•NODPSP (objective xiv-health services, clean and safe water, decent shelter, food security etc, XX- basic medical services to the population, XXI –clean and safe water, XXII- food security and nutrition. Legal framework continued…
•The Uganda Medical and Dental Practitioners Council
Jurisprudence: Progressive beginning beset by inconsistency
•Salvatori Abuki & Anor V AG- EgondaNtende J [T]he right to life is inviolable. I take this view guided by the National Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy which we are enjoined to apply in interpreting this Constitution in part thereof. I take comfort in part (xiv) General Social and Economic objectives…An exclusion order under section 7 of the witchcraft Act seems to me to be set in the opposite direction from assuring access of the person banished to any shelter, food, security, clean and safe water, and health services. Horizontal claims by tobacco smokers
•Vincent Oribi V BAT
•Thomas Okumu V BAT & Mastermind Tobacco ltd. (court sought to determine whether case was representative/class action suit or a PIL case. Case dismissed because court found it was a class action and plaintiff did not notify and seek the consent of the people he sought to represent. Environmental Health Cases •UETCL V De Samaline Incorporation Ltd. [T]he right to a clean and healthy environment must not only be regarded as a purely medical matter. It should be regarded as a holistic socio-cultural phenomenon because it is concerned with physical and mental well-being of human beings... a clean and healthy environment is measured in both ethical and medical context. It is about linkages in human well-being. These may include social injustice, poverty, diminishing self -esteem, and poor access to health services. That right is not restricted to a clinical model
•Discharge of unpleasant, noxious and chocking dust constituted violation of employees’ right to a clean and healthy environment under Art. 39 . Environmental Health Cases continued….
•Byabazaire Grace Thaddeus v. Mukwano Industries
Court indicated that applicant had no locus standi . Only NEMA has power to sue under NEA
The TEAN Cases
•TEAN ltd V BAT ltd court held that a petition concerning unregulated smoking in public places disclosed no cause of action. Judgment disregarded the flexible locus standiallowed under article 50 of the Constitution that allows anybody to bring a case in public interest regardless of whether they are affected by the violation.
•BAT V TEAN ltd - where the court held that spirited persons or groups of persons who may feel obliged to represent those persons or groups of persons may, acting in the public interest do so under article 50(2) of the Constitution
Environmental Health Cases
InThe Environmental Action Network Ltd v Attorney General & NEMA (2001)- smoking in public places
ACODE V AG & NEMA (2004)
where the court held that the right to a healthy environment entitles Ugandans to a right to an environment adequate for their health and wellbeing.
PETITION 16: A threat to justiciability
•CEHURD & Others V AG First attempt to bring case on substantive health issues – Maternal mortality, EmOC, stock outs
•Political Question (learn from other jurisdictions, but also inadequate research preparation)
•Enforcement of rights before the High Court (disregard of article 137(3)- court may make order of redress or refer to High Court) Towards Effective Utilisation of PIL
•Capacity building (judges and civil society)- training, attachments to judges, research for cases
•Judiciary to develop framework within which to adjudicate right to health
•Activists to develop creative strategies for litigation
•Exploit existing constitutional provisions to argue for justiciability
•Use Equality and non-discrimination as cross-cutting issues.
•Use of Amicus curiae (Law clinics have a role)
•Use of other strategies to supplement litigation (awareness raising, research & monitoring, advocacy and social mobilisation)