| dc.description.abstract | This study examined the implications of the Constitutional Court’s decision on the right to health in
the constitutional Petition Number 16/2011 on the realisation of the right to health in Uganda.
Particularly, the analysis focused on the potential impact of the precedent set out on the constructional
court ruling and the legal and socio-economic imperatives that necessitates the justifiability of the
right to health in Uganda. The method applied in obtaining the information was document analysis.
The UN and Uganda Human Rights Law frameworks, Court decisions and Academic commentaries
relating to a right to health were mainly analysed. The analysis found out that whereas a right to health
merits to be realised as a fundamental Human Right, the case lost the argument based on the Political
Question Doctrine. Thus, the constitutional court ruling has a potential of limiting the way the
government is to ensure its primary duty of guaranteeing, protecting and promoting the realisation of
the right to health in the country through the judicial system unless this precedent is overturned by the
supreme court of appeal. The constitutional court ruling has an impact of realising the right to health
through pragmatic approaches by both the government and civil society organizations. Given that the
right to health is to be realised progressively, this research recommends that the constitution of the
republic of Uganda to explicitly be recognised as a fundamental right in its bill of rights and the
judicial system as an arm of government enforcing the realisation of Human Rights should be made to
appreciate the challenges of realising the right to health in Uganda. The civil society entities should
continually engage the government and its organs and individuals on the question of realising the right
to health. | en_US |
