DOCSLIB.ORG

The Uganda Judiciary: 2018 Scorecard

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Uganda Judiciary: 2018 Scorecard THE UGANDA JUDICIARY SCORECARD REPORT 2018 THE UGANDA JUDICIARY: 2018 SCORECARD 1 | P a g e THE UGANDA JUDICIARY SCORECARD REPORT 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2 LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................................ 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................................................... 6 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................................... 10 1.1 Background .......................................................................................................................................... 10 1.2 Scorecard Rationale .............................................................................................................................. 11 1.3 Research Objectives .............................................................................................................................. 12 1.4 The Scorecard ....................................................................................................................................... 12 1.5 Judgment Reviews ............................................................................................................................... 13 2.0 METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................................................................... 13 2.1 Overall Approach ................................................................................................................................. 13 2.2 Scope of the Assessment ....................................................................................................................... 13 2.3 Stakeholders (Respondents) Targeted .................................................................................................... 13 2.4 Target sample sizes – Distribution of Respondents ................................................................................. 14 2.5 Data collection Methods and Tools ........................................................................................................ 15 2.6 Quality Control ..................................................................................................................................... 17 2.7 The Implementation Team ..................................................................................................................... 18 2.8 Limitations to the Research .................................................................................................................... 18 2.9 Challenges ........................................................................................................................................... 19 3.0 FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................................................................... 20 3.1 Profiles of Respondents Interviewed ...................................................................................................... 20 3.2 Description of Litigants .......................................................................................................................... 22 3.3 Performance Scores ............................................................................................................................... 25 3.3.1 Overall Scores for Higher Courts by Litigants and Legal Professionals .................................................. 26 3.3.2 Overall Scores for High Courts by Litigants and Legal Professionals ..................................................... 26 3.3.3 Overall Scores for Chief Magistrates Courts by Litigants and Legal Professionals ................................. 28 3.3.4 Scores for Top Performing Individual Judges and Magistrates .............................................................. 29 3.3.5 Higher Courts Scores by Litigants ........................................................................................................ 30 3.3.6 High Courts Scores by Litigants ........................................................................................................... 30 3.3.7 Chief Magistrates Court Scores by Litigants ......................................................................................... 32 3.3.8 Higher Courts Scores by Legal Professionals ....................................................................................... 33 3.3.9 High Courts Scores by Legal Professionals .......................................................................................... 33 3.3.10 Chief Magistrates Court Scores by Legal Professionals ....................................................................... 34 3.4 Courtroom Observations Scores ............................................................................................................. 41 3.4.1 Courtroom Observations per Court...................................................................................................... 41 3.4.2 Overall Observation Scores ................................................................................................................ 41 3.5 Evaluation of the Court Performance Through the Lenses of the Judgments Delivered 2018 ..................... 48 3.5.1 Methodology ..................................................................................................................................... 48 3.5.2 SUPREME COURT ............................................................................................................................... 49 3.5.3 COURT OF APPEAL ............................................................................................................................ 51 3.5.4 HIGH COURT DIVISION ...................................................................................................................... 55 3.6 Civil Society Organizations’ Viewpoints on the Performance of Judiciary ............................................... 58 4.0 Conclusion and Recommendation ............................................................................................................................................ 60 4.1 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................................... 60 4.2 Recommendations to Address Challenges .............................................................................................. 60 4.3 Recommendations on Quality of Judgments .......................................................................................... 61 Annex 1: Combined Court Scores by Litigants and Legal Professionals ................................................................................. 