Legal issue

Whether the actions of the Republic of Uganda while responding to the protests, amounted to the violation of fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, in particular the right to freedoms of peaceful assembly and association.

Ruling

The Court found that in the meaning of Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community and Article 11 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the right to assemble is an integral part of the rule of law, good governance and any violation thereof would amount to a violation of the Treaty. However, the Court ruled that the Applicant did not furnish it with the necessary evidence to prove the allegations raised in the affidavits deponed in support of the application. It further held that the evidence that was produced by the applicant was too weak to help the Court in ruling against the actions of Uganda. The Court was of the view that whereas the applicants had affidavits and electronic DVD in support of their application, there was a need to reveal the identity of the protestors whose rights were actually violated by the actions of the law enforcement agencies.

Reasoning of the Court

In the Court’s wisdom, affidavits in which deponents claim that people were injured, maimed and killed as well as electronic recordings captured during a protest are not enough to substantiate an allegation of a violation of the right to peaceful assembly. It stated that better evidence such as the identities, medical records of injuries and death certificates of the deceased is required. In the absence of such evidence, the Court cannot make a finding that the violations happened. This ruling is important in as far as it highlights that violations of civic freedoms are also violations of sub-regional as well as regional treaty obligations and standards.

The applicant in this case is a professional body that brings together practicing lawyers in the East African Region. In 2011, after the general elections in Uganda, the country witnessed an increase in fuel costs and the cost of living. Pro-democracy activists, especially from the opposition political parties, organized demonstrations during which they decided to “walk to work”. These demonstrations came to be famously known as ‘walk to work.’ The Government of Uganda responded to the demonstrations with brutal force – using teargas, arrests and shootings which resulted in the death of civilians, most of whom were not among the demonstrators. In their capacity as custodians of rule of law, the applicants brought this case before the East African Court of Justice claiming that the actions of the State were in conflict with Articles 21, 22, 24 and 29 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda as well as Articles 6(d), 7(2), 27, 30, 38 and 71 of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community and Articles 3, 4. 5, 6, 9, 10, 11 and 28 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The applicants invoked Rules 1(2) and 24 of the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure, 2013. They asked the Court to declare among other issues, that such actions amounted to a violation of the right to freedom of association and assembly.

The applicants in their capacity as custodians of the rule of law, filed an application on 31st May 2011, before the East African Court of Justice alleging violations of Articles 21, 22, 24 and 29 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda as well as Articles 6(d), 7(2), 27, 30, 38 and 71 of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community including Articles 3, 4. 5, 6, 9, 10, 11 and 28 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. They invoked Rules 1(2) and 24 of the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure, 2013. They challenged the actions of the government of Uganda of using brutal force against demonstrators. On 23rd August 2011, the applicants applied to Court by Notice of Motion under Rules 12, 21(4), 48 and 50 of the Rules of Procedure for the East African Court of Justice to amend the initial application to correct errors in phraseology. On 27th September 2011, the Court of First Division granted leave to the Applicant to amend the application.

The right to a peaceful assembly is an integral part of the rule of law, good governance and any violation thereof would amount to a violation of sub-regional and regional human rights standards. An allegation of violation of civic rights can only be sustained with sufficient evidence to prove that it occurred. Such evidence may include but is not limited to identities of the victims, medical records of injuries and death certificates of the deceased.