Monday, October 1, 2012

Moot Opportunity for Third Year LLB Students


ATTENTION UCU THIRD YEAR LLB STUDENTS This year UCU has formed its fifth Jessup moot team. We hope that this team will be the fifth team in five years to represent Uganda in the International Round of this prestigious competition. We have three Fourth Year LLB students on the team. We need to add two Third Year LLB Students to the team. At the present we have failed to identify candidates for these posts on the team. Therefore, we will be organizing an exercise to identify and name the additional team members. Please note that the Third Year LLB students will not travel to Washington D.C. with the Fourth Year LLB team members unless the Third year team members choose cater for their own travel expenses. Travel expenses are only budgeted for the Fourth Year LLB team members. This is the way we have done things in each of the past four years. However, it should also be noted that Third Year LLB team members are given favoured consideration for placement on the team as Fourth Year LLBs the following year. With those preliminary words, here is how the assessment/identification process will work: First students shall access the 2013 Jessup Compromis issued in September, 2012. This is the matter between Alfurna and Rutasia. Links to Compromis in both Word and PDF formats are available on the Internet at: http://www.ilsa.org/jessuphome/competition-materials Students are then required to prepare an argument on issue (a) on behalf of Alfurna. This issue is found on paragraph 55 of the Compromis. Students shall report to the clinical conference room on Saturday the 20th of October at 6:00 p.m. Students shall arrive prepared to offer oral argument on issue (a) on behalf of Alfurna. In addition students shall submit a written legal argument not to exceed 2500 words, including footnotes. You are only to submit the material that would be in the Pleadings section of the Jessup Memorial if the matter was restricted to issue (a). That means that you should not submit a cover page, a table of contents, an index of Authorities, a statement of jurisdiction; questions presented; a statement of facts; or a summary of pleadings. The legal argument can be submitted in hard or soft copy via flash drive or email to dbriandennison@gmail.com Students will present their oral arguments outside of the presence of other competing students. Each student will be given ten minutes to present an argument on issue (a) on behalf of Alfurna. Excellence guidance on oral arguments and written arguments in the Jessup Competition is available here: http://jessup.whitecase.com/newsdetail.aspx?news=2450 Students will be evaluated in accordance with official Jessup competition standards with the written submission worth 1/3’s and the oral submission worth 2/3’s of the total point allotment. The highest two performers will be selected.

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

No Second Team for the Uganda IHL Moot at this Time


Please note that at this time UCU has only been allotted one spot for the upcoming IHL Moot in September. There is no indication that we will be allowed to enter a second team as we have been in years past. Therefore, the upcoming session on Saturday 28th will be for two team spots on Team A.

Monday, July 16, 2012

Announcement regarding Remaining 2012-2013 Inter-University Moot Team Assignments:


At this time we are only prepared to name four rising fourth-year students to the remaining moot competitions for the 2012-2013 Academic Year. The 4th Year Students on the Jessup Team are: Yongyera Roland, Tuhairwe Herman and Kayondo Siver In addition Kiwana Jonathan will serve as a team member on Team A of UCU’s IHL National Moot Team. We still need to name two additional team members to Team A as well as three members to a possible Team B for the IHL Moot. (Note, that Team B will not be guaranteed a spot in the IHL Moot. UCU has been able to enter two teams in this competition the previous 3 years, but we cannot be assured the allowance of two teams this year) Additional team members will be named through a supplemental evaluation that will be performed on Saturday evening, 28 July beginning at 5:00 p.m. in the Faculty of Law’s Clinical Conference Room. Three things will happen at this exercise. 1) You will be given a brief quiz on International Humanitarian Law; 2) You will be asked to submit a short oral argument as to whether or not NATO military intervention in Syria without the approval of the UN Security Council would violate international law (you have to choose a side and defend it); 3) You will be asked to play a part in an impromptu role playing exercise. Yes, this evaluation procedure presents a real challenge to interested students. Third year students have yet to take International Humanitarian Law. Therefore you have very little time to acquaint yourself with the subject matter. However, the competition will be held in September so we need individuals who are able to learn over a very short period of time with little outside help. Also, the timing of this supplemental competition is burdensome for the September intake. Yet the September intake students have more time to brush up on IHL law. We apologise for the timing and relatively short notice. The hope was that we could take care of team formation at the beginning of next semester. However, this became impossible once we learned of the new accelerated timetable for the IHL moot. Note that your participation and showing in this supplemental exercise could also increase your chances of being selected to some other moot opportunity over the course of the academic year. Although, any such opportunities remain uncertain contingencies at this time. Thank you for your interest in the UCU Moot Programme. Brian Dennison

