Court name
High Court of Uganda
Case number
HCT-05-CV-EPA-2001/3
Judgment date
7 February 2002

Musinguzi v Amama Mbabazi & Anor (2) (HCT-05-CV-EPA-2001/3) [2002] UGHC 2 (07 February 2002);

Cite this case
[2002] UGHC 2
Short summary:
Civil Procedure

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA

HOLDEN AT MBARARA

HIGH COURT-05-CV-EPA-0003 OF 2001

 MUSINGUZI GARUGA JAMES PETITIONER

VERSUS

 AMAMA MBABAZI RESPONDENT NO. 1
ELECTORAL COMMISSION RESPONDENT NO. 2

BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE FMS EGONDA-NTENDE

RULING (2)

1. During the course of cross examination of Mrs Jackleene Mbabazi by Mr. Walubiri, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, asked the witness whether Respondent No. 1 had given or passed to her a list of the Petitioner’s agents. Dr. Byamugisha, learned Counsel for Respondent No. 1, objected to the question on the ground that it was not relevant. In the course of replying to the submission by Mr. Walubiri in response to this objection, Dr. Byamugisha made another application. He requested that forthwith under Rule 15 of the Parliamentary Elections (Election Petitions) Rules, 1996, the Petitioner must apply to court for leave to cross examine any of the Respondents’ witnesses, and do so only with leave of the court. It is those two matters that form the subject of this ruling. I will take them in reverse order.
2. Dr. Byamugisha contends that Petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Walubiri, is acting unreasonably, by asking of the witness now before the court irrelevant questions. That in order to save time of the court, and the witnesses (the current one and those lined up present in Mbarara), and the costs likely to incurred by his client on these witnesses, it is necessary for this court to grant leave, upon application, to the party wishing to cross examine witnesses, and in due course to restrict such counsel’s cross examination of witnesses to specific matters that will have been set out, in the order for leave.
3. Mr. Deus Byamugisha, learned Counsel for Respondent No. 2, supported Dr.