Wakilii

Katuntu v A.G. of Uganda and Another (Reference 5 of 2012)

East African Court of Justice · [2013] EACJ 48 · 2013 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Reference to the East African Court of Justice challenging the conformity of Uganda's Rules of Procedure for election of EALA members with the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community
Decision
Reference 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 East African Court of Justice held that it has jurisdiction to interpret the Treaty provisions governing EALA elections but not to determine election outcomes. The Court found that Uganda's Parliament properly exercised its election power under Article 50(1) of the Treaty. Article 50(1) does not require that all six political parties represented in Parliament be guaranteed representation in the EALA. The Rules of Procedure adopted by Parliament conformed to the Treaty. The Reference was dismissed.

Outcome

Reference dismissed

Facts

Abdu Katuntu, Shadow Attorney General in Uganda's Parliament, challenged Uganda's Rules of Procedure for electing members to the East African Legislative Assembly (EALA). Following a 2006 Constitutional Court decision that invalidated earlier Rules, Parliament passed new Rules in May 2012. The Applicant contended that these Rules did not guarantee representation for all six political parties in Parliament and failed to ensure Parliament itself would elect EALA members. On 30 May 2012, seventeen candidates were nominated and nine were elected by secret ballot. The NRM presented six candidates, DP and UPC each presented one, and all were approved. Nine Ugandan EALA members intervened to defend their election. The Applicant sought declarations that the Rules violated the Treaty and that fresh elections should be held.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court is vested with jurisdiction to entertain issues relating to the election of members to the EALA.
  2. Whether the Applicant has locus standi to institute this Reference.
  3. Whether the Amended Reference is in conformity with the Rules of Procedure of this Honourable Court.
  4. Whether the Parliament of Uganda exercised its power of election under Article 50(1) of the Treaty.
  5. Whether the meaning and import of Article 50(1) of the Treaty requires that all the six political parties represented in the Parliament of Uganda be represented in the EALA.
  6. Whether the 2nd Respondent is legally bound to halt the swearing of the elected members of the EALA.
  7. Whether the parties are entitled to the remedies sought.

Orders

  • Prayers (a), (d), (g) and (h) disallowed.
  • No order made in respect of abandoned prayers (b), (c) and (e).
  • Each party to bear his or its costs.
  • Reference dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Treaty Interpretation — Jurisdiction of Regional Courts — Distinction Between Treaty Interpretation and Election Disputes
The East African Court of Justice has jurisdiction to interpret Treaty provisions governing EALA elections under Article 27(1), but Article 52 reserves determination of election outcomes to national institutions that determine questions of election of members of the National Assembly.
EALA Elections — Meaning of 'Election' — Discretion of National Assembly
The word 'elect' in Article 50(1) of the Treaty means to choose or select persons to hold political positions. While Article 50 provides that the National Assembly shall elect nine members to the EALA, it gives no directions on how the election is to be done except that members must not be from the National Assembly and should as far as feasible represent specified groupings. The procedure for election is expressly left to the discretion of each National Assembly.
EALA Elections — Representation of Political Parties — No Guaranteed Slots
Article 50(1) of the Treaty does not require that all political parties represented in a National Assembly be guaranteed representation in the EALA. The phrase 'as much as is feasible' leaves the extent of feasibility of representation to be determined in the discretion of the National Assembly. Guaranteeing slots to political parties would fetter the power of Parliament to elect members and risk contravention of Article 50(1).
Locus Standi — Public Interest Litigation — Access to Regional Courts
Any resident in the East African Community has locus standi under Article 30(1) of the Treaty to access the East African Court of Justice to seek interpretation of the Treaty when a dispute has arisen.
Amendment of Pleadings — Addition of Parties — Requirement of Consent
Where a party seeks to add a new respondent by way of amended pleading, Rule 48(b) of the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure requires the consent of all parties including the person to be added. Failure to obtain such consent renders the amendment irregular and the added party must be struck out.

Legislation cited (19)

  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 4(3)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 9(1)(f)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 23(1)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 27(1)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 29(1)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 30(1)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 38(1)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 40
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 50(1)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 52
  • East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 24(1)
  • East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 36(1)(d)
  • East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 36(4)
  • East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 48(b)
  • East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 53
  • Constitution of the Republic of Uganda Article 86(1)
  • Constitution of the Republic of Uganda Article 86(2)
  • Constitution of the Republic of Uganda Article 86(3)
  • Parliamentary Elections Act 2005 s.86

Cases cited (10)

  • Oulanyah v Attorney General of Uganda (Constitutional Petition No. 28 of 2006)
  • Anyang' Nyong'o v Attorney General of Kenya (EACJ Reference No. 1 of 2006)
  • Mtikila v Secretary General of the East African Community (EACJ Reference No. 2 of 2007)
  • Sebalu v Secretary General of the East African Community (EACJ Reference No. 1 of 2010)
  • Rugumba v Attorney General of Rwanda (EACJ Reference No. 8 of 2010)
  • Democratic Party v Secretary General of the East African Community (EACJ Reference No. 6 of 2011)
  • Nambi v Bunyoro General Merchants (1979) HCB
  • African Overseas Trading Co. vs Achorya (1963) EA 468
  • Hogod Jack Simonian v Johar (1962) E.A 336
  • Fernandes Kara Arjan & Sons 1961 E.A.693

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Katuntu v A.G. of Uganda and Another (Reference 5 of 2012) [2013] EACJ 48 (25 November 2013)
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.