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Announcement and Revised Rules for the 2012 Intra-UCU Moot Competition:

Announcement and Revised Rules for the 2012 Intra-UCU Moot Competition:

The Faculty of Law is happy to announce that the Intra-University Moot will take place this Semester. Students in their 1st, 2nd and 3rd years of study in the LLB Progamme are welcome to participate in the Moot. The following are rules and details regarding the Moot.

Teams:
There shall be two law students on each moot team. All team members must be 1st, 2nd or 3rd year LLB students enrolled in January Term of 2012. 4th year students are not eligible to compete. Team members must be from the same year of study. Team members are not required to be enrolled in the same intake. For example a team can consist of a September intake LLB 2 student and a January intake LLB 2 student.

Schedule:
Briefs must be submitted electronically to Brian Dennison at bdennison@ucu.ac.ug by Midnight on evening of Friday, 17 February, 2012. Late briefs will not be accepted short of exceptional circumstances.

At least four teams from each of the three eligible years of study will be accepted into the oral rounds. Teams will be accepted based on their written briefs. A list of teams accepted into the oral rounds will be posted at the Faculty of Law and on the UCU Moots blog site by Tuesday the 21th of February. The address for the blog site is ucumoots.blogspot.com

The preliminary oral rounds will take place on Saturday, the 25th of February. The semi-final rounds will take place on Tuesday, the 28th of February and the final round will take place at 2:00 p.m. in Nkoyoyo Hall on Wednesday, the 29th of February.

The Moot Problem:
The Moot Problem is available for viewing and downloading at ucumoots.blogspot.com

Hard copies will also be provided to Class Representatives for sharing and copying.

Written Briefs:
In order to compete in the oral rounds of the Intra-UCU Moot teams must file a single brief on behalf of either the Petitioner or Respondent. The names of the students and their year of study must be listed on the top corner of the first page of the brief and at the end of the brief on a by-line. E-mail points of contact for the team should also be included on the top corner of the first page.

The brief must be typed, and double-spaced. The font must be 12 point Times New Roman. There must be at least one inch of space on all of the margins. The entire brief may not exceed 25 pages. There is no minimum length. The brief shall consist of a title page, a table of authorities, a concise statement of facts and proceedings (not to exceed 2 pages in length), a legal argument section, and a short prayer of relief. All portions of the brief including the title page count against the page limitation.

Please note that in the case of the 2012 moot problem the facts at issue are largely the language of the act that is being challenged. While it is a “law” for the purposes of this exercise its contents are the facts of the case.

Teams should structure their arguments as the legal issues are presented in the Moot Problem. Teams are expected to cite ample case law from both Uganda and other jurisdictions in order to support the many Constitutional arguments germane to the problem.

The briefs will be scored on the following grounds: 1) Writing Style and Organization – 20 Possible Marks; 2) Legal Analysis and Application of Law to Facts– 20 Possible Marks; and 3) Compliance with Instructions – 10 Possible Marks

Oral Rounds:
The teams with the four highest scored briefs in each of the three years of study will be permitted to compete in the oral rounds. If there are four briefs or less than four briefs submitted for any year of study, all teams that have submitted briefs in that year of study will advance to the oral rounds with the highest scoring brief receiving a bye in case there are only three entries. The teams from each year of study will compete against each other to determine the winning team from that year of study.

