sebalu v secretary general of east african community and others reference no 1 of 2010 2011 eacj 6 30 june 2011

sebalu v secretary general of east african community and others reference no 1 of 2010 2011 eacj 6 30 june 2011

The EACJ does not currently have appellate jurisdiction over decisions of national courts, including the Supreme Court of Uganda, as the protocol to operationalise such jurisdiction has not been concluded. The delay and inaction by the 1st and 2nd Respondents in progressing the protocol process constitute infringements of the Treaty, specifically the principles of good governance, democracy, rule of law, and obligations under Articles 6, 7(2), 8(1)(c), and 29. The Applicant has a cause of action under Article 30. The 3rd and 4th Respondents are not proper parties to the Reference and are to be struck off.

Citation
sebalu v secretary general of east african community and others reference no 1 of 2010 2011 eacj 6 30 june 2011
Parties
Applicant: Hon. Sitenda Sebalu; 1st Respondent: The Secretary General of the East African Community; 2nd Respondent: The Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda; 3rd Respondent: Hon. Sam K. Njuba; 4th Respondent: Electoral Commission of Uganda
Court
EACJ
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
30 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Reference / Judgment
Outcome
Reference partly allowed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Regional Courts, Good Governance, Treaty Interpretation, Obligations of Partner States, Appellate Jurisdiction, Human Rights
Source Language
English
Regional Integration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Jurisdiction of Regional Courts Good Governance Treaty Interpretation Obligations of Partner States Appellate Jurisdiction +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hon. Sitenda Sebalu

Applicant

The Secretary General of the East African Community

1st Respondent

The Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda

2nd Respondent

Hon. Sam K. Njuba

3rd Respondent

Electoral Commission of Uganda

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Reference / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Reference discloses a cause of action
  2. 2 Whether Article 27 of the Treaty confers appellate jurisdiction on the EACJ over the decision of the Supreme Court of Uganda
  3. 3 Whether the 1st and 2nd Respondents have discharged their obligations regarding the protocol to operationalise extended jurisdiction of the EACJ

Ratio Decidendi

The EACJ does not currently have appellate jurisdiction over decisions of national courts, including the Supreme Court of Uganda, as the protocol to operationalise such jurisdiction has not been concluded. The delay and inaction by the 1st and 2nd Respondents in progressing the protocol process constitute infringements of the Treaty, specifically the principles of good governance, democracy, rule of law, and obligations under Articles 6, 7(2), 8(1)(c), and 29. The Applicant has a cause of action under Article 30. The 3rd and 4th Respondents are not proper parties to the Reference and are to be struck off.

Court Disposition

Reference partly allowed

Orders

  • Declarations that the failure or delay by the 1st Respondent to refer the matter of the 2nd Respondent's delay to the Council of Ministers is an infringement of Articles 29, 7(2), 8(1)(c), and 6(d) of the Treaty.
  • Declaration that the inaction by the 2nd Respondent is an infringement of Articles 6(d), 7(2), and 8(1)(c) of the Treaty.