Court blocks application against UPE probe

THE Constitutional Court has thrown out an application aimed at blocking the probe into the alleged mismanagement of funds in the Universal Primary and Secondary Education sector.

 

The Court ruled on Monday that the applicant, Sulaiman Muwonge Lubega waited too long to challenge the Commission until almost all the work was done.  

 

It said that he can still challenge the Commission’s report. Lubega who identifies himself as a parent in both UPE and USE challenged the impartiality and fairness of the commission of inquiry saying that two of its members are party to UPE and USE funds. 

 

“The Commission was appointed by President Yoweri Museveni in 2009 and is headed by High Court Judge, Ezekiel Muhanguzi. It was mandated to probe alleged ghost pupils, ghost teachers, attendance of pupils and teachers, disbursement of UPE and USE funds, resources, school inspection system and the capacity of supervisors to ensure value for UPE and USE funds.

 

The Commission which has had its deadline extended several times is finally due to hand in its report on August 14, 2012. Lubega had submitted to Court that he was aggrieved by the character and composition of the Commission which he said was biased and incapable of discharging its mandate. 

 

He complained that the Commission is impartial because two of its members, Dr. Nassali Lukwago and Eng. P.M. Batumbya are 'part and parcel of and closely intertwined with the UPE and USE funds and therefore they are the very people whom the Commission is supposed to be investigating.

 

He asserted that both are potential witnesses to the Commission and therefore, they and the Commission cannot be fair in their findings.

 

The Judges said that Lubega did not give any reasons why he waited until this later when over 80% of the work was done and the Commission was in its final stages of its mandate. 

 

“The applicant can even after the report is out, have chance to subject it to Constitutional scrutiny before the Constitutional Court... We are not convinced of the arguments… we dismiss the application for the temporary injunction…," the Court ruled.