Legal issue

Whether the action of the Government of Uganda of shutting down internet and mobile money services during the general elections of 2016 was a violation of Article 29 (1) (a) of the Constitution of Uganda, which protects freedom of speech and expression that includes freedom of the press and other media.

Ruling

The Court held that the petitioners did not pose a question regarding the interpretation of an Act of Parliament or law that contravenes any of the Articles of the Constitution, nor did they complain about any provision within the Constitution whose interpretation they sought from the Court, making reference to their pleadings. The wording of the provisions of Article 29 (1) (a) that the petitioners claimed to have been violated, are also clear and unambiguous. The petitioners did not seek to have the meaning of any specific words given meaning by the Court. The complaint was all about contravention of provisions through acts and omissions of the respondent which they alleged contravened clear provisions of the Constitution.

Reasoning of the Court

Court reasoned that the rights that were alleged to have been violated were guaranteed by the Constitution. These rights fall under the category for which declarations and remedies could be issued by other competent courts or tribunals under Article 50 of the Constitution which provides for the enforcement of rights and freedoms by courts. It concluded that the matter should have been lodged in another competent court or tribunal.

During the 2016 general elections, the Government of Uganda shutdown internet as well as mobile money services. The petitioners suffered a number of losses and inconveniences including the termination of a short-term contract and inability to travel to school. Aggrieved, they complained to the Constitutional Court seeking to challenge the legality of actions of the Government of Uganda. They asked the Court to determine whether the act of the State to shut down the internet, was consistent with its obligation to promote and protect the freedom of speech and expression which includes freedom of the press and other media as protected under Article 29 (1) (a). This petition was brought under Article 137 (1) that empowers the Court to determine any question as to the interpretation of the Constitution.

This petition was brought under Article 137 (3) (a) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda and Rule 3 of the Constitutional Court (Petitions and References). The petition was challenging the shutdown of social media by the respondent and the blocking or shutting down of access to mobile money services during the Presidential and Parliamentary Elections in February 2016 and the swearing in of the President-Elect in May 2016. The Constitutional Court delivered its ruling on 27 April 2021.

Article 137 of the Constitution may only be invoked in order to seek court’s intervention to interpret the constitutionality of an Act of Parliament and the actual conduct complained of that is inconsistent with the Constitution. Complaints about human rights violations should be brought to a competent court or tribunal under Article 50 of the Constitution.