UGANDA: Mabirizi, opposition to appeal #AgeLimitRuling in Supreme Court
Mabirizi lists 80 ‘mistakes’ found in age limit petition judgement
Written by URN, THE OBSERVER
Male Hassan Mabirizi Kiwanuka, one of the petitioners who challenged the ‘age limit’ Constitutional Amendment Act of 2017, has filed a notice of appeal challenging the verdict of the Constitutional court.
The notice of appeal was filed on Friday – a day after a Constitutional court decision that upheld the amendment by parliament to lift the cap on the presidential age, which was initially limited to persons aged between 35 and 75.
Four of the five members of the Constitutional court; Cheborion Barishaki, Elizabeth Musoke, Alphonse Owiny-Dollo and Remmy Kasule, upheld the amendment when they said that it did not contravene the Constitution and neither did it contravene parliament’s rules of procedure.
But Justice Kenneth Kakuru declared that the entire process was flawed and asked that the entire amendment Act be purged from the Constitution of Uganda. Male Mabirizi Kiwanuka is to appeal against the Constitutional court
In his judgment, Kakuru pointed out that out of a population of close to 40 million Ugandans, only 22 individuals, eight government ministries, 15 commissions or agencies including the prime minister in his official capacity, four political parties, the leader of the opposition in parliament and one district local government official were able to give their views on the bill before the legal and parliamentary affairs committee of parliament.
He stated that the rest appeared to be a collection of obscure and amorphous groups that include Fronasa veterans, Uganda Association of Uneducated Persons, Kick Age Limit Out of the Constitution and others.
On Friday evening Mabirizi who was praised by the Constitutional court for his research and submissions in the petition, rushed to Court of Appeal where he presented 80 reasons for challenging the verdict of the Constitutional court.
Part of the reasons he says that he was denied a right to a fair hearing, was discriminated in a manner that is not justifiable in a democratic society and was denied a chance to respond to the contribution of the attorney general.
Mabiriizi contends that the court did not decide the fate of the two affidavits of Keith Muhakanizi the Secretary to the Treasury and Gen David Muhoozi, the commander of the defence forces, which allegedly contained hearsay. Mabiriizi adds that he was also denied a chance to cross-examine Muhoozi.
“But since am appealing just part of the judgement that is why am giving the grounds to which I don’t agree with in that judgement. Of course I don’t agree with retaining some provisions of the Act of age limit and others because of procedure. Court is saying procedure was okay. Had they found that the procedure wasn’t okay, then the entire Act had to fall. But they are saying the procedure was okay yet it was not okay,” Mabirizi stated.
Mabirizi, after filing the notice of the Appeal rushed to the Supreme Court registry amidst a tight deadline to avail them with copies as the legal procedures require.
The procedures include the requirement to state all reasons for the appeal and inform the Supreme court as soon as possible in instances where one is not appealing against the whole judgment of the Constitutional court.
Although armed police personnel attempted to block his access to the Supreme court, on grounds that he arrived beyond office time, Mabirizi later succeeded after introducing himself and the motive for his ‘visit’. He now wants the Court of Appeal to declare the entire law as null and void.
“We’re building a country on shaky ground which cannot stand. I have given 80 reasons, actually 80 disagreements with the judges….if you can be able, in just a day to pick 80 mistakes to be challenged, then I don’t know what will happen after 60 days. I want the entire law to be annulled to be declared null and void.”
0#1 ainembabazi 2018-07-28 12:50
Hats off, Mr. Mabirizi. Keep going, we are behind you.
0#2 nonpartisan 2018-07-28 13:06
People blindly celebrated this owiny dollo chap when he was tapped for deputy chief justice while I smirked… NRM, especially the president is too smart and wise for money seeking Ugandans.
People thought dollo would be a Judge to be fair and just yet he was simply given that very high post just because he was from the opposite, far apposite region. This makes it seem like he would perhaps be rough on NRM.
Meanwhile, dollo is an old bought cadre who thinks mostly about his family’s future but not Uganda’s.
0#3 Wooden K. 2018-07-28 13:42
Hello Uganda !
I do not have any respect for Mabirizi , but he is right this time.
Personally , I found 113 CONTRADITIONS in the rulings of the 4 cowardly Judges.
I find it outrageous that after the Judges had noted and comfirmed that H.E. Super Glue had assented to the Act without the Speakers Certificate, the same Judges concluded that there was nothing wrong with the results of that “illegality”.
Just like that , the 4 insinuated that in this case , the end was enough to justify the means.
Also , the judges ruled that it was “selfish ..and illegal ” for MPs to extend their mandate beyond the contracted period. and then the Judges concluded that the same MPs who were paid to lift the age limit to favour one individual`s life presidency were not motivated by that individual`s selfishness ; and that the vice of “legal manouvring” applies only to MPs but not the president.
—— AUTO – GENERATED; Published (Halifax Canada Time AST) on: July 28, 2018 at 10:14AM