Court exonerates MP Kiyingi
Jul 25, 2014
The Constitutional Court has ruled that Independent MP for Mawokota South Kenneth Kiyingi-Bbosa should maintain his seat in Parliament as he never abandoned his independent status to join NRM party.
The Constitutional Court has ruled that Independent MP for Mawokota South Kenneth Kiyingi Bbosa should maintain his seat in Parliament as he never abandoned his independent status to join NRM party.
In a ruling read by Justice Remmy Kasule, who chaired the panel, the court unanimously agreed with Dennis Jude Musede representing Kiyingi that it was not sufficient evidence by the petitioner to say that by merely attending the NRM party caucus at Kyankwanzi and another party meeting at Entebbe, meant that the incumbent had crossed from independent to the ruling party.
The other members of the Coram were Justices Eldad Mwangusya, Rubby Aweri Opio, Richard Buteera and Kenneth Kakuru.
“We are of the view that there was nothing to demonstrate that the Independent MP, Kiyingi, stopped being an independent Member of Parliament (MP) under which category he was elected to join the National Resistance Movement (NRM) Party,” the court ruled.
Mustapha Ssemugenyi, a voter in Mawokota South County had petitioned the Constitutional Court seeking declarations that the incumbent MP for Mawokota South had crossed from being independent to the NRM party arguing that he had attended the NRM party caucus from start to finish and a subsequent party meeting held at State House Entebbe.
Ssemugenyi had accused the MP for violating the Constitution by having fully participated in the ruling party’s activities and other party meetings.
He had also asked the court to declare his seat in Parliament vacant and the Electoral Commission should organize fresh election.
However, Kiyingi through his lawyer Musede had referred to Ssemugenyi’s arguments as mere allegations that had no proof whatsoever and the petition should be dismissed with costs.
However, the court rejected the plea by both sides and ruled that because the petition was of public interest, they would not order that each party bore its own expenses to avoid scaring away the public from filing into courts of law election petitions.
Related Stories