The highest four scored briefs that do not qualify as the highest four briefs for any year of study will be placed in the “wildcard” bracket. The three winning teams from each year of study and the winning team from the “wildcard” bracket will compete against each other in the semi-final round. The four teams in the semi-final round will be seeded based on their written brief scores.

Each Oralist in the Oral Rounds will be scored as follows: 1) Knowledge of Law: 20 possible marks; 2) Application of the Law to Facts: 20 possible marks; 3) Ingenuity, Responsiveness and Ability to Answer Questions : 20 possible marks; 4) Style, Poise, Courtesy and Demeanour: 20 possible marks; and 5) Organization: 20 possible marks

In all rounds the team with the highest brief score will get to choose which side of the case it wants to argue.

Monday, January 23, 2012

Revised Intra-University Moot Problem as of 24 January 2012

For a link to a pdf version of the problem go THE LINK HERE

2012 Moot Problem (Issuance Date: 24 January, 2012)

This Moot Problem takes place in January of 2016 on the eve of elections in Uganda.

This Moot Problem concerns a Constitutional challenge to the Fair and Safe Election Act.

The Fair and Safe Election Act is a controversial piece of legislation passed “to ensure public safety and public order during the 2016 Election Period.” A full version of the Act is included as Appendix A to this Moot Problem.

The Fair and Safe Election Act has been passed by Parliament and formally assented to by the President. However, the Fair and Safe Election Act has yet to be implemented. According to the express terms of the Act it is only effective during the upcoming Ugandan Election Period. The Act defines the Election Period as 1 February, 2016 through 1 March, 2016.

Procedural Posture

The Moot case concerns a Constitutional Petition filed in the Constitutional Court of Uganda.
The Petition has been properly brought under Article 137(3) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda. There are no factual issues in dispute. This instant matter solely concerns the constitutionality of the provisions of the Fair and Safe Election Act.

The Parties

The original Petitioner in this case is Fourth Estate Uganda. Fourth Estate Uganda is a properly registered Non-Government Organisation in Uganda dedicated to freedom of the press and freedom of expression. Fourth Estate Uganda has been joined by several other petitioners in this case including newspapers, television stations, radio stations, newspaper editors, television news anchors and radio personalities. The Respondent in this case is the State of Uganda represented by the Office of the Attorney General.

Issues Presented

The Constitutional Court of Uganda reviewed the pleadings in the case and conducted a pre-hearing conference. At the pre-hearing conference the Constitutional Court advised the parties to address four issues by written brief and later by oral argument. The oral argument will take place on the morning of 31 January, 2016. The issues that the Constitutional Court requests briefing and oral argument are as follows:

1. Whether or not the political question doctrine strips this Court of the power to subject the Fair and Safe Election Act to judicial review.
2. Whether or not the Fair and Safe Election violates any Constitutional protection afforded to freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of association or freedom of the press.
3. Whether or not the Fair and Safe Election Act violates the any Constitutional right to a fair hearing, the right to appeal or the right of habeas corpus.
4. Whether corporations in Uganda are entitled to Constitutional protections in the context of speech and political action; and if so, whether the Fair and Safe Election Act violates any such rights to which corporations are arguably entitled.

The Petitioner and Respondent should limit their arguments to the points delineated by the Constitutional Court.


Exhibit A:

THE FAIR AND SAFE ELECTION ACT, 2016


Having noted a substantial risk of violence and unrest during elections on the African Continent, and aware of an increasing tendency among members of the media to incite tension and through the publication of harmful and reckless reports, we the members of Parliament enact The Safe and Fair Election Act. This Act is intended to ensure public safety and public order during the 2016 Election Period.

DATE OF ASSENT: 4 January, 2016

Date of Commencement: 1 February, 2016

BE IT ENACTED by Parliament as follows:

1. Short Title
This Act may be cited at the Fair and Safe Election Act, 2016 and shall be deemed to come into force on the 1st day of February, 2016 and will cease to be in force at the conclusion of the 2016 Election Period.

