STATUTORY INTERPRETATION
This basically refers to the process by which courts ascertain and clarify the
meaning of words, phrases, or provisions in statutes to resolve ambiguities or
apply them to specific cases. In Uganda, the judiciary plays a crucial role in
statutory interpretation to ensure the intention of Parliament is realized while
safeguarding justice and constitutional principles. The interpretation is
governed by various principles, maxims, and established rules.
The Concept of Statutory Interpretation in Uganda is guided by both statutory
and common law principles. In Uganda, the Interpretation Act Cap 2 provides a
framework for interpreting statutory provisions, offering definitions and
guidance on resolving ambiguities. Courts often supplement statutory guidance
with established rules of interpretation, including the literal rule, golden rule,
mischief rule, ejusdem generis rule, and purposive approach.
1.1 RULES OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION
Statutory interpretation in Uganda relies on a combination of rules and
principles designed to clarify ambiguous statutory provisions while upholding
justice and legislative intent. By applying the literal, golden, mischief, ejusdem
generis and purposive approaches alongside constitutional principles, the
Ugandan courts ensure that laws are interpreted in a manner that reflects the
intention of Parliament and promotes fairness and equity.
1. Literal Rule
The literal rule requires that words in a statute be given their plain, ordinary,
and grammatical meaning unless doing so would result in absurdity. For
example; In the Commissioner General Uganda Revenue Authority v Meera
Investments Ltd (Civil Appeal 22 of 2007) [2009] UGSC 3, the court strictly
interpreted tax exemption provisions based on the plain meaning of the law. It
held that tax exemptions should not be implied but expressly stated.
LLB (IUIU), PGD. LP (LDC), LLM (KIU) Page 1
2. Golden Rule
This rule modifies the literal rule by allowing courts to avoid interpretations
that lead to absurd or unjust results, even if the words are plain. For example;
while interpreting the Succession Act Cap 268, the court applies the golden
rule to prevent an absurd result in a dispute over inheritance, ensuring justice
aligned with the intention of the law.
3. Mischief Rule
The mischief rule directs courts to consider the "mischief" or problem the
statute was intended to remedy, focusing on legislative intent. For example; In
Attorney General v Susan Kigula & 417 Others (Constitutional Appeal
No. 03 of 2006) [2009] UGSC 6, the supreme court in this constitutional
appeal, interpreted the abolition of the mandatory death penalty in light of
constitutional principles to remedy the injustice and inconsistency it caused.
4. Purposive Approach
The purposive approach is closely related to the mischief rule, requiring courts
to interpret legislation by focusing on the overall purpose and objectives of the
law. For example; In Uganda Association of Women Lawyers v Attorney
General (Constitutional Petition No. 2 of 2003) [2004] UGCC 1, the court
adopted a purposive approach in interpreting gender equality provisions under
the Constitution to address systemic discrimination.
5. Ejusdem Generis Rule
Under this rule, when general words follow specific words, the general words
are interpreted to include only items of the same type as the specific words. For
example: In Kampala Capital City Authority v Kabandize (2018), the court
applied the ejusdem generis rule to interpret “other structures” in a zoning law
as only referring to structures similar to residential and commercial buildings.
LLB (IUIU), PGD. LP (LDC), LLM (KIU) Page 2
1.2 CONSTITUTIONAL SUPREMACY
All statutory interpretation must align with the Constitution, as it is the
supreme law. For example; In Attorney General v Salvatory Abuki [1999]
UGSC 7, the court invalidated provisions of the Witchcraft Act that were
inconsistent with constitutional principles on human dignity.
1.3 CONSTRUCTION
The concept of construction refers to the harmonious process of interpreting
and giving meaning to legal texts, such as statutes, contracts, or constitutional
provisions. It involves analyzing the language, context, and purpose of the legal
document to ascertain its true meaning. In Uganda, courts apply various
principles and aids of construction to ensure justice and adherence to the rule
of law. The concept of construction is critical in addressing ambiguities,
resolving conflicts in legal texts, and aligning the interpretation with legislative
intent, constitutional values, and societal needs. Provisions within a statute
should be read in harmony with one another.
1.3.1 AIDS TO CONSTRUCTION
Generally, in constructing the meaning of words under statutory interpretation,
the Courts in Uganda rely on two types of aids for the statutory interpretation
which are; internal aids and external aids to construction.
1. Internal Aids
The internal aids to construction are basically the tools that guide the
construction, found within the statute itself. They include;
a) Preamble:
This provides the purpose or objective of the law. For example; the preamble of
the 1995 Constitution of Uganda reflects the national objectives and values
that guide constitutional interpretation.
Research on: Long title, short title, cross headings, sections, punctuation
LLB (IUIU), PGD. LP (LDC), LLM (KIU) Page 3
b) Definitions Clauses and Sections
These specify the meaning of key terms in the statute. For example; the court
may refer to the definition section of the Penal Code Act to interpret "harm"
c) Headings and Marginal Notes
These provide guidance on the content of sections but are not binding. For
example; in interpreting the various Acts, courts have considered headings to
determine the context of certain provisions.
d) Illustrations
Some statutes provide examples to clarify provisions. For example; the need to
include illustrations to explain the application of contract law principles.
e) Schedules
These contain supplementary details or procedural guidelines. For example;
Courts often refer to schedules in the Civil Procedure Rules for procedural
issues.
