Wakilii

Niwabiine & Others v National Resistance Movement & Another (Miscellaneous Cause 143 of 2022)

High Court · [2022] UGHCCD 327 · 2022 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for judicial review challenging NRM Central Executive Committee resolution endorsing incumbent EALA representatives as party candidates
Decision
Application dismissed for failure to exhaust internal party remedies

Observed later treatment

Treatment recorded in citing cases followed in 1 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.

Good law Followed in 1 case and applied in 0 cases, with no adverse treatment recorded. Citations rising — 5 citing cases on record, 5 in the most recent three data years. 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 dismissed the application for judicial review. The second respondent (NRM Electoral Commission) was struck off as it is not a body corporate capable of being sued. The court held that applicants failed to exhaust existing remedies within the party's internal structures before approaching court, rendering the application premature. Matters of candidate selection and nomination by political parties are internal domestic affairs not justiciable in courts of law.

Outcome

Application dismissed for failure to exhaust internal party remedies

Facts

Twenty-three applicants were aspiring NRM candidates for East African Legislative Assembly (EALA) positions for the 2022-2027 term. On 28 June 2022 the NRM Electoral Commission invited interested persons to express interest. On 8 July 2022 applicants were invited to State House Entebbe for vetting by the Central Executive Committee (CEC). At that meeting CEC passed a resolution endorsing incumbent EALA members to continue for another term, effectively ring-fencing the positions. The applicants challenged this resolution via judicial review, seeking declarations that the resolution was illegal, irrational, discriminatory and procedurally improper, and orders restraining its implementation. Out of 130 initial aspirants, 67 withdrew and CEC vetted 63, recommending 6 candidates. Applicants argued they were disenfranchised and denied the right to participate in party electoral processes.

Issues

  1. Whether the application is competently before the court.
  2. Whether the application raises any valid grounds for judicial review.
  3. Whether the applicants exhausted existing remedies available within the party structures.
  4. Whether the applicants were accorded a fair hearing.
  5. Whether the applicants are entitled to the remedies sought.

Orders

  • The 2nd respondent (NRM Electoral Commission) is struck off with costs.
  • The preliminary points of law and objections are upheld.
  • The application is dismissed with costs to the respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Judicial Review — Locus Standi — Political Party Organs Not Being Body Corporate
Under section 6(3) of the Political Parties and Organisations Act 2005, only a registered political party is a body corporate with capacity to sue or be sued in its corporate name; sectional branches, segments, or ad-hoc committees such as the NRM Electoral Commission do not qualify as a political party and cannot be sued in their own names.
Judicial Review — Exhaustion of Alternative Remedies — Requirement to Pursue Internal Party Remedies First
Rule 7A(1)(b) of the Judicature Judicial Review (Amendment) Rules 2019 requires the court to satisfy itself that an aggrieved person has exhausted existing remedies available within the public body or under the law before entertaining an application for judicial review; where a political party has internal dispute resolution mechanisms such as election tribunals established under its regulations, applicants must exhaust those remedies before approaching the courts.
Electoral Law — Party Primaries — Nomination of Candidates as Internal Party Affair
The selection, nomination, and vetting of candidates for election by a political party fall squarely within the domestic affairs and internal jurisdiction of that party; courts are loath to interfere in decisions regarding whom a party should nominate or not nominate, as such matters are political questions involving party strategy and expediency not justiciable in courts of law.
Judicial Review — Limits of Court Intervention — Decision-Maker's Discretion
In judicial review proceedings, courts must bear in mind that it is the decision-maker, not the court, to whom Parliament has entrusted not only the making of the decision but also the choice of how the decision is made; the remedy is not intended to substitute courts for the bodies making decisions but to ensure relevant authorities use their powers in a proper manner.
Civil Procedure — Affidavits — Approbation and Reprobation
Where applicants voluntarily participate in a process governed by known party guidelines and procedures, including vetting by the Central Executive Committee, they cannot later challenge the very system they accepted and agreed to be part of; accepting the benefit of a procedure while subsequently repudiating its outcome constitutes approbation and reprobation which is not permitted.

Legislation cited (22)

Cases cited (11)

  • Uwimbabazi Beatrice v The NRM Election District Tribunal & Busingye Harriet Mugenyi (Miscellaneous Cause No. 15 of 2020)
  • Semwanga Godfrey & 31 Others v Democratic Party (Miscellaneous Cause No. 59 of 2020)
  • Male H. Mabirizi Kiwanuka versus Attorney General
  • Wembabazi Beatrice v The NRM Election Disputes Tribunal & Busingye Harriet Mugenyi (High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 15 of 2020)
  • Sewanyana Jimmy v Kampala International University (High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 207 of 2016)
  • Okello v Kyambogo University & Another (Miscellaneous Cause No. 23 of 2017)
  • Fox Odoi-Oywelowo v NRM & AG (Constitutional Petition No. 37 of 2015)
  • [1994] 1 AC 531
  • Emenike v P.D.P (2012) 12 NWLR (pt 1315) p. 556(SC)
  • Onouha v Okafor (1983) SCNLR 244
  • Dalhatu v Turaki (2003) 15 NWLR (pt 843) 310

Cases citing this judgment (4)

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.

Niwabiine & Others v National Resistance Movement & Another (Miscellaneous Cause 143 of 2022) [2022] UGHCCD 327 (2 August 2022)
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.