Wakilii

Editors Guild Uganda Limited & Another v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Cause 400 of 2020)

High Court · [2021] UGHCCD 282 · 2021 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for judicial review of directives by Media Council of Uganda requiring registration and accreditation of journalists for coverage of 2021 elections
Decision
Application granted; directives quashed; permanent injunction and prohibition orders issued restraining enforcement of impugned directives

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 High Court held that the Media Council of Uganda acted illegally and ultra vires the Press and Journalists Act by requiring journalists to register and be accredited for coverage of the 2021 elections, absent a functional National Institute of Journalists of Uganda. The Court found the directives procedurally irregular as the Council lacks statutory authority to register journalists without prior enrollment by the Institute. Orders of certiorari issued quashing the directives and an order of prohibition restraining enforcement.

Outcome

Application granted; directives quashed; permanent injunction and prohibition orders issued restraining enforcement of impugned directives

Facts

On 10 December 2020, the Media Council of Uganda issued press guidelines requiring all journalists (local and foreign) to register and be accredited by the Council to cover the 2021 general elections and other state events, stating no journalist would be allowed coverage without a press tag from the Council. After a meeting with the first applicant on 15 December 2020, the Council extended the registration deadline to 30 December 2020 but maintained the directives. On 30 December 2020, the Deputy Inspector General of Police announced that security agencies would block journalists without Media Council press cards from covering elections. The applicants challenged the directives as ultra vires the Press and Journalists Act, which requires journalists to first be enrolled by the National Institute of Journalists of Uganda before the Media Council may issue practicing certificates. The evidence showed the Institute has been defunct for over ten years.

Issues

  1. Whether the application raises issues for judicial review.
  2. Whether the Guidelines for Media Council of Uganda Accreditation of Journalists for coverage of the 2021 Elections and Other Events are illegal, irrational and procedurally improper.
  3. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • An order of certiorari is hereby issued quashing the directives of the Media Council of Uganda issued in the press statements made on the 10th and 20th December 2020 directing journalists to register and be accredited in order to cover the 2021 general elections and other State events for being illegal (ultra vires) and irrational.
  • An order of certiorari is issued quashing the illegal registration and accreditation of journalists to cover the 2021 general elections and other State events by the Media Council of Uganda for being illegal, irrational and procedurally irregular.
  • An order of prohibition is issued restraining the Media Council of Uganda and any other regulatory agents of Government and Security Organs from illegally and irrationally curtailing the media and the press to cover the 2021 general elections and other State events.
  • An Order of permanent injunction is hereby issued restraining the Respondent's Security agencies from implementing the illegal and irrational directives of the Media Council of Uganda restraining journalists from covering the 2021 General Election and other State events.
  • It is declared that the registration of journalists by the Media Council of Uganda without an operational National Institute of Journalists of Uganda to enrol journalists in accordance with the Press and Journalists Act is illegal, irrational and procedurally irregular.
  • It is declared that the Respondents failure to operationalize the National Institute of Journalists of Uganda established under the Press and Journalists Act is illegal and irrational.
  • The Respondent pays costs of this application.