62 Annex 2: Court Scores by Litigants ................................................................................................................................................ 63 2 | P a g e THE UGANDA JUDICIARY SCORECARD REPORT 2018 Annex 3: Court Scores by Legal Professionals ............................................................................................................................ 64 Annex 4: CSOs that Participated ................................................................................................................................................... 65 Annex 5: Detailed Comments on Judgments Reviewed ............................................................................................................. 66 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Number of Interviews Conducted .................................................................................................. 20 Figure 2: Respondents by Territory .............................................................................................................. 21 Figure 3: Proportion of Interviews by Court Type ........................................................................................ 21 Figure 4: Number of Interviews by Court Type ............................................................................................ 22 Figure 5: Number of Interviews Conducted per Court ................................................................................ 22 Figure 6: Occupation of Litigants ................................................................................................................. 23 Figure 7: Litigants by Gender ...................................................................................................................... 23 Figure 8: Litigants by Type .........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Losing Ground.Pdf
    The Unprecedented Shrinking of Public Spaces LOSING and Land in Ugandan GROUND? Municipalities A publication of the Cities Alliance Joint Work Programme for Equitable Economic Growth in Cities By Paul. I. Mukwaya, Dmitry Pozhidaev, Denis Tugume, and Peter Kasaija © UNCDF and Cities Alliance 2018 AUTHORS Paul. I. Mukwaya, Department of Geography, Geo-informatics and Climatic Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda Dmitry Pozhidaev, United National Capital Development Fund, Kampala, Uganda Denis Tugume, Department of Geography, Geo-informatics and Climatic Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda Peter Kasaija, Department of Geography, Geo-informatics and Climatic Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda JWP MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION Rene Peter Hohmann, Cities Alliance Fredrik Bruhn, Cities Alliance GRAPHIC DESIGN Creatrix Design Group This publication was produced by Cities Alliance and the United Nations Capital Development Fund (UNCDF) as part of the Cities Alliance Joint Work Programme (JWP) for Equitable Economic Growth in Cities. The U.K. Department for International Development (DFID) chairs the JWP, and its members are the United Nations Capital Development Fund (UNCDF), UN-Habitat, Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing (WIEGO), Commonwealth Local Government Forum (CLGF), Ford Foundation, Institute for Housing and Development Studies (IHS) at Erasmus University Rotterdam and the World Bank. Disclaimer: The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the Cities Alliance, the United Nations, including UNCDF and UNOPS, or the UK Department for International Development (DFID). 2 Losing Ground? SUMMARY There is increasing importance being attached to is to promote economic growth that benefits ALL public spaces and other municipal assets, such as citizens.
    [Show full text]
  • Handbook on Environmental Law in Uganda
    HANDBOOK ON ENVIRONMENTAL LAW IN UGANDA Editors: Kenneth Kakuru Volume I Irene Ssekyana HANDBOOK ON ENVIRONMENTAL LAW IN UGANDA Volume I If we all did little, we would do much Second Edition February 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................................... v Forward ........................................................................................................................................................................vi Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................... viii CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL LAW ..................................................................................................... 1 1.1 A Brief History of Environmental Law ......................................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 Religious, Cultural and historical roots .................................................................................................. 1 1.1.2 The Green Revolution ............................................................................................................................ 2 1.1.3 Environmental Law in the United States of America
    [Show full text]
  • The Quad (The 2017 Alumni Magazine)
    THE QUAD | ALUMNI MAGAZINE | FALL 2017 Dedman CELEBRATING ALUMNI 30 Years of the Distinguished Alumni Awards YEARS OF DISTINGUISHED ALUMNI AWARD30 WINNERS THE QUAD | VOL 48 Dean Director of Alumni Relations Photographers SMU Dedman School of Law Jennifer M. Collins Abby N. Ruth ’06 Thomas Garza, Hillsman Office of Alumni Relations Jackson, Bret Redman P.O. Box 750116 Dallas, TX 75275-0116 Director of External Relations Managing Editor 214-768-4LAW(4529) Lynn M. Dempsey Patricia S. Heard Printer ColorDynamics Email: [email protected] Director of Writers & Contributors www.law.smu.edu Communications & Marketing Mark Curriden, Kristy A. Offenburger Patricia S. Heard, Brooks Igo The Quad is published for graduates and friends of the law school. Reproduction in whole or in part of this magazine without permission is prohibited. SMU will not discriminate in any program or activity on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, disability, genetic information, veteran status, sexual orientation, or gender identity and expression. The Executive Director for Access and Equity/Title IX Coordinator is designated to handle inquiries regarding nondiscrimination policies and may be reached at the Perkins Administration Building, Room 204, 6425 Boaz Lane, Dallas, TX 75205, 214-768-3601, [email protected]. Dedman SCHOOL OF LAW IN THIS ISSUE FALL 2017 Features 4 | 30th Annual Distinguished Alumni Awards A special evening honors six new award recipients and commemorates 30 years of winners and their enormous contributions to the law school, the profession and the community. 12 | Spring Break 2017: DISTINGUISHED ALUMNI Crayons as Contraband 4 Professor Natalie Nanasi and eight Dedman Law students volunteer at AWARD WINNERS Karnes County Residential Center to help immigrant mothers and children fleeing violence.
