Wakilii

Uganda Association of Women Lawyers (FIDA-UGANDA) & Another v Ndiko & 5 Others (Constitutional Application 9 of 2022)

Constitutional Court · [2024] UGCC 26 · 2024 Application Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application by two non-governmental organisations for leave to intervene as amici curiae in a pending constitutional petition challenging provisions of the Divorce Act
Decision
Application allowed; Applicants admitted as amici curiae in the main constitutional petition

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 Constitutional Court granted two non-governmental organisations leave to intervene as amici curiae in a constitutional petition challenging provisions of the Divorce Act. Applying Rule 5 of the Judicature (Amicus Curiae) Rules 2022, the court found that the applicants possessed demonstrable expertise in gender equality and matrimonial property disputes, were neutral and impartial despite being feminist advocacy groups, and intended to address novel questions of law not raised by the parties — namely substantive equality, the court's duty to avoid a legal lacuna, and the utility of suspending an order of invalidity. The court held their intended brief was in the public interest and rejected the Attorney General's objection that they were partisan.

Outcome

Application allowed; Applicants admitted as amici curiae in the main constitutional petition

Facts

The Applicants, two non-governmental organisations specialising in women's rights and public interest litigation, sought leave to intervene as amici curiae in Constitutional Petition No. 23 of 2020. In that head petition the Petitioners challenge several provisions of the Divorce Act as inconsistent with the Constitution, including provisions on grounds for divorce, naming of co-respondents, and judicial separation and protection orders (sections 15, 16 and 18) which are said to discriminate against husbands. The Applicants did not seek to address the constitutionality of the impugned provisions themselves, but the quality and effect of the orders the court might make if those provisions were declared unconstitutional, including substantive equality and the court's duty to avoid creating a legal lacuna. The Attorney General opposed the application, contending it was incompetent, that the submissions would not assist the court, and that the second Applicant was partisan given its mission to strengthen civil society.

Issues

  1. Whether the application discloses sufficient grounds for the Applicants to be granted leave to intervene as amicus curiae in the head constitutional petition.

Orders

  • The objection to the application is dismissed.
  • The Applicants are granted leave to intervene as amici curiae in the main constitutional petition.
  • The joint amicus brief filed by the Applicants is adopted by the court.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs of this application.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Amicus Curiae — Requirements for Admission under the Judicature (Amicus Curiae) Rules 2022
A person or organisation may be admitted as amicus curiae where it is neutral and impartial, possesses demonstrable expertise in the area in dispute, and offers submissions on novel points of law that will assist the court and aid the development of jurisprudence in the public interest.
Civil Procedure — Amicus Curiae — Neutrality and Impartiality of Advocacy Organisations
An applicant's identity as a feminist or human rights advocacy group does not, of itself, strip it of objectivity or render it partisan; impartiality is assessed by reference to the perspective the applicant seeks to bring to the questions before the court, not its mission or vision statements.
Civil Procedure — Amicus Curiae — Non-Binding and Discretionary Nature of Submissions
The opinions of an amicus curiae are not binding on the court, and it remains within the court's discretion whether to consider or disregard the amicus submissions.

Legislation cited (22)

Cases cited (1)

  • Uganda Association of Women Lawyers and Others v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 2 of 2003)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda Association of Women Lawyers (FIDA-UGANDA) & Another v Ndiko & 5 Others (Constitutional Application 9 of 2022) [2024] UGCC 26 (12 December 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.