Communication 431/12 – Thomas Kwoyelo v. Uganda 32. Citing the jurisprudence of the Commission, the Respondent State asserts that local remedies have not been exhausted in conformity with the well settled principle of finality of court process and legal certainty which begets that the Supreme Court of Uganda hears the Complainant’s case as a last and final court within the jurisdiction of Uganda. 33. The Respondent State submits that domestic remedies still exist at the domestic level and argue that the Constitutional Court of Uganda is not the highest court in Uganda but only a Court of first instance for matters calling for Constitutional interpretation. 34. It outlines various articles of the 1995 Constitution of Uganda which recognise the Supreme Court as the final Court of appeal, particularly Article 132(3) which provides that ‘any party aggrieved by a decision of the Court of Appeal sitting as a Constitutional Court is entitled to appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision’. 35. The Respondent State avers that the judgment in Constitutional Reference No. 36 of 2011 was delivered on 22 September 2011 and the Attorney General being dissatisfied with the said judgment appealed against the whole judgment on 23 September 2011. 36. They assert that the appeal is currently pending hearing and final determination and further assert that following the lodgement of the appeal, the Respondent State successfully applied to stay execution on the grounds that if execution was allowed to proceed it would in effect render the appeal nugatory. 37. The Respondent State submits that the Supreme Court of Uganda is duly constituted and has quorum to hear and entertain the appeal. They further submit that the Court be allowed an opportunity to hear and pronounce itself on the 8 62nd Ordinary Session, 25 April – 9 July 2018

Sélectionner le paragraphe cible3