Interpreting ‘the highest appellate court’ in light of the drafting history of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of Uganda: Reconciling <i>2nd Lt. Ogwang Ambrose v Uganda</i> (2024) with <i>Attorney General v Kabaziguruka</i> (2025)

Abstract Article 22(1) of the Constitution of Uganda (1995) provides that an offender can be sentenced to death. However, he/she can only be executed after ‘the conviction and sentence have been confirmed by the highest appellate court.’ The Constitution does not define ‘the highest appellate court.’ In PTE Muhumuza Zepha v Uganda (2020) the Court of Appeal held that ‘[t]he expression “highest appellate court” does not necessarily mean the Supreme Court of Uganda or the Court of Appeal of Uganda, but the highest appellate court prescribed by Parliament.’ In 2nd Lt. Ogwang Ambrose v Uganda (2024), the Supreme Court endorsed that Court of Appeal’s reasoning. However, in Attorney General v Kabaziguruka (2025), the Supreme Court, without expressly overruling or departing from 2nd Lt. Ogwang Ambrose v Uganda (2024), held that under Article 22(2) it is the highest appellate court. It held that PTE Muhumuza Zepha v Uganda (2020) was wrongly decided on this issue. Although the Court in Attorney General v Kabaziguruka (2025) does not refer to the debates in the Constituent Assembly, the author relies on the drafting history of Article 22(1) to argue that the Court reached the correct conclusion.