National
Expelled MPs’ case: Supreme Court rules Thursday
Publish Date: Mar 04, 2014
Expelled MPs’ case: Supreme Court rules Thursday
Ejected MPs talk to Prof. Kanyeihamba in court. PHOTO/Francis Emorur
  • mail
  • img
newvision

By Hillary Nsambu

The Supreme Court will on Thursday rule whether the MPs expelled from the ruling party, NRM should retain their seats in Parliament pending the hearing and final disposal of their constitutional appeal.

 This followed an application for temporary orders restraining the Speaker of Parliament from ejecting them and the Electoral Commission from hold by-elections in their respective constituencies as the Constitutional Court had ordered.

On a 4-1 majority judgment, late last month, the Constitutional Court ordered the MPs to leave Parliament. It also ordered the Electoral Commission to organize by-election in their respective constituencies.

The four troubled MPs are Theodore Ssekikubo, Mohammed Nsereko, Barnabas Tinkasimire and Wilfred Niwagaba.  

Peter Mukidi Walubiri and Caleb Alaka, who submitted on behalf of a group of lawyers representing the four MPs, argued that the MPs like other citizens had a constitutional right of appeal, which has a high likelihood of success and as such they should not be condemned unheard.

The lawyers also submitted by asking the court to stop the Speaker of Parliament and the EC chairman from implementing the orders and directives of the Constitutional Court, the appellants were exercising their constitutional rights.

They said that they had also filed an application in court for a permanent injunction in which they seek for orders permanently restraining the Parliament and the EC from implementing the orders before the main appeal is heard. 

The opposing lawyers opposed the application, saying that what the applicants wanted to preserve had already been implemented and that there was no status quo to preserve. 

Earlier, Justice George Wilson Kanyeihamba, who used to lead the lawyers representing the expelled MPs expressed great disappointment for being removed from the group without being informed. He described the move by the appellants as a coup- de-etat . The court, however, remarked that he should not have discussed his misunderstandings with his lawyers in public.                

 

 

 

 

 

The statements, comments, or opinions expressed through the use of New Vision Online are those of their respective authors, who are solely responsible for them, and do not necessarily represent the views held by the staff and management of New Vision Online.

New Vision Online reserves the right to moderate, publish or delete a post without warning or consultation with the author.Find out why we moderate comments. For any questions please contact digital@newvision.co.ug

  • mail
  • img
blog comments powered by Disqus
Also In This Section
New CJ pledges independent Judiciary
The new Chief Justice Bart Katureebe has pledged to build a strong and independent Judiciary....
Dying lawyer to wife: I have been killed
A dying Kampala city advocate told his wife: "I have been killed but I know who has done it."...
Red Cross gets substantive Secretary General
The Uganda Red Cross Society (URCS) has finally got a substantive Secretary General...
Ministry out to reduce child abuse
The gender ministry has partnered with the different children's NGOs to help reduce cases of child abuse in the country by easing the reporting and counselling mechanism...
Police to scale down deployment in private premises
The Police are considering scaling down deployments in private premises so as concentrate on general policing with the view of enhancing public safety...
Mulago gets equipment for eye surgery
TEN percent of all the blindness is caused by cataracts. At Mulago National Referral Hospital about 6-10 eye patients are operated every week...
Is KCCA doing enough to curb poor hygeine?
Yes
No
Can't Say
follow us
subscribe to our news letter