    [Show full text]
  • Summarized Tribunal Report
    Summarized Tribunal Report On 15th May 2013, Hon. Frank Tumwebaze, the Minister of the Presidency, who is also the Minister in charge of Kampala Capital City, received a Petition from Seventeen (17) councilors of the Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA). The Petition set out grounds upon which the Councillors sought the removal of Mr. Erias Lukwago from his position as Lord Mayor of Kampala Capital City. The allegations levelled against the Lord Mayor were; abuse of office, misconduct or misbehaviour and Incompetence. On receipt of the Petition, the Hon. Minister in consultation with the Chief Justice, constituted a Tribunal to investigate the allegations contained in the Petition. The Tribunal members were Honourable Lady Justice Catherine Bamugemereire, Mrs. Joska Ocaya-Lakidi and Mr. Alfred Okello Oryem. The Terms of Reference of the Tribunal, in addition to setting out a time-frame of two months for its operation, specified that a decision was to be reached as to whether the Petition’s assertions could support a prima facie case for the removal of the Lord Mayor. The Tribunal further noted that the Petition seeking the removal of Mr. Erias Lukwago from his elective position of Lord Mayor of Kampala Capital City, was a matter of great public interest which had created an atmosphere of collective euphoria within sections of the population of Kampala. The sheer gravity and the far reaching ramifications of this exercise compelled the Tribunal to subject the evidence adduced before to such rigour and care as akin to the standard ordinarily applied to election petitions. Indeed whilst the standard of proof applied by the Tribunal was not beyond reasonable doubt as required in criminal cases it was a lot higher than proof on a balance of probabilities which is the accepted standard of proof in cases of a civil nature such as this one.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Judge in Uganda: Remuneration Systems and Promotion Possibilities
    Civil Judge in Uganda: Remuneration Systems and Promotion Possibilities. How to Reward Efficient and Independent Decisions Asiimwe Jackline-Bainipai* Abstract This piece of work is discusses the systems of remuneration of judges and promotion possi- bilities as well as rewarding efficient and independent decisions in Uganda. The research finds that whereas these three form part and parcel of the core of an independent judiciary, and whereas there are adequate legal provisions, the enforceability is lacking due to the fact that there are high levels of interference by the executive in the function of the judiciary. The remuneration, reward of an efficient judge are largely dependent on paying allegiance to the executive and deciding cases in appeasement of the executive. Yet, the remuneration, promotion and reward are supposed to be on merit. They should also be established by law and not subject to arbitrary interference from the executive. This study has revealed how the executive has substantial impact on remuneration, promotion and reward of efficient judges. Judges that decide cases according to the law irrespective of the interests of the exe- cutive are sidelined in the promotions, remunerations and reward. The study makes relevant conclusions and recommendations. “The remuneration of the judges is not sufficient to induce the ablest lawyers in the prime of life to accept judicial office. If that state of affairs is allowed to continue it must have serious effect upon the administration of the law. It will impair those intel- lectual standards which have made our English legal system a great legal system; it will tend to impair that law abiding instinct which is the condition precedent for the maintenance of a high standard of civilization, and it will weaken the chief remaining guarantee for the prosecution of the liberties of that subject.”1 With reflection on the above statement on remuneration, this piece of work discusses remu- neration systems and promotion possibilities and how to reward efficient and independent judges from the Ugandan perspective.
