Constitutional Interpretation Or Rights Enforcement? A Closer Look At The Legal Brains Trust V. Attorney General, 2022 Ruling

Abstract

This case comment examines the Legal Brain Trust (LBT) Ltd v Attorney General, 2021 ruling, focusing on the jurisdictional issues concerning constitutional interpretation and human rights enforcement. The central question addressed is whether every alleged violation of constitutional rights requires the Constitutional Court's interpretation or if such matters can be adjudicated by other competent courts, such as the High Court or Magistrate Courts. The comment argues that the High Court erroneously dismissed the case as one requiring constitutional interpretation, overlooking its primary focus on human rights enforcement. Through a detailed analysis of constitutional provisions and relevant case law, the comment highlights the need for a clear distinction between public interest litigation aimed at constitutional interpretation and that intended for human rights enforcement. The comment concludes with the importance of recognizing this differentiation to ensure proper case allocation, uphold justice, and maintain the integrity of Uganda's legal system thereby calling for a more streamlined approach to prevent future misinterpretations and better support the enforcement of human rights.

Keywords: constitutional law, constitutional interpretation, human rights enforcement, uganda