Wakilii

Rwanyarare and Others v Attorney General (Constitutional Application No. 6 of 2002)

Constitutional Court · [2003] UGCC 4 · 2003 Application Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for an interlocutory order staying the operation of a statutory provision pending 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 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 Constitutional Petition No. 7 of 2002, the Constitutional Court held that it has inherent jurisdiction under section 101 of the Civil Procedure Act and rule 1(3) of its own Rules to make orders preventing the petition from being rendered nugatory. The Court doubted whether Attorney General v Silver Springs Hotel remained good law, holding that the Crown immunity in section 15(2) of the Government Proceedings Act is inconsistent with the 1995 Constitution, under which judicial power derives from the people. The application was allowed and the operation of section 6(3) and (4) stayed pending final disposal of the petition.

Outcome

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

Facts

The applicants, members and leaders of existing political parties, 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 required parties existing under Article 270 of the Constitution to register as bodies corporate within six months of commencement or cease to legally exist. The registration deadline was 16 January 2003. Given the Constitutional Court's busy schedule and a related pending petition (No. 5 of 2002 filed by Dr. Paul Kawanga Semwogerere and others), it was unlikely the petition would be heard and disposed of before the deadline. The applicants brought this application seeking an order staying the operation of section 6(3) and (4) pending final disposal of their petition, arguing that without such relief their challenge would be rendered nugatory and the rights of party members to associate and assemble would be violated. The Attorney General opposed, contending the Court had no power to suspend an Act of Parliament and that an injunction could not issue against the Government under section 15(2) of the Government Proceedings Act.

Issues

  1. Whether the Constitutional Court has jurisdiction or power to suspend or stay the operation of section 6(3) and (4) of the Political Parties and Organizations Act 2002 pending disposal of the constitutional petition.
  2. Whether the Constitutional Court can grant redress under Article 50 of the Constitution.
  3. Whether an injunction or stay can issue against the Government in light of section 15(2) of the Government Proceedings Act.
  4. Whether the application was properly brought before the court.

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

Civil Procedure — Interlocutory Relief — Inherent Jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court
The Constitutional Court has inherent jurisdiction under section 101 of the Civil Procedure Act and rule 1(3) of its Rules to make such orders as are necessary to meet the ends of justice or prevent abuse of its process, including staying the operation of a challenged statutory provision pending determination of a petition.
Constitutional Law — Enforcement of Rights — Redress under Article 50 and Article 137
The Constitutional Court is competent to grant redress under Article 50 of the Constitution only upon determination of a petition properly brought before it under Article 137(3).
Constitutional Law — Government Proceedings — Crown Immunity from Injunction
The immunity from injunction conferred on the Government by section 15(2) of the Government Proceedings Act, rooted in the English doctrine that the Crown cannot enjoin itself, is inconsistent with the 1995 Constitution under which judicial power derives from the people, and must be construed with such modifications as are necessary under Article 274 to bring it into conformity with the Constitution.
Constitutional Law — Access to Justice — Duty to Determine a Litigant's Complaint
A court must not turn away a litigant without deciding the complaint brought before it on the ground that the court is busy; it must give redress to meet the ends of justice as the circumstances dictate.
Constitutional Law — Stay of Statutory Provision — Distinction from Repeal
An order staying or suspending the operation of a statutory provision pending constitutional interpretation does not usurp Parliament's legislative function and does not amount to repealing the law.

Legislation cited (18)

Cases cited (7)

  • Attorney General v Tinyefuza (Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 1997)
  • Ismail Serugo v KCC 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 [1977] AC 972
  • Leveque 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.

Rwanyarare and Others v Attorney General (Constitutional Application No. 6 of 2002) [2003] UGCC 4 (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.