This case clarified one of the cardinal rules of the constitutional interpretation – the ‘rule of harmony’. The court determined that all provisions of the Constitution must be read together, one provision not negating the other, especially provisions touching on the same subject.
The Petitioners contended that Article 12(1) should be read exclusive of Article 12(2) of the Constitution and that Article 12(2) be considered in isolation of Article 12(1) in order to make those not eligible for citizenship under Article 12(1) be eligible for citizenship under Article 12(2).
The court cited Attorney General v Major General Tinyefuza S C and adhered to the rule of harmony and rejected the Petitioners’ interpretation of Article 12.
The court further confirmed that refugees resident in Uganda and who satisfy the requirements under the laws of Uganda are eligible to apply for and acquire citizenship by naturalisation under Article 13 of the Constitution and section 16 of the Uganda Citizenship and Immigration Control Act. The court further confirmed that the word ‘alien’ includes any person, whether or not such a person is a refugee, who is not a citizen of Uganda.
Given the lack of evidence that an application for either registration as a citizen or naturalization as a citizen of Uganda was rejected or not processed, the court assumes that Government departments and Agencies are carrying out their statutory duties in accordance with the law.
Eligibility of refugees to citizenship; registration; naturalisation; rule of harmony
The petitioners are all refugees who have lived in Uganda for considerable periods of time and have expressed an interest to apply for citizenship but have not done so. The petitioners sought the interpretation of Article 12(2)(c) of the Constitution and whether the ineligibility of persons born in Uganda whose parents or grandparents were refugees at the time of their birth to citizenship by registration under Article 12(a)(ii) of the Constitution has no legal effect as regards the eligibility of refugees to citizenship by registration under Article 12(2)(c) of the Constitution. The petitioners sought the declaration that a refugee resident in Uganda and who satisfied the requirements under the Laws of Uganda was eligible to apply for citizenship by registration under Article 12(2) of the Constitution and to apply for and acquire citizenship by naturalization under Article 13 of the Constitution.
Petition failed
The court held that there is no question for constitutional interpretation of Article 13 in relation to section 16 of the Act, even where the words, ‘any alien’ in section 16(1) of the Act are construed as either including or excluding a refugee living in or outside of Uganda or a refugee denied citizenship by registration under Article 12(1) of the Constitution. The court adhered to the rule of harmony that stipulates that all provisions of the Constitution must be read together. Further, there was a lack of evidence that an application for either registration as a citizen or naturalization as a citizen of Uganda was rejected or not processed.