The republic of uganda in the supreme court of uganda at kampala

(a) non-compliance with the provision of this Act if the Court is satisfied that the election was not conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in those provisions and that the non-compliance affected the result of the election in substantial manner;

(b)………………… (Emphasis is added).

In his submission counsel for the Petitioner relying on S.2 (2) of the Act, treated contravention of a provision of the Commission Act, as if it was a contravention of the Act. S.2 (2) of the Act, reads thus:

“(2) The Commission Act shall be construed as one with this Act.” “Commission Act” is defined in sub-section (1) of the same section, as the Electoral Commission Act 1997. Sub-section (2) is clearly concerned with construction of the two statutes. It means that the provisions of both Acts are to be construed in the same manner. I find support for this view in CRAIES ON STATUTE LAW, 7th Ed., S.G.G. Edgar, 1971 Sweet & Maxwell, London. At p. 138, the learned author says:

“It is now common practice to insert clauses which make certain Acts one for purposes of construction.... The effect of enacting that an Act shall be construed as one with another Act is that the court must construe every part of each of the Acts as if it had been contained in one Act.”

The sub-section does not purport to incorporate into the Act, provisions of the Commission Act. A provision of the Commission Act which is not re-enacted in the Act cannot be referred to as a provision of the Act.

I hasten to add, however, that the complaints of contravention of provisions of the Commission Act are relevant to and will be discussed under application of principles to the conduct of the elections. In my view, this distinction which resulted into separate issues, but which in a final analysis appears to be hairsplitting, is a consequence of the complex manner in which the provision was drafted. It seems to me that it would have been more straight forward and even clearer if the provision in paragraph (a) of S.58 (6) of the Act had been drawn thus:

Non-compliance with (provisions and) principles laid down in the electoral law for the conduct of the election if the court is satisfied that the noncompliance affected the result of the election in a substantial manner.

That way non-compliance with provisions of any law governing the election would be put on the same footing vis a viz the grounds for annulment. In my view the provision as it stands isolates non-compliance with the provisions of the Act to no useful purpose. Be that as it may, I will therefore defer consideration of complaints of contravention of the Commission Act, to when I deal with the second issue. That leaves two complaints pleaded in paragraph 3(1) (a) (b) and (d).