2. External Aids
The external aids to construction are the materials outside the statute that
assist in interpretation. They include;
a) Legislative History
This basically involves examining debates and discussions during the drafting
of the law. For example; The Hansard (parliamentary debates) are often
consulted in Uganda to determine legislative intent.
b) Judicial Precedents
The Courts rely on previous decisions to ensure consistency and predictability.
For example; In most criminal matters the court references earlier cases to
resolve ambiguities in criminal law.
c) International Instruments
These are applied where Ugandan laws align with international conventions.
For example; Courts have used the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) 1979 to interpret gender rights
under the Constitution.
LLB (IUIU), PGD. LP (LDC), LLM (KIU) Page 4
d) Legal Textbooks and Legal Commentaries
The legal writings by scholars are sometimes used for interpretation. For
example; In Re Christine Namatovu Tebajjukira [1992] KALR 8, legal texts
were referred to in interpreting the law on succession.
e) Customary Practices
In cases involving land or family law, courts may consider customary norms to
supplement statutory interpretation. For example; the examining of customary
land rights within the broader statutory context.
The concept of construction and its aids are vital to ensure laws are applied
effectively and justly. By balancing literal, golden, mischief, ejusdem generis
and purposive rules, and using internal and external aids, courts align legal
interpretation with legislative intent, constitutional values, and social justice.
1.4 PRESUMPTIONS
Presumptions are underlying principles or default rules that courts rely on
during statutory interpretation unless explicitly rebutted by the statute. These
presumptions reflect fundamental legal principles, such as the protection of
individual rights, the separation of powers, and justice, and they help courts to
discern the legislature’s intent. The presumptions recognized in statutory
interpretation, particularly in Uganda include;
1. Retrospective Operation
A statute is presumed not to have a retrospective effect unless explicitly stated.
The laws generally apply prospectively to avoid unfairness or injustice. This
presumption is particularly important for criminal and tax legislation. For
example; the court emphasizes that a criminal law may not apply retroactively
unless explicitly provided, and thereby citing constitutional protections under
Article 28(7) of the 1995 Constitution.
LLB (IUIU), PGD. LP (LDC), LLM (KIU) Page 5
2. Alteration of the Common Law
It is presumed that statutes do not alter the common law unless the intention
to do so is clear. Courts interpret statutes in harmony with existing common
law principles. For example; the courts generally note that the statutory
provisions on self-defense in the Penal Code Act are consistent with the
common law principle.
3. Presumption Against Implied Repeal
If two statutes appear to conflict, it is presumed that the later statute does not
repeal the earlier one unless expressly stated. Courts will strive to harmonize
the two. For example; In Attorney General v Uganda Law Society
(Constitutional Appeal 1 of 2006) [2009] UGSC 2, the court stated that
constitutional provisions could not be impliedly repealed by ordinary
legislation.
4. Presumption Against Injustice or Absurdity
The Courts presume that Parliament does not intend to pass laws that result in
injustice, absurdity, or unreasonable outcomes. If literal interpretation leads to
such results, courts may apply other interpretative methods to correct them.
For example; the court may avoid an absurd interpretation of a tax provision
that would have unfairly penalized the taxpayer.
5. Penalization Without Fault (Mens rea)
It is presumed that Parliament does not intend to impose criminal liability
without fault (mens rea). The Courts generally require clear language to impose
strict liability. For example; when court holds that strict liability only applies
where expressly provided, emphasizing the importance of mens rea in criminal
offenses.
LLB (IUIU), PGD. LP (LDC), LLM (KIU) Page 6
6. Ouster of Judicial Review
It is presumed that Parliament does not intend to exclude the jurisdiction of
the courts to review administrative or executive actions unless this is explicitly
stated. For example; the court may refuse to interpret a statute as ousting
judicial review, emphasizing the constitutional right to access courts under
Article 126 of the 1995 Constitution.
7. In Favor of Individual Rights
The statutes are presumed to be consistent with fundamental rights and
freedoms, as provided in the Constitution. Courts interpret laws in a manner
that upholds these rights. For example; In Charles Onyango Obbo & Anor v
Attorney General (2004), the court interpreted the Penal Code Act narrowly to
protect the right to freedom of expression under Article 29 of the Constitution.
Generally, presumptions under statutory interpretation help ensure that laws
are applied in a manner that is just, consistent, and reflective of fundamental
principles of the legal system. In Uganda, these presumptions are often guided
by constitutional provisions, common law principles, and judicial precedents to
achieve fairness and uphold the rule of law. Courts will only depart from these
presumptions when there is clear and express language in the statute to the
contrary.
LLB (IUIU), PGD. LP (LDC), LLM (KIU) Page 7
