Human Rights Network Uganda & 4 Ors v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition-2013/56) [2020] UGCC 6 (26 March 2020)

The Petitioners challenged the constitutionality of section 8 of the Public Order Management Act (POMA), which gave the Inspector General of Government powers and discretion to prohibit gatherings and demonstrations. Petitioners argued that it violated Article 92 of the Constitution, which prohibited Parliament from passing legislation whose effect is to overturn or alter a judgment of court, because section 32(2) of the Police Act Cap 03 was declared unconstitutional in Muwanga Kivumbi Vs Attorney General and s 8 of POMA contains fundamentally similar contents.

The court interpreted s 8 as prohibitory and not regulatory in that it gave the police powers to prevent and disperse public gatherings, and held that it is a “reincarnation” of the provision declared unconstitutional in the Kivumbi judgment. The police had a duty to supervise public gatherings to prevent a breach of the peace, not prohibit gatherings altogether. Parliament had thus violated Article 92 by enacting s 8 of POMA.

The court clarified various concerns around the exercise of the rights to freedom of assembly and demonstration. The petition was allowed not only on the ground that s 8 violated Article 92 but also on the wider ground that it violated Article 29, which guaranteed freedom of assembly and the right to protest peacefully and unarmed.

The minority judgments addressed other challenges to POMA which counsel for the Petitioners had abandoned before the hearing.