Andrew Mujuni Mwenda & Another v Attorney General (Consolidated Constitutional Petitions No.12 of 2005 & No.3 of 2006) [2010] UGCC 5
Andrew Mujuni Mwenda, a journalist, sought declarations of nullification of the offences of sedition and promoting sectarianism preferred against him in the Chief Magistrate’s Court, contending that they were unconstitutional. The Eastern African Media Institution (U)Ltd on it’s own and in public interest petitioned the Court seeking declarations of nullification of the same offences of sedition, promoting sectarianism and criminal defamation. The court declared (i) Sections 39 and 40 of the Penal Code inconsistent with provisions of the Articles 29(1) (a) and 43(2) (c) of the Constitution and null and void (ii) Sections 42, 43 & 44 of the Penal Code which relate to sedition redundant (iii) Petitioners failed to prove that the offence of promoting sectarianism is inconsistent with the Constitution.
https://dullahomarinstitute.org.za/acjr/resource-centre/Uganda%20Mwenda.pdf/view
https://dullahomarinstitute.org.za/acjr/@@site-logo/DOI001 Logo-rgb.png
Andrew Mujuni Mwenda & Another v Attorney General (Consolidated Constitutional Petitions No.12 of 2005 & No.3 of 2006) [2010] UGCC 5
Andrew Mujuni Mwenda, a journalist, sought declarations of nullification of the offences of sedition and promoting sectarianism preferred against him in the Chief Magistrate’s Court, contending that they were unconstitutional. The Eastern African Media Institution (U)Ltd on it’s own and in public interest petitioned the Court seeking declarations of nullification of the same offences of sedition, promoting sectarianism and criminal defamation. The court declared (i) Sections 39 and 40 of the Penal Code inconsistent with provisions of the Articles 29(1) (a) and 43(2) (c) of the Constitution and null and void (ii) Sections 42, 43 & 44 of the Penal Code which relate to sedition redundant (iii) Petitioners failed to prove that the offence of promoting sectarianism is inconsistent with the Constitution.