The appeal stemmed from a Constitutional Court judgment delivered by a panel of five judges at Mbale High court about eight months ago upholding the amendment of the constitution in which parliament lifted the cap on the presidential age.
A Court document showing the date when the judgement in three Consolidated Age Limit Appeals will be delivered.
Judgment on the consolidated appeals challenging the outcome
of the age limit petition is set for Thursday, April 18. The confirmation was
given this afternoon in a notice issued by Supreme Court Deputy Registrar
The appeal stemmed from a Constitutional Court judgment
delivered by a panel of five judges at Mbale High court about eight months ago
upholding the amendment of the constitution in which parliament lifted the cap
on the presidential age.
The judges; Cheborion Barishaki, Elizabeth Musoke, Alphonse
Owiny-Dollo and Remmy Kasule, said the
act was passed in line with Constitutional procedures. But Justice Kenneth Kakuru dissented in his
judgment noting that the entire process of amending the Constitution was flawed
since the majority of the legislators never consulted citizens, in whom the
power is vested.
But the decision was challenged by city lawyer Male
Mabirizi, six opposition members of Parliament and Uganda Law Society. Mabirizi raised 16 grounds on which the
Judges erred in law delivering their judgment.
He said that the judges erred in law when they failed to
state the reasons for their decision not to summon the speaker of Parliament to
testify in the initial petition on matters that relate to the conduct of
parliament and events that dominated the process. Mabirizi also contends that
the justices erred in fact when they contradicted themselves on legal
principles and facts of the case, prompting them to reach wrongful conclusions.
He added that the justices erred when they held that a
president is not liable to vacate office on attaining the age of 75 years until
his term expires. Mabirizi and the other petitioners demanded that the Constitutional
Court process be declared null and void for derogating the right to a fair
hearing. He also wanted the
constitutional petition returned to the Constitutional Court for expeditious
hearing before a different panel in compliance with fair hearing principles.
The petition was heard by a panel of Seven Judges led by
Chief Justice Katureebe. The others are Stella Arach Amoko, David Mwangutsya,
Apio Aweri, Lillian Tibatemwa, Paul Mugamba and Jotham Tumwesigye.
During the hearing, the Attorney General William Byaruhanga
together with dozens of senior government lawyers argued that the law should be
maintained in the constitution because it was passed lawfully.
The Attorney General submitted that whereas citizens of
Uganda were consulted on some provisions of the constitutional Amendment law,
the citizens were never consulted on the issue of Article pertaining to the
presidential age because it was unnecessary. He argued that the views of the
Ugandan population were presented by their respective members of Parliament
His Deputy Mwesigwa Rukutana also put up a spirited fight
for maintaining the law arguing that it doesn’t impose any charges on the
consolidated fund. Solicitor General Francis Atoke argued that the law should
be maintained because provisions that were found to be unlawful were expunged
by the constitutional court.
Earlier, Male Mabirizi has sued the Chief Justice of Uganda
demanding an order to compel him to deliver the same judgment. He argued that
the delay in delivering the judgment beyond the mandatory 60 days is contrary
to the Judicial Code of Ethics.