5 Nonetheless the petition on the face of it has to show that there is indeed a question as to the interpretation of the Constitution. See:- Attorney General vs Major General David Tinyefunza, Constitutional Appeal No.l of1997, Mbabaali Jude Vs Hon. Edward Kiwanuka Ssekandi, Constitutional Petition No. 0028 of 2012, Ismael Serugo vs Kampala City Council and Attorney General, Supreme Court Constitutional Appeal No. 10 2 ofl 998 (unreported). Upon the reading of the petition itself and the affidavits accompanying it, I have failed to find to any question as to the interpretation of the Constitution which has not already been answered by this Court and the Supreme Court I find that the petitioner does not disclose a reasonable a cause of action as a result. 15 I would accordingly strike it out on that account with no order as to costs. Before I take leave of this matter I would like to observe that a number of NGOs and individual citizens are bringing to this Court, well intended but poorly conceived petitions. These petitions are shallow both in form and substance. It could be that they are encouraged by past success of public interest cases at this Court or by the 20 fact that this Court has adopted an unwritten rule of not condemning unsuccessful petitioners to costs. Whatever the case, there is serious need to ensure that only deserving petitions are heard. This Court in my view should proceed to strike out unfounded petitions summarily and only proceed to hear and determine deserving ones. 25 Dated at Kampala this day of .... 2021. Kenneth Kakuru JUSTICE OF APPEAL/CONSTITUTIONAL COURT 30 3 | Page