Male Kassim Mabirizi Kiwanuka, one of the people that lost the petition before the Constitutional Court challenging the Constitutional Amendment No. 1 of 2018, — the so-called age limit amendment — this morning filed an appeal to the Supreme Court
Mabirizi had earlier filed an intention to appeal; listing 82 grounds on which he was unhappy with the appellant court ruling.
Today, he formally filed his incredibly voluminous appeal, which is contained on a total of 30,692 pages and 150 bound books.
The self-styled lawyer arrived at the court on a pickup truck with the booklets, and was accompanied by another person who helped him carry them to the Registry.
The petition was received by His worship Godfrey Opifemi, the Deputy Registrar of Supreme Court.
In this appeal, Mabirizi challenges part of the majority judgement, some orders and some aspects of findings, decisions and orders made in the unanimous judgement of Constitutional Court Judges Owinyi-Dollo, Remmy Kasule, Elizabeth Musoke, and Cheborion Barishaki. He however, concurs wholly with the judgement of Justice Kenneth Kakuru.
Among the grounds for Mabirizi’s appeal include what he calls failure of the constitutional court judges to award him professional fees and damages after awarding fees to other co-petitioners with lawyers
“You cannot say that I am not entitled to professional fees because I represented myself, it’s unfair and against the principles of fair hearing since it took me time to compile these documents,” he said.
Mabirizi had also asked the appellant court for damages since he suffered in a number of ways including surviving being arrested by Police as he was heading to Parliament during the age limit debate.
He says the appellant court judges erred in fact and law, when they failed to hear and determine the petition expeditiously, and when they evicted him from court seats occupied by other petitioners’ representatives.
He adds that the judges denied him ample time to explain more about his case, and a chance to respond to respondents’ submissions by a way of rejoinder
He further wonders why the judges didn’t summon the Speaker of Parliament Rebecca Kadaga; and why they failed to mention his two supplementary affidavits.
Majority of the judges, he says, didn’t determine the legality of contents in the affidavit of Gen David Muhoozi, the Chief of Defense Forces and that of Mr. Keith Muhakanzi the Secretary to the Treasury, which he says had elements of hearsay
Asked by reporters why he went alone to the Supreme Court, he responded, “In the Constitution Court, we went separately, but the petitions were consolidated. I therefore couldn’t wait for somebody to file my appeal.
Recently, Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago, one of the lawyers representing the six MPs who were part of the consolidated application expressed interest in appealing against part of the Constitutional Court judgement.