before interim injunctive orders are granted. He submitted that the Applicant had satisfied all of them.
In response, Mr. Mwaka, relying on the affidavit of Mr. Waminda, the Registrar of the Anti-Corruption Court Division, disagreed with the submissions of the applicant’s counsel. He contended that the designated Magistrates in the Anti Corruption Division of the High Court were properly established by the Chief Justice in accordance with Article 133 of the Constitution and section 148 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act. He submitted that Practice Direction No.5 of the High Court (Anti-Corruption Division) Practice Directions, 2009 established the composition of the High Court Division, and Magistrates were only attached to that Division.
There was no evidence, he further submitted, that any magistrate had exceeded jurisdiction conferred by law.
In Counsel’s view, the application was frivolous as the orders sought could not be granted and there was nothing to stay arising out of the decision of the Constitutional court.
Counsel submitted that the appeal had no chance of success, and that there was no irreparable harm that would be suffered by the applicant who was not an accused person. He contended that the cases cited by counsel for the applicant were distinguishable from the instant case because in all those cases, the applicants were