Ruling
It has been contended for the Petitioners that Article 12(1) should be read exclusive of Article 12(2) of the Constitution and that Article 12(2) be considered in isolation of Article 12(1) in order to make those not eligible for citizenship under Article 12(1) be eligible for citizenship under Article 12(2). This is the import of the declaration sought under this head. No compelling reason is advanced as to why we should ignore the rule of harmony in this case. In any case from a reading of the whole Article 12 it is clear that it touches on one subject, citizenship by registration. Article 12 creates a right in favour of certain categories of people who would be entitled to registration as citizens of Uganda upon application. If one does not fall within the categories of people expressed to be entitled to registration on application by the Constitution, then one cannot become a citizen by virtue of registration. The Constitution has provided for another category of citizenship or route to citizenship that people who do not qualify under either birth or registration can take. This is naturalisation under Article 13. It is not the end of the world for persons who do not qualify under Article 12 or are sspecifically excluded by Article 12(1) not to be entitled to be registered as citizens on application. Considering the above, the justices were unable to grant the declaration that those persons that are eligible for citizenship under Article 12(1) of the Constitution be eligible under Article 12 (2) of the Constitution. With regards to the second contention that was to the effect that a refugee resident in Uganda and who satisfies the requirements under the laws of Uganda is eligible to apply for and acquire citizenship by naturalization under Article 13 of the Constitution.’ The Justices stated under Article 13, the Parliament would by law provide for the acquisition and loss of citizenship by naturalization.’and that in compliance with the foregoing provision Parliament made the requisite law in the form of section 16 of the Uganda Citizenship and Immigration Control Act [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’]. The Justices stated that it was clear that we are-interpreting, not the Constitution but the Act in relation to naturalization. They therefore declined to issue the declaration sought as outside of its jurisdiction though we agree refugee’s resident in Uganda are eligible to be considered for citizenship on application for naturalization under section 16 of the Uganda Citizenship and Immigration Control Act. ‘That the relevant government departments and or agencies process applications for citizenship by registration and or naturalization by refugees who satisfy the requirements for citizenship under the relevant legislation and regulations.’ Also, because no single Government ‘Department or Agency was named or cited in these proceedings that is alleged to be dealing with this matter. They could not issue orders at large to bodies not identified. The justices stated that it was not how courts entertain disputes and or offer relief to parties that come before them. Ultimately, the Justices refused to grant the orders sought and the petition failed.