Supreme Court sets Thursday for Age Limit petition judgement
Controversial city lawyer Male Mabirizi, one of the petitioners in the case, on Tuesday morning served Chief Justice and Attorney General with a mandamus order for the Supreme Court's failure to pronounce itself itself on the matter within 60 days as mandated by the law.
NATIONAL | The Supreme Court was on Tuesday moved to fix a date on which it will pronounce itself on Age Limit appeal after being served with an extraordinary writ demanding immediate performance of the constitutional duty.
Controversial city lawyer Male Mabirizi, one of the petitioners in the case, on Tuesday morning served Chief Justice and Attorney General with a mandamus order for the Supreme Court’s failure to pronounce itself itself on the matter within 60 days as mandated by the law.
Within hours of his notice, Supreme Court Deputy Registrar released a notice indicating Thursday as the date the Supreme Court justices will decide on the matter.
Mabirizi’s petition is consolidated alongside those of MP Gerald Karuhanga and four others and Uganda Law Society.
“Take notice that the judgment of this appeal has been fixed for the 18th day of April 2019 at 10am .If no appearance is made by yourself, your pleader or by someone by law authorized to act for you, the judgment will be delivered in your absence,” the notice says.
In January, the Supreme Court closed hearing from witnesses and the defence team in the case and was, by law, expected to make its judgement on the matter within 60 days.
But this had been neglected even as the deadline elapsed, leaving calls for the court to decide on the matter drowned out in judicial silence. But Mabirizi’s latest move got the justices dusting their wigs and robes to prepare for ‘action.’
The petition followed a majority 4-1 ruling in August last year that approved the controversial Age Limit Bill. The petitioners had sued the government, claiming that the bill was smuggled in the House and that the process of enacting it was marred by violence, arrests and police’s disruption of opposition MPs consultative meetings.
With the exception of Justice Kenneth Kakuru, all the other justices of the High Court ruled that MPs constitutionally amended Article 102(b) to scrap upper presidential age limit.