    [Show full text]
  • Rent-Seeking Practices, Local Resource Curse, and Social Conflict in Uganda’S Emerging Oil Economy
    land Article Rent-Seeking Practices, Local Resource Curse, and Social Conflict in Uganda’s Emerging Oil Economy Tom Ogwang * , Frank Vanclay and Arjan van den Assem Department of Cultural Geography, Faculty of Spatial Sciences, University of Groningen, 9712 CP Groningen, The Netherlands; [email protected] (F.V.); [email protected] (A.v.d.A.) * Correspondence: [email protected] or [email protected] Received: 27 January 2019; Accepted: 25 March 2019; Published: 27 March 2019 Abstract: We consider the different types of rent-seeking practices in emerging oil economies, and discuss how they contribute to social conflict and a local resource curse in the Albertine Graben region of Uganda. The rent-seeking activities have contributed to speculative behavior, competition for limited social services, land grabbing, land scarcity, land fragmentation, food insecurity, corruption, and ethnic polarization. Local people have interpreted the experience of the consequent social impacts as a local resource curse. The impacts have led to social conflicts among the affected communities. Our research used a range of methods, including 40 in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, participant observation, and document analysis. We argue there is an urgent need by all stakeholders—including local and central governments, oil companies, local communities, and civil society organizations—to address the challenges before the construction of oil infrastructure. Stakeholders must work hard to create the conditions that are needed to avoid the resource curse; otherwise, Uganda could end up suffering from the Dutch Disease and Nigerian Disease, as has befallen other African countries. Keywords: local resource curse; social conflicts; social impacts; presource curse; rent seeking 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Adminstrative Law and Governance Project Kenya, Malawi and Uganda
    LOCAL GOVERNANCE IN UGANDA By Rose Nakayi ADMINSTRATIVE LAW AND GOVERNANCE PROJECT KENYA, MALAWI AND UGANDA The researcher acknowledges the research assistance offered by James Nkuubi and Brian Kibirango 1 Contents I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 3 II. LOCAL GOVERNANCE IN THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT............................................................. 6 A. Local Governance in the Pre-Independence Period ........................................................................... 6 B. Rule Making, Public Participation and Accountability in Pre independence Uganda ....................... 10 C. The Post-Independence Period........................................................................................................ 11 D. Post 1986 Period ............................................................................................................................ 12 III. LOCAL GOVERNANCE IN THE POST 1995 CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL REGIME ...... 12 A. Local Governance Under the 1995 Constitution and the Local Governments Act ................................ 12 B. Kampala Capital City: A Unique Position........................................................................................... 14 C. Public Participation in Rule Making in Local Governments and KCCA .............................................. 19 IV. ADJUDICATION OF DISPUTES AND IMPACT OF JUDICIAL REVIEW ................................. 24 D. Adjudication
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Institutional Capacity-Building for Environmental Law and Institutions in Africa
    UNEP/UNDP/Dutch Joint Project on UEEZ) QV Environmental Law United Nations UNEP Development Programme United Nations and Institutions in Africa Environment Programme Review of Institutional Capacity-Building for Environmental Law and Institutions in Africa 0 0 0 - ----- June 2000 807-1 970-X 1 -------' AM undi UNEP UNEPIUNDPIDUTCH JOINT PROJECT ON ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND INSTITUTIONS IN AFRICA REVIEW OF INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY-BUILDING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND INSTITUTIONS IN AFRICA JUNE 2000 ISBN 92-807-1970-X -~p PREFACE The pilot project on the enhancement of capacity of selected African countries in environmental law and institutions was prompted by the Dutch Government's financial grant of US$ 5 million as a response to the glaring need for such an initiative in Africa. It was clear that African countries needed support if they were to meet the requirements and aspirations enunciated in Agenda 21 as well as in Rio Declaration. Such support should be directed towards initiatives which develop demonstrative practices in making of environmental law with public participation, ownership of such laws by nationals and efficacious machineries for enforcement of such laws. The funds were provided to UNEP because of its established global mandate in capacity building in environmental law. But given that UNEP does not maintain country offices which would coordinate national level work in an intensive project, the Dutch Government proposed too that UNDP should be a partner in the project to derive benefits from the agency's experience in technical assistance and capacity building. This was to be the basis of the title of the project as UNEPIIJNDPIDutch Joint Project on Environmental Law and Institutions in Africa.
