. 106 of 2010)
  • The King v Port of London Authority Ex parte Keynoch Limited [1919] 1 KB 176
  • Wheeler v Leicester City Council [1985] 2 All ER 1106
  • John Kashaka Muhanguzi v Kapchorwa District Council and two others (Misc. Application No. 129 of 2000)
  • Ocheng SC Peter & others v President General of DP & others (Misc. Cause No. 217 of 2008)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Amongi & anor V Olara Otunnu & 2 Ors (Misc. Cause No. 035 of 2015) [2015] UGHCCD 86 (6 May 2015)
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.