(2018) 2 African Human Rights Yearbook 109 and to freedom from torture, respectively.115 This reference, in his view, was in part informed by the fact that the Convention was ‘the forerunner of the bill of rights found in many independence, and post independence constitutions’.116 Significant reference to the European Convention was also made by the Constitutional Court in the Turyatemba case.117 Relying on article 6(1) of the Convention, the Court opined that the right to be heard was ‘a fundamental basic right’, ‘one of the cornerstones of the whole concept of a fair and impartial trial’, ‘fundamental and far reaching’ and ‘now of universal application’.118 The Court also referred to the Convention in respect of the right to freedom of conscience and of religion,119 as well as the right to non-discrimination.120 The Court seemed to be particularly attracted by the fact that the Convention preceded the 1995 Constitution.121 A less enthusiastic stance towards the Convention was, however, adopted by the Constitutional Court in Andrew Mujuni Mwenda and The Eastern African Media Institute v Attorney General,122 two cases from 2005 and 2006 respectively which were consolidated by the Court as they dealt with the same subject matter. It was argued on behalf of the Attorney General, based in part on the provisions of article 10(2) of the European Convention, that restrictions on the freedom of expression were not unique to Uganda but a feature of many other progressive legal orders.123 In determining the matter, however, the Constitutional Court itself did not rely upon the European Convention. The Constitutional Court also declined to rely on the Convention in the 2007 case of Soon Yeon Kong Kim and Another v Attorney General.124 This matter came to the Court by way of reference from a criminal trial, before a Magistrate, of two Korean nationals. Counsel for the accused persons (the applicants in the matter before the Constitutional Court) sought access to police statements made by prosecution witnesses, arguing that this was an aspect of the right to a fair trial, guaranteed under article 28 of the Constitution. In support of this argument, he referred to, among others, article 6 of the European 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 At 51. As above. n 27. At 12-13. At 14. At 20. At 14 & 20. Consolidated Constitutional Petitions 12 of 2005 and 3 of 2006. Article 10(2) of the European Convention provides that: ‘The exercise of these freedoms since it carries with it duties formalities and responsibilities, may be subject to such conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by the law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, territorial integrity, or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime for protection of health or minerals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others for preventing of the disclosure of information received in confidence or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary’. Constitutional Reference 6 of 2007.