    [Show full text]
  • Media and Elections
    m e d i a and elections Page 1 Publisher FOREWORD Uganda Media Development Foundation P.O.BOX 21778, KAMPALA Early in 2011 the Ugandan people will be called to vote in the PLOT 976, MUGERWA ROAD BUKOTO Parliamentary and Presidential elections, the fourth elections after Tel:+256 414 532083 the promulgation of the 1995 constitution and only the second Email: [email protected] under the new multiparty dispensation. The media has a crucial Website: www.umdf.co.ug role to play in this process - before, during as well as after the elections - since they provide information for the voters and help Project Editor creating transparency in the electoral process. Gertrude Benderana Only informed citizens can effectively practice their democratic Tel: +256 772 323325 rights, and a pre-condition for an informed choice of the voters is Email:[email protected] a free and vibrant media landscape. The media provide a platform for the people to get to know the available alternatives and learn UMDF National Coordinator about the different candidates and what they stand for. At the Mathias Mulumba Mayombwe same time, the candidates and parties competing for power can Tel: + 256 752 964448 actively use this platform for reaching out to the voters and getting Email: [email protected] their messages across. However, for the media to effectively fulfill their democratic role, UMDF Chairman particularly during times of election, a number of challenges have James Kigozi to be managed. This includes ensuring responsible conduct of Email:[email protected] journalists and adherence of basic principles and quality standards Photo credit: All pictures courtesy of the New in reporting, as well as promoting a free environment for objective Vision printing and publishing corp.
    [Show full text]
  • Presentation on Performance of the Supreme Court Made to the 18 Annual Judges' Conference at the Speke Resort Hotel, 19 – 21
    PRESENTATION ON PERFORMANCE OF THE SUPREME COURT MADE TO THE 18TH ANNUAL JUDGES’ CONFERENCE AT THE SPEKE RESORT HOTEL, 19TH – 21ST JANUARY, 2016 BY HON. JUSTICE JOTHAM TUMWESIGYE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT 1 The Hon. Chief Justice The Hon. Deputy Chief Justice The Hon. Principal Judge The Hon. Justices of the Supreme Court The Hon. Justices of the Court of Appeal The Hon. Judges of the High Court The Secretary to the Judiciary The Chief Registrar Distinguished guests, Ladies and gentlemen. Introduction. The Supreme Court of Uganda is a creature of the 1995 Constitution. It is established under Article 130 of the Constitution which provides: The Supreme Court shall consist of – (a) The Chief Justice; and 2 (b) Such number of justices of the Supreme Court not being less than six, as parliament may by law prescribe. The Judicature (Amendment) Act No. 9 of 2011 provides that the Supreme Court shall consist of the Chief Justice and ten justices of the Supreme Court. However, currently the Supreme Court consists of 9 members who are: (i) Hon. Justice Bart Katureebe, C.J, (ii) Hon. Justice Jotham Tumwesigye, JSC, (iii) Hon. Lady Justice Dr. E.K Kisaakye, JSC, (iv) Hon. Lady justice Stella Arach-Amoko, JSC, (v) Hon. Justice Augustine Nshimye, JSC, (vi) Hon. Justice Eldad Mwangusya, JSC, (vii) Hon. Justice Rubby Opio Aweri, JSC (viii) Hon. Lady Justice Faith Mwondha, JSC, (ix) Hon. Lady Justice Tibatemwa Ekirikubinza, JSC. Commendation Five of the justices who were recently appointed replaced: Hon. Justice B.J Odoki, Chief Justice Emeritus Hon. Justice J.W.N Tsekooko Hon Justice G.M Okello Hon Lady Justice C.N.B Kitumba 3 I would like to take this opportunity to thank the recently retired justices of the Supreme Court for their dedicated and exemplary service to judiciary and the country as a whole.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Document
