Wakilii

Dr. Rwanyarare and 9 Others v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition Application 6 of 2002)

Constitutional Court · [2003] UGCC 3 · 2003 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for an order staying or suspending the operation of statutory provisions pending the determination of a constitutional petition
Decision
Application allowed; operation of section 6(3) and (4) of the Political Parties and Organizations Act, 2002 stayed pending the final disposal of Constitutional Petition No. 7 of 2002.

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

On an application to stay section 6(3) and (4) of the Political Parties and Organizations Act, 2002 pending a constitutional petition challenging them, the court held it has power under Article 137(4) to grant redress in addition to a declaration, and inherent jurisdiction under section 101 of the Civil Procedure Act and its own rules to make orders meeting the ends of justice. Although the Government Proceedings Act and earlier authority barred injunctions against the Government, the court doubted that such Crown immunity survives the 1995 Constitution, under which judicial power derives from the people. The application was allowed and the impugned provisions stayed pending disposal of the petition.

Outcome

Application allowed; operation of section 6(3) and (4) of the Political Parties and Organizations Act, 2002 stayed pending the final disposal of Constitutional Petition No. 7 of 2002.

Facts

The applicants had filed Constitutional Petition No. 7 of 2002 challenging the constitutionality of section 6(3) and (4) of the Political Parties and Organizations Act, 2002, which compelled existing political parties referred to in Article 270 of the Constitution to register as bodies corporate within six months of the Act's commencement or cease to legally exist. By this application the applicants sought an order suspending or staying the operation of those provisions pending final disposal of the petition. They contended that, given the Constitutional Court's busy schedule, the petition was unlikely to be heard and disposed of before 16 January 2003, the registration deadline, so that their challenge and the rights of party members to associate and assemble would be rendered nugatory. The respondent contended that no law empowered the court to suspend or stay an Act of Parliament, that doing so amounted to legislating, and that section 15(2) of the Government Proceedings Act barred any injunction against the Government.

Issues

  1. Whether the Constitutional Court has jurisdiction to suspend or stay the operation of any law, including section 6(3) and (4) of the Political Parties and Organizations Act, 2002.
  2. Whether the Constitutional Court can grant redress under Articles 50 and 137 of the Constitution.
  3. Whether an injunction can issue against the Government in light of section 15(2) of the Government Proceedings Act.

Orders

  • The application is allowed.
  • The operation of section 6(3) and (4) of the Political Parties and Organizations Act, 2002 is stayed pending the final disposal of Constitutional Petition No. 7 of 2002.
  • Costs shall abide the result of the petition.

Rules and key headnotes

Constitutional Law — Remedies — Order of Redress under Article 137(4)
The Constitutional Court has power under Article 137(4) of the Constitution to grant an order of redress in addition to a declaration where it considers it necessary upon interpretation of the Constitution.
Constitutional Law — Remedies — Redress under Article 50 and the Article 137(3) Gateway
The Constitutional Court is competent to grant redress under Article 50 of the Constitution where a fundamental right or freedom is infringed or threatened, but only upon determination of a petition properly brought under Article 137(3).
Civil Procedure — Inherent Jurisdiction — Section 101 Civil Procedure Act
Although section 65(e) of the Civil Procedure Act and section 35 of the Judicature Statute do not confer authority to grant the order sought, the court retains inherent jurisdiction under section 101 of the Civil Procedure Act and its own rules to make such orders as are necessary to meet the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of its process.
Administrative Law — Government Immunity — Injunctions against the Government under the 1995 Constitution
The historic Crown immunity reflected in section 15(2) of the Government Proceedings Act cannot stand unmodified under the 1995 Constitution, where judicial power is derived from the people and exercised in their name; the rule that an injunction cannot issue against the Government no longer holds with the force it had before the Constitution.
Constitutional Law — Access to Court — Duty to Decide a Litigant's Complaint
A court will not turn away a litigant without deciding his or her complaint; the court's busy schedule is not a ground to decline to grant redress that meets the ends of justice.
Constitutional Law — Interlocutory Relief — Stay of an Impugned Statute Pending Petition
The Constitutional Court may stay or suspend the operation of an impugned statutory provision pending the determination of a constitutional petition challenging its validity, so that the challenge is not rendered nugatory.

Legislation cited (17)

Cases cited (7)

  • Attorney General v David Tinyefuza (Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 1997)
  • Ismail Serugo v Kampala City Council and Attorney General (Constitutional Appeal No. 2 of 1998)
  • Attorney General v Silver Springs Hotel & Others (Civil Appeal No. 1 of 1989)
  • Olive Casey Jaundoo v Attorney General of Guyana [1971] AC 972
  • Levesque v Attorney General of Canada et al (1985) 25 DLR 184
  • N. Nagendra Rao and Co v State of A.P. AIR 1994 SC 2663
  • Byrne v Ireland and the Attorney General [1972] IR 241

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Dr. Rwanyarare and 9 Others v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition Application 6 of 2002) [2003] UGCC 3 (16 January 2003)
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.