Coming up for hearing: on 11th March 2022.
Reference filed: on 26th October 2016.
Articles: 6 (d), 7(2), 27 and 30(1) (2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.
Rules: 24(1), (2) & (3) of the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure, 2019.
Subject matter: Freezing of Bank Accounts.
The Applicant, Ismail Dabule is a Ugandan resident who instituted the case on his own behalf and on behalf of 1004 others while the Respondent is the Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda sued on behalf of the Government.
The factual background of the case is that, in 1979 the National Consultative Council of Uganda enacted the Banking Act 1979, which was amended by the Banking Act (Amendment) Statute 18 of 1980 to introduce sections 26A and 26B which gave the Minister of Finance power to make Legal Notices No. 2 of 1982 and No. 2 & 3 of 1984 freezing the Applicant’s bank accounts.
Pursuant to the Banking (Freezing of Accounts) Legal Notices No.2 and No.3 of 1984, the then Minister of Finance instructed Bank of Uganda (BOU) to take over the Applicants’ accounts in Uganda Commercial Banks so as to freeze various personal and business accounts belonging to the Applicants’. Upon freezing the Applicants’ bank accounts, the BOU transferred all the funds to itself.
On 3rd February 1995, the then Minister of Finance wrote to the banks to unfreeze the said accounts. The Applicants wrote a letter to the BOU on 21st March 2003, seeking implementation of the Minister’s letter.
In April 2004, the Applicants’ filed a case at the Constitutional Court of Uganda seeking unfreezing order, compensation for the continued freezing of the accounts in question, and payment of the principal amounts and interest. The Court dismissed the petition by its ruling delivered on the 14th September 2007.
Dissatisfied with the ruling of the Constitutional Court, the Applicants lodged a Constitutional Appeal before the Supreme Court of Uganda. The Supreme Court also dismissed the petition by its judgment delivered on 30th October 2015.
Consequently, the Applicants instituted Reference No.5 of 2016 Ismail Dabule & 1004 Others vs the Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda at the First Instance Division of the East African Court of Justice challenging the act of freezing their accounts. The Applicants allege both Courts in Uganda (the Constitutional and the Supreme Court) confirmed that they are free to access their money unfrozen by the then Minister of Finance.
The Applicants alleges that, on 5th August 2016 their lawyers wrote to the Minister of Finance a final demand on payment of the said monies but the Respondent ignored/refused in any way and no money has been paid to the Applicants to date.
The Applicant sought in the Reference for declarations and orders to the effect that, the refusal of the Government of Uganda to release the Applicants’ alleged unfrozen funds and the unjustified continued holding of the Applicants’ money, documentation and account balances are a violation of Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty Establishing the East African Community.
The Respondent contended the reference was misconceived, frivolous and vexatious and raised no issues or questions for interpretation by the First Instance Division. Further, matters raised were not justiciable and the Respondent had at all material times respected the Applicants’ right to own property and is not in custody of any of the Applicants’ frozen accounts.
The Respondent in among other things submitted to have not by any act or omission violated any provisions of the Treaty and sought dismissal of the Reference with costs.
The First Instance Division after hearing the matter found the Reference was premised on non-existent court decisions that supported any claim in respect of the frozen or unfrozen accounts. Further found the Applicants had not established what Ugandan National law if any, was contravened by the Respondent. The First Instance Division therefore ruled there was no live dispute before it and dismissed the Reference.
The Applicants dissatisfied with the decision of the First Instance Division, successfully instituted an appeal to the Appellate Division alleging among other issues that, the Learned Justices of the First Instance Division erred in law and fact in holding that the Applicants’ Reference was not properly before them.
On appeal, they sought for orders allowing the appeal, quashing/varying the challenged decision and costs.
The Appellate Division allowed the appeal with costs, quashed the decision of the First Instance Division and set aside the dismissal order. Reference remitted back to the First Instance Division with direction to proceed with hearing of the case based on issues raised during a scheduling conference held on 28th November 2018.
This is a document produced by the Registry to assist in understanding forthcoming matters before the Court. It does not bind the Court. For authoritative Decisions, Judgments and general information about the Court please visit https://www.eacj.org
Contact: Registrar, East African Court of Justice, P.O. Box 1096 Arusha, Tanzania Tel: +255 27 2506093 Fax: +255 27 27 2509493 Email: eacj@eachq.org