Saturday , September 19 2020
Home / NEWS / Three supreme court justices differ in age limit judgement
Covid-19 Image

Three supreme court justices differ in age limit judgement

Supreme court justices. PHOTO via @Parliament_Ug

Kampala, Uganda | THE INDEPENDENT | Justices Stella Arach Amoko, Apio Aweri and Eldad Mwanguhya have differed in their judgment on the consolidated presidential age limit appeal.

The two are part of the seven members of the Supreme Court panel delivering their judgment on the consolidated age limit appeal, which is still ongoing.

The appeal is challenging the scrapping of the 77 year president age limit from the constitution.

In her judgment, Justice Stella Arach Amoko upheld the Constitutional Court decision indicating that the process leading to the conceptualization of the Age Limit Bill, which eventual led to the scrapping of the age limit was very clear and lawful.

She therefore dismissed the appeal by Male Mabirizi, six opposition legislators and Uganda Law Society with each party bearing its own costs.

However, in his judgment, Justice Mwanguhya noted that the process leading to the scrapping of the presidential age limit was flawed.

He said there was no valid certificate of compliance for the bill before it was sent to the president to be assented to.

“There was no valid certificate of compliance. This means that there was nothing valid to assent to by the President”, said Mwanguhya.

He also explained that during consultations, some of the voters asked their legislators to terms limits and voted against the bill.

Justice Mwanguhya also noted that some of legislators were assaulted badly and thrown out of parliament during debate of the bill, which was uncalled for.

Justice Mwanguhya however, declined to pronounce himself on the allegations that MPs were bribed to support the bill, saying it is the role of the Auditor General to do so.

Each MP received Shillings 29M as facilitation to consult voters on the bill

However, several opposition legislators declined to take the money and returned it to the treasury of parliament, saying they are facilitated to do their work.

He ordered each party to meet the costs of its suit. Justice Apio Aweri also upheld the decision of the constitutional court Judgment and dismissed the application.

Justices Prof. Lilian Tibatemwa, Jotham Tumwesigye, Apio Aweri, Paul Mugamba and Justice Bart Katureebe were yet to deliver their judgment by the time of publishing this story.

Male Mabirizi, one of the petitioners told URN that he is impressed by the reasoning of Justice Mwanguhya and hopes more judges take his side.

The Kyadondo East legislator MP, Robert Kyagulanyi alias Bobi Wine, said they expect little from the court, saying the judiciary is controlled by the state.




  1. Yesterday’s verdict was as dramatic as the Tottenham vs Manchester city champions league game match. At around 3:00p.m, 18 April, 2019, three of the five judges who had pronounced themselves on the issue, were in favor of the appeal. So, and out of excitement I “WhatsApp” my father: “supreme court, Uganda has won.” To me, I had no faith in justice Jotham Tumwesigye given his political background and more so, his appointment leading to the judge of the supreme court but judging from what had transpired, I developed a little faith in the chief justice, Bart Katurembe. I had “set off” a false alarm for myself, the good judge didn’t have even the “courage of sight” to read his own judgment. If the judge couldn’t read because of a “medical condition”, how could he have written the said judgment??? Sorry dad!



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *