Wakilii

Kalali Steven v Uganda Law Society (Miscellaneous Cause 129 of 2023)

High Court · [2024] UGHCCD 25 · 2024 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for enforcement of fundamental rights under Article 50 of the Constitution seeking declarations and orders regarding the Uganda Law Society's nomination and appointment of representatives to statutory bodies
Decision
Permanent injunction granted restraining future breaches; remainder of application dismissed

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 2 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 2 times with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 Uganda Law Society (Elections) Regulations 2016 were validly made and not ultra vires the parent Act. The Council's practice of nominating or appointing representatives to statutory bodies without conducting elections breached both the Act and the Regulations, as the position of Society representative is elective under Regulation 13. However, the Court found no infringement of the applicant's right to freedom of expression, distinguishing the right to vote from freedom of expression though they are integrated rights. A permanent injunction was issued restraining further breach of the election requirements.

Outcome

Permanent injunction granted restraining future breaches; remainder of application dismissed

Facts

Kalali Steven, an advocate and member of the Uganda Law Society, challenged the Society's Council for appointing or nominating representatives to various statutory bodies without conducting elections among members since 2016. The applicant claimed this violated the Uganda Law Society (Elections) Regulations 2016, which he argued required elections for such positions. The Uganda Law Society responded that its Council had power under Section 10 of the Uganda Law Society Act to nominate representatives, and argued that the Elections Regulations were ultra vires to the extent they made such positions elective. The Society further contended that conducting elections for representatives to over 34 statutory bodies would be financially burdensome and practically unfeasible, and that it followed a diligent participatory nomination process inviting members to express interest in roles.

Issues

  1. Whether the Uganda Law Society (Elections) Regulations 2016 are inconsistent with the Uganda Law Society Act Cap 276.
  2. Whether the conduct of the Respondent in the appointment and/or nomination of the Respondent's representatives to various statutory bodies was in breach of the Uganda Law Society Act and/or the ULS Elections Regulations.
  3. Whether the alleged breach, if any, infringed the Applicant's right to freedom of expression towards electing the Respondent's representatives to the various statutory bodies.
  4. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • A permanent injunction is issued restraining the Respondent's Council from any further breach of the Uganda Law Society Act and the Elections Regulations regarding the election of the Society representatives.
  • The rest of the application by the Applicant is dismissed.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs of the application.

Rules and key headnotes

Delegated Legislation — Ultra Vires Challenge — Proper Procedure for Impeachment of Statutory Instruments
An application for human rights enforcement is not the proper vehicle for challenging the validity of delegated legislation as ultra vires. Such a challenge requires the court to be properly moved to invoke its prerogative powers by way of judicial review. The court cannot exercise its supervisory powers over decisions of public bodies acting in performance of statutory functions in any other way than by invocation of its prerogative powers.
Delegated Legislation — Interpretation of Enabling Provisions — General Words Following Specific Provisions
Where an enabling provision empowers a body to make regulations on specified matters and includes a general provision for "such other matters as may be deemed necessary for the proper conduct and regulation of the affairs" of the body, the specific provisions are not exhaustive. The body may make regulations on matters beyond those specifically listed, provided they fall within the scope of the general provision and do not contravene the parent Act.
Professional Associations — Election of Representatives — Validity of Regulations
Under the Uganda Law Society Act, regulations made by the Council pursuant to Section 25(h) and (i), which provide for election of society representatives to statutory bodies, are intra vires the Act. The position of Society representative is an elective office under validly made regulations, and elections must be conducted in conformity with the Uganda Law Society (Elections) Regulations, requiring involvement of the Elections Committee and adoption of prescribed procedure.
Fundamental Rights — Freedom of Expression — Distinction from Right to Vote
The right to freedom of expression under Article 29(1)(a) and (b) of the Constitution does not include within its scope the right to vote leaders of one's choice. Though freedom of expression is integral to the enjoyment of the right to vote (which flows from civic rights under Article 38), the two are distinct rights. A breach of election procedures does not automatically constitute infringement of freedom of expression.
Civic Rights — Right to Participate in Affairs of Government and Associations
The right to vote flows from Article 38 of the Constitution, which provides that every citizen has the right to participate in the affairs of government individually or through representatives. This right is further grounded in Paragraph II(v) of the National Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy, which requires political and civic associations to conform to democratic principles in their internal organisations and practice.

Legislation cited (22)

Cases cited (5)

  • Returning Officer of Kampala and Others v Zziwa Margaret (Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 39 of 1997)
  • Uganda Clearing Industry & Forwarding Association v Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA) and Attorney General (High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 439 of 2017)
  • Makula International v Cardinal Nsubuga 1982 [HCB]11
  • Hag v Canada (Chief Electoral Officer) (1993) SCJ No. 84 (1993) 2 SCR 995
  • Re Secession of Quebec [1998] SCJ No.61 [1998] 2 SCR Para. 61

Cases citing this judgment (2)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kalali Steven v Uganda Law Society (Miscellaneous Cause 129 of 2023) [2024] UGHCCD 25 (2 February 2024)
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.