Mob justice and mob debates are wrong

Oct 19, 2011

Parliament is currently receiving reviews and plaudits from the civil society. Members of the 9th House must be commended for standing up to be counted – especially on taking the scourge of corruption head-on.

By Pamela Ankunda

Parliament is currently receiving reviews and plaudits from the civil society. Members of the 9th House must be commended for standing up to be counted – especially on taking the scourge of corruption head-on. 
 
But how much damage will have been done to reputations of those accused in case we find that Parliamentary immunity was abused to peddle lies? And does Parliament still have the independence of mind to find unbiased evidence?
 
We hope that when the rubble roused by the ongoing oil debate finally settles, Uganda will be the ultimate victor. But based on events in the aftermath of tabling the motion seeking to have the Production Sharing Agreements divulged, we wonder if what the movers of the motion and the ordinary folk are on the same page. I am afraid that, backed by the Bujagali debate and delay, the two days debate will also delay investment and revenue.  
 
In the two days that Parliament sat to discuss the motion; nobody talked about the disclosure of the agreements or tried to steer debate to that direction even when most of the information is available in the National Oil and Gas Policy.  
 
From star performer, Youth MP Gerald Karuhanga to the tens of MPs who either laid “evidence” on table or backed the “evidence”, everybody called for those implicated to resign, making grand statements about the need to purge corruption from the country. 
 
Now, there is an inconvenient truth, that the documents tabled by Karuhanga are a forgery. Is there any MP who has the guts to make that clarification on the floor? 
Parliament is instead going to spend more time and tax payers’ money in investigations, becoming yet the latest victim of scam. 
  
So, the nation watched, as emotions took over logic and reason, but thankfully, days after the debate, or lack of it, some Members of Parliament have expressed regrets over their performance, since they believed then, that documents were authentic.  
 
Never-the-less, we fault them for being un-democratic, when they heckled or shouted at any body with an alternative view in mob seeking recriminations seeking to crucify implicated ministers but not allowing them to respond. 
 
Though heckling may be a widely accepted form of expression in legislative houses around the world, mob debate (injustice) is not. What we saw on the two “oil days” was debate degenerated into a release of emotions, and an exchange of regrettable words only protected by the precincts of Parliament. 
 
 
Vice-President Ssekandi’s case exemplifies the irrational tone of the debate in the House. On pointing out that investigation into the authenticity of the documents under debate had discovered them to be false and forged, he was unceremoniously driven off the floor. One feels that even those that dared to veer the debate back to its gist, the need to disclose the contents of the PSAs would have been thrown off the floor in similar dishonorable manner. 
 
There is information that the movers of the motion are now seeking backing for a censure motion against the man they are seeking to get rid of, Prime Minister Amama Mbabazi. After that, then what? After this mob injustice ends, shall we see rational cool-headed and informed debate on oil? 
 
 
The fight to rid this country of corruption must be supported by everyone, but so must the need to respect the rule of law, and the right to innocence until otherwise. Sadly, our MPs passionately sought to attack corruption but in so doing, forgot virtues ordinarily espoused by the house – rationality and honor. Most importantly though, they forgot oil. 
 
 
 

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});