In his petition drafted in form of talking points before the seven justices, Ssebaduka wondered how a sensible person would subject presidential aspirants to go and look for signatures of their supporters from two thirds of the country but then afterwards subject them to virtual campaigns and elections.Â
Due to the coronavirus, the Electoral Commission barred candidates from holding conventional campaigns. Ssebaduka argued that it doesn’t make sense for the EC to demand for signatures which were to be collected physically from allover. He noted that if indeed COVID-19 exists, the presidential aspirants would have contracted it during the course of looking for signatures.
Ssebadduka who said he was a presidential aspirant asked court to scrap the scientific campaigns and also waive the condition of looking for signatures before nominations. But all the respondents jointly opposed the applications. The ministry of Health through the state attorney Richard Adrole argued that it had been wrongly sued as all legal actions made against government should be filed against the attorney general.
Then the Electoral Commission chairperson justice Simon Byabakama who was represented by the Commission’s lawyers led by Eric Sabiiti and Hamidu Lugoloobi argued that Ssebadduka had abused the court process as he should have filed his petition before the High court and that it was wrong for him to sue Byabakama.Â
The two senior legal officers argued that the Electoral Commission’s Act provides that an official of the Commission cannot be sued in their individual capacity unless they have acted in bad faith which wasn’t the case here. They also noted that one cannot file a presidential elections petition before elections are conducted.
President Museveni on his part through his lawyers led by Edwin Karugire noted that as a sitting president he enjoys the immunity and therefore he cannot be sued. However, in their ruling, the seven Supreme court justices led by chief justice Alfonse Owiny-Dollo have unanimously concurred with the submissions raised by all the respondents and dismissed the petition with costs.
Other justices on the panel are; Stellah Arach Amoko, Percy Night Tuhaise, Faith Mwondha, Paul Mugamba, Ezekiel Muhanguzi and Mike Chibita. They noted that Ssebadduka abused the court process and besides this, he used abusive language to the extent that he abused everyone involved in his petition including justices of the court and the only person he didn’t abuse was himself.
The justices noted that apart from demeaning the sanctity of the justices, his petition lacked any merit and there is no way any reasonable tribunal would ever entertain a petition framed out of abusive language like his. They said in the interest of justice and fairness, Ssebadduka should be punished for his abusive language.
As such, they directed that he appears before them on November 11, 2020, and explain why he shouldn’t be found in contempt of court. Contempt of court is the only offense that is not laid out in the Penal Code Act as it may have both civil and criminal elements. However, for such conducts that arise from between proceedings, section 107 of the Penal Code Act states that a person who may found in contempt of court commits a misdemeanour.
Section 22 of the Penal Code Act also provides that a general punishment of such misdemeanours may not exceed two years imprisonment. The judge may also use their discretion to punish the person to any sentence.Â
Speaking after the decision, Ssebadduka said that he did not expect his petition to succeed when being heard by such justices, and he repeated his abusive words against the different parties and institutions involved.