The recent ruling by the Civil Division of the High Court that confirmed the ownership of the National Unity Platform as being in the hands of presidential candidate, Robert Kyagulanyi has been challenged in a higher court.
Two members of the National Unity and Reconciliation and Development Party (NURP), which was renamed National Unity Platform (NUP) including Difas Basile and Hassan Twala have now filed a notice of appeal in the Court of Appeal challenging the lower court’s decision to dismiss their earlier application.
“Take notice that the applicants/ intended appellants in the above matter, namely Difas Basile and Hassan Twala being dissatisfied with the decision of Justice Musa Ssekaana delivered by electronic mail to their advocate’s email address intend to appeal against the whole decision,” the notice of appeals reads in part.
Consequently, the lower court has been asked to provide a record of proceedings to the two NURP members to enable them prepare to file their appeal.
In the earlier application, Kyagulanyi, also known as Bobi Wine was jointly sued with the Electoral Commission, Attorney General, former National Unity Reconciliation and Development Party (NURP) president Moses Nkonge Kibalama, National Unity Platform Party (NUP) leaders David Lewis Rubongoya, Aisha Kabanda, Joel Ssenyonyi, Flavia Kalule Nabagabe, Fred Nyanzi Ssentamu and Paul Ssimbwa Kagombe.
The two petitioners claimed that NURP was gazetted as a political party in Uganda on December 13, 2004, and issued a certificate of registration on December 28, 2004 and that in 2019, without any right and in breach of the party constitution, Kibalama and the Electoral Commission illegally changed its party name to NUP and on July 14, 2020 handed over its leadership to Kyagulanyi and Kagombe.
However, in his ruling, Justice Musa Ssekaana said the case had no merit and consequently threw it out.
“This court declines to entertain the application since it was not brought under any known procedure and secondly it was made to avoid the time limit of 3 months within which an application for judicial review should have been brought,”Ssekaana ruled.
The judge explained that there is no set procedure governing such an application like one by some of the NURP members challenging Kyagulanyi’s acquisition of the National Unity Platform party.
Ssekaana said the application was a mere amorphous document placed before his court in an exploration expedition with hope of chancing on a remedy.
“It is not clear whether it is an application for constitutional interpretation or for enforcement of rights. But it can be deduced from the nature of remedies sought that this application seeks from this court judicial review remedies,”Ssekaana said.
“The application should have been an application for judicial review since the applicants seek for declarations, orders and injunctions on the activities of the respondents. “
He said the two applicants threw in the case and run away after realizing it was not headed anywhere since it had been filed beyond the three months period as prescribed by law.
According to the judge, the two applicants were not sure of what they were doing by filing the application past the recommended time.
“It can be deduced from the pleadings and provisions cited that the applicants’ counsel are not aware that there is legal regime that governs the procedure of challenging decisions of political parties. It is trite law, that inherent powers of court cannot be invoked where there is specific law governing a subject matter,”Ssekaana noted.