    5 THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA CONSTITUTIONAL PETITION N0.46 OF 2016 BETWEEN BRITISH AMERICAN TOBACCO LIMITED ........................................ PETITIONER 10 VERSUS 1. ATTORNEY GENERAL 2. CENTER FOR HEALTH HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEVELOPMENT .................................................. RESPONDENTS CORAM: Hon. Mr. Justice Alfonse C. Owiny-Dollo, DCJ 15 Hon. Mr. Justice Kenneth Kakuru, JA/ JCC Hon. Mr. Justice Egonda-Ntende, JA/ JCC Hon. Lady. Justice Hellen Obura, }A/ JCC Hon. Mr. Justice Ezekiel Muhanguzi, JA/ JCC JUDGMENT OF HON. JUSTICE KENNETH KAKURU. iA/ JCC 20 The Petition is brought under Article 137 of the J 995 Constitution of Uganda and the Constitutional Court (Petitions and References) Rules 2005 Statutory Instrument No. 91 of 2005. The Petitioner is a renowned company dealing in tobacco products and has been 25 operating in Uganda for more than 30 years. Jt is listed on the Uganda Securities Exchange. It carries on business of cigarette sale, distribution and marketing in Page 1 s Uganda. This petition challenges the provisions of Tobacco Control Act (TCA) which came into force on 18th May, 2016. The petitioner alleges that the provisions of the Tobacco Control Act No.22 of 2015 are inconsistent with and in contravention of particular Articles of the 1995 Constitution of Uganda. The particular sections of the Tobacco Control Act which are the subject of this challenge are set out in paragraph 10 15 of the petition, which I shall refer to later. The Petitioner contends that:- a) Section 15(2) of the TCA contravenes and is inconsistent wiLh Articles 40(2), 26 and 29(1) (a) of the Constitution.
    [Show full text]
  • Cause List for the Sittings in the Period: 26/08/2013 - 30/08/2013 P
    THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA In the Court of Appeal of Uganda(COA) at Kampala CIVIL CAUSE LIST FOR THE SITTINGS IN THE PERIOD: 26/08/2013 - 30/08/2013 P. 1 / 13 AUGUST 26, 2013 CORAM: HON. MR. JUSTICE, S.B.K. KAVUMA, JA HON MR. JUSTICE A.S. NSHIMYE, JA HON. MR. JUSTICE REMMY KASULE, JA HON. LADY JUSTICE FAITH E. MWONDHA, JA HON MR. JUSTICE RICHARD BUTEERA, JA Time Case number Parties Claim/Description Sitting type Court/Chamber 109:30 am COA-00-CV-CPC-0016-2013 HON LT (RTD) SALEH M.W KAMBA & ANOR VS MPS who were dismissed from NRM Hearing - COURT1-COA . THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF UGANDA party also to vacate their respective petitioner's case Seats in Parliament. 209:30 am COA-00-CV-CPC-0021-2013 NATIONAL RESISTANCE MOVEMENT VS THE Expelled MPs to retain their seats in Hearing - COURT1-COA . ATTORNEY GENERAL & 4 OTHERS Parliament ontravenes Arts petitioner's case 1(1)(2)(4)2((1)(2),20(1)(2),1 309:30 am COA-00-CV-CPC-0019-2013 JOSEPH KWESIGA VS ATTORNEY GENERAL Declare vacant Seat in Parliament Hearing - . when an elected Member of petitioner's case Parliament is Expelled from Party in acc 409:30 am COA-00-CV-CPC-0025-2013 HON. ABDU KATUNTU VS ATTORNEY GENERAL The Act of the AG advising the Hearing - COURT1-COA . speaker of parliament to expel Mps petitioner's case are in contravation of Article 119 CORAM: HON. MR. JUSTICE KENNETH KAKURU, JA HON. MR. JUSTICE KENNETH KAKURU, JA Time Case number Parties Claim/Description Sitting type Court/Chamber Printed: 23 August 2013 THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA In the Court of Appeal of Uganda(COA) at Kampala CIVIL CAUSE LIST FOR THE SITTINGS IN THE PERIOD: 26/08/2013 - 30/08/2013 P.
    [Show full text]