Age Limit judgment: Lawyer Mabirizi heads to East African Court of Justice

City lawyer, Male Mabirizi, one of the appellants in the age limit case at the Supreme Court has said he will soon be heading to the East African court of justice after being dissatisfied with the verdict of the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court in a 4:3 majority judgment dismissed a challenge by three parties who had challenged the constitutional court ruling that had upheld age limit clauses from the constitution by parliament.

“The decision of the constitutional court is upheld and this appeal fails,” said Justice Eldad Mwanguhya who read the final verdict on behalf of the Chief Justice Bart Katureebe who was unwell.

Mabirizi however says he will next week storm the Supreme Court with an application seeking to have the Katureebe’s judgment declared in a bid to review, rectify or correct “several mistakes” in the majority decision.

“If the results of the application are in the negative, I will proceed to the East African Court of Justice to call upon it to adjudicate on the position of rule of law in Uganda in light of the decision of The Supreme Court which, among others justified torture, inhuman and degrading treatment on account that when people misbehave, they have to be tortured,”Mabirizi says.

He argues that all this is done for the future of good governance in the country and the need to protect the sanctity of Uganda’s constitution.

“Therefore, to me, the struggle still continues.”

On Thursday afternoon, a panel of 7 judges of the Supreme Court in a 4:3 judgment held that the majority justices of the Constitutional Court never erred when they ruled that the entire process of conceptualising, debating and enactment of Constitution (Amendment) Act 2018 that removed the presidential age limit from the Constitution did not contravene the 1995 Constitution and Rules of Procedure of Parliament.

The Supreme Court also held that Justices of the Constitutional Court never erred when they ruled that the removal of the age limit for the President was not inconsistent with the Constitution.

The ruled that it was right for the Constitutional Court to hold that the president elected in 2016 is not liable to vacate office upon attaining the age of 75.

Speaking shortly after the judgment, Deputy Attorney General, Mwesigwa Rukutana described it as being a representation of the will of the people.

“I congratulate everyone for this triumph. This calls for every Ugandan to celebrate for democracy and rule of law have taken root in our country,”Rukutana said.

However, opposition politicians led by Norbert Mao described the occasion as a sad day for the country.

“Ugandans who had hopes in this court are disappointed .We respect the judgment but consider it illegitimate,” Mao said shortly after court.

“You can’t torture legislators and at the end of the day you say the outcome was clean.”