Seguya Hillary Innocent, a Ugandan Student pursuing a Masters Degree in international relations at Harvard University who had dragged President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, Government Spokesperson Ofwono Opondo and AIGP Asan Kasingye the political Commissar in Uganda Police to the High Court for blocking him on Twitter, has challenged the ruling of the high court.
After losing the case as per the decision of High Court judge Justice Andrew Bashaija who held that it was right for the above individuals to block him since these were their personal accounts, not official ones as it was being alleged by Seguya, he now seeks the intervention of the East African Court of Justice.
Through his Agent Hassan Male Mabirizi, Seguya seeks the East African Court to nullify the High court ruling, which he says undermines accountability by those in government to the citizens.
He also argues that it undermines freedom of expression, it’s illegal and cripples his ability to participate in his own governance thereby breaching Articles 6(d) & 7(2) of The Treaty for Establishment of The East African Community.
“The actions are unlawful and an infringement on fundamental and operational principles of the East Africa Community which include good governance, adherence to principles of rule of law, accountability, transparency universally accepted standards of Human rights.”
Seguya faulted the trial judge for having acted against a number of laws and guidelines within the constitution which makes his decision unlawful.
He cites “The act of making a decision outside the 90 days required by the Uganda Judicial Review rules.”
That it was wrong for the judge to send the applicant judgment which was not signed by the judge who had made it.
Seguya alleges that the actions of the judge relying on the Uganda Human Rights Enforcement Act which was published on November 15, 2019, after the application had been filed on August 26, 2019, was wrong.
Early this year, Justice Andrew Bashaija dismissed Seguya’s application on grounds that the government officials had a right to decide on who follows them on their personal social media accounts as he reminded him that he can follow the information from their offices on their official accounts