The Supreme Court of Uganda’s Powers to Depart from or Reopen (Review) Its Decisions Under Article 132(4) of the Constitution

Abstract Article 132(4) of Uganda’s Constitution (1995) states that the Supreme Court may generally consider its decisions binding but can depart from them when necessary. Unlike some other African constitutions, Uganda’s does not explicitly authorise the Supreme Court to review its own rulings. The drafters intended for Article 132(4) to permit only departure, not review. However, this Article does not explicitly forbid review, and Rule 2(2) of the Supreme Court Rules (1996) allows the Court to set aside judgments found to be ‘null and void’. This article relies on the drafting history of the Constitution and contends that Rule 2(2) aligns with the Constitution since Article 132(4) does not expressly bar review. Drawing on practices in countries like Kenya, Ghana, and Tanzania, it argues that the Court could invoke its inherent powers to broaden the grounds for review when justice so requires, even beyond cases deemed null and void.