2. This Act Expressly Concerns a Political Question
The purpose of this Act is to ensure public safety and public order during the 2016 Election Period. In that sense, this Act concerns a purely political question that removes it from the power and purview of judicial review.

3. The Election Period
The 2016 Election Period begins on 1 February, 2016 and concludes on 1 March, 2016.

4. Designation Power of the Electoral Commission
During the 2016 Election Period, the Electoral Commission has the legal authority to designate individuals and corporate entities as having acted in a manner detrimental to the election process. In making this determination the Election Commission can only consider the actions occurring during the Election Period.


5. Grounds of Designation as Detrimental to the Electoral Process

The Electoral Commission may designate individuals or corporate entities as detrimental to the electoral process under the following circumstances:

a. The Electoral Commission finds that the individual or corporate entity has issued a report or published a statement that has the potential to impact public safety or public order in a negative manner during the Election Period.

b. The Electoral Commission finds that an individual or corporate entity issued a false report or false statement that is likely to impact public perceptions that are relevant to the 2016 Election.

6. The Right to a Hearing
If the Electoral Commission initially designates an individual or corporate entity as having acted in a manner detrimental to the electoral process, the subject individual or corporate entity will be summoned to a hearing. This hearing will be conducted before an appointed representative of the Electoral Service Commission. At this hearing the subject individual or corporate entity shall have the burden to affirmatively refute the initial designation of the Electoral Commission. The subject individual or corporate entity has the right to appear at this hearing. In most instances the hearing must take place within 5 business days of a preliminary determination by the Election Commission. However, in the case where an individual has been interned, the hearing shall take place within 48 hours of internment.

7. Prohibition Against Public Comment During Pendency of Hearing
Once the Electoral Commission makes a preliminary designation that a person or corporate entity has acted in a manner detrimental to the election process, the subject individual or corporate entity is prohibited from making any public statement, report or comment until the conclusion of the hearing provided for under Section 6 of this Act. This prohibition shall continue until the conclusion of the Election Period unless the subject person or corporate entity successfully refutes the preliminary designation at the hearing or at any subsequent appeal.

8. Preventative Accommodation and Preventative Management
If the representative of the Electoral Commission designates an individual or corporate entity as having acted in a manner detrimental to the election process the following actions may be taken:

a. If the detrimental act was committed by an individual, that individual may be interned at the Speke Resort until the conclusion of the Election Period. During internment that individual will be barred from communicating with anyone other than the staff of the Speke Resort, legal counsel and immediate family members. Internment can case place prior to conducting a hearing under Section 6 of this Act.

b. If the improper act was committed by a corporate entity all physical property of that corporate entity or any subsidiary or sister entity will be seized by the Uganda Election Commission for the duration of the Election Period. Seizure can case place prior to conducting a hearing under Section 6 of this Act.


9. Right to File for Reconsideration
Any party that is aggrieved by a decision by the Electoral Commission has the right to file for reconsideration. The Electoral Commission has up to fifteen days to render a decision from the time a motion for reconsideration is filed. The right to file a motion for reconsideration is deemed to be a remedy that must be exhausted prior to appealing any decision by the Electoral Commission. All parties that disagree with any determination by the Electoral Commission have the right to appeal that decision to the High Court after exhausting the all other remedies available before the Electoral Commission.

10. Appeals of the Designations of the Electoral Commission
All parties that object to the final determination of the Electoral Commission have the right to appeal that decision to the High Court.

11. Right to Habeas Corpus Will Not Apply
Designated agitators and instigators will be interned and not be incarcerated. Therefore, such individuals have no right to habeas corpus. In addition, to the extent that habeas corpus would apply it is hereby suspended through this Act of Parliament and assent of the President during the Election Period in order to insure public safety and public order.

12. Immunity of Presidential Candidates
Candidates for President of Uganda that are the official nominees of recognised political parties in Uganda shall be immune from this Act and shall not be subjected to censure or internment under the auspices of this Act.