Rules and key headnotes

Judicial Review — Illegality — Ultra Vires Acts — Delegate Exceeding Statutory Powers
A delegate must exercise its jurisdiction within the four corners of its delegation and if it has acted beyond that, its action cannot have any legal sanction and is challengeable by way of judicial review.
Press and Journalists Act — Registration of Journalists — Mandatory Procedure — National Institute of Journalists
Under the Press and Journalists Act, the Media Council may only register and issue practicing certificates to journalists who have been enrolled with the National Institute of Journalists of Uganda and paid prescribed fees. Without a functional National Institute, the Media Council acts outside its mandate and ultra vires the Act in attempting to register journalists.
Electoral Commission Act — Accreditation of Election Observers — Distinction from Journalists
The Electoral Commission Act empowers the Electoral Commission to accredit election observers but does not mandate the Media Council to accredit journalists as election observers. The Media Council has no statutory authority to accredit journalists for election coverage purposes.
Scope of Judicial Review — Decision-Making Process — Distinction from Human Rights Claims
Judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process and the assessment of the manner in which a decision is made, not with the decision in issue per se. It involves supervisory jurisdiction exercised not to vindicate rights as such, but to ensure that public powers are exercised in accordance with basic standards of legality, fairness and rationality. Constitutional human rights claims should be brought under Article 50 of the Constitution, not conflated with judicial review applications.
Affidavit Evidence — Hearsay — Newspaper Articles — Admissibility
Newspaper articles annexed to an affidavit constitute hearsay evidence and are generally inadmissible unless falling within an exception to the hearsay rule. Where affidavit evidence includes inadmissible hearsay, the court may exercise its discretion to sever the offending paragraphs and attachments rather than strike out the entire affidavit.
Locus Standi — Sufficient Interest — Public Interest Organizations
Under Rule 3A of the Judicature (Judicial Review) (Amendment) Rules 2019, any person who has a direct or sufficient interest in a matter may apply for judicial review. A public interest organization incorporated to promote human rights, constitutionalism, rule of law and to engage in public interest litigation has sufficient interest to bring judicial review proceedings on matters of media regulation and press freedom.

Legislation cited (26)

Cases cited (24)

  • Lukwago Elias v Electoral Commission (High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 393 of 2020)
  • Kamba Saleh v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 38 of 2012)
  • MK Financiers Ltd v Shah & Co (Miscellaneous Application No. 900 of 2014)
  • Sir Dawda K. Jawara v The Gambia Communication No. 147 of 1995
  • Dallas County v Commercial Union Assurance Company Ltd et al, Appelles 286, F. 2d 388 (5th Cir, 1967)
  • Attorney General v Tinyefuza (Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 1997)
  • Col Dr. Kiiza Besigye v Museveni Yoweri Kaguta (Election Petition No. 1 of 2001)
  • Centre for Public Interest Law Limited v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Cause No. 91 of 2020)
  • Petnum Pharmacy Limited v National Drug Authority (Miscellaneous Cause No. 56 of 2018)
  • Ignatius Loyola Malungu v Inspector General of Government (Miscellaneous Cause No. 59 of 2016)
  • Hon. Ssekikubo Theodore and 2 Others v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Cause No. 92 of 2015)
  • Hon. Abdul Katuntu & Another v MTN (U) Ltd & Others (High Court Civil Suit No. 248 of 2012)
  • Chief Constable of North Wales v Evans [1982] 3 ALL ER 141
  • Pastoli v Kabale District Local Government Council & Others [2008] 2 EA 300
  • Arua Kubala Park Operators and Market Vendors' Co-operative Society Limited v Arua Municipal Council (Miscellaneous Cause No. 3 of 2016)
  • Associated Provincial Picture Houses Limited v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 K.B 223
  • Uganda Law Society v Kampala Capital City Authority & Another (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 243 of 2017)
  • Media Council of Tanzania v Attorney General Reference No. 2 of 2017
  • Scanlen & Holderness v Zimbabwe Communication No. 297/2003 (3rd April 2009)
  • Compulsory Membership in an Association Prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism, Advisory Opinion OC-5/85, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (Ser.A) No. 5 (1985)
  • Interfreight Forwarders (U) Ltd v East African Development Bank (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 33 of 1992)
  • Harrikisson v Attorney General (Trinidad and Tobago) [1980] AC 265
  • Dott Services Ltd v Attorney General and Auditor General (Miscellaneous Cause No. 125 of 2009)
  • Kampala University v National Council for Higher Education (Miscellaneous Cause No. 053 of 2014)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Editors Guild Uganda Limited & Another v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Cause 400 of 2020) [2021] UGHCCD 282 (18 January 2021)
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.