Matembe fails to stop Omnibus Bill debate
Mar 24, 2005
THE Constitutional Court yesterday ruled that it was premature for three MPs led by Miria Matembe, to petition court to stop Parliament from considering the omnibus Constitutional (Amendment) Bill 2005.
By Hillary Nsambu
and Jude Etyang
THE Constitutional Court yesterday ruled that it was premature for three MPs led by Miria Matembe, to petition court to stop Parliament from considering the omnibus Constitutional (Amendment) Bill 2005.
The ruling was on temporary injunction sought by the MPs, Matembe (Mbarara Woman), Ben Wacha (Oyam North) and Abdu Katuntu (Bugweri) to stop Parliament from considering the Bill until their petition was concluded.
Justice Galdino Okello said it was too early to tell whether Parliament was headed towards breaching the Constitution by proceeding with the Omnibus Bill because it (the Bill) had not yet been submitted to Parliament for consideration.
“Until the report is tabled and considered by Parliament, it is difficult to say Parliament has accepted the Bill and in the format in which it was presented by the minister.
“Since Parliament has a duty to act within the Constitution when carrying out its functions, it’s too early to tell whether it will breach the Constitution at this stage.
It’s therefore, in our view, premature to gauge a breach of the Constitution on the part of Parliament,†said Okello on behalf of the panel of five judges.
Okello, however, said they acknowledged that the petitioners had a prima facie (meaning a possible case).
and Jude Etyang
THE Constitutional Court yesterday ruled that it was premature for three MPs led by Miria Matembe, to petition court to stop Parliament from considering the omnibus Constitutional (Amendment) Bill 2005.
The ruling was on temporary injunction sought by the MPs, Matembe (Mbarara Woman), Ben Wacha (Oyam North) and Abdu Katuntu (Bugweri) to stop Parliament from considering the Bill until their petition was concluded.
Justice Galdino Okello said it was too early to tell whether Parliament was headed towards breaching the Constitution by proceeding with the Omnibus Bill because it (the Bill) had not yet been submitted to Parliament for consideration.
“Until the report is tabled and considered by Parliament, it is difficult to say Parliament has accepted the Bill and in the format in which it was presented by the minister.
“Since Parliament has a duty to act within the Constitution when carrying out its functions, it’s too early to tell whether it will breach the Constitution at this stage.
It’s therefore, in our view, premature to gauge a breach of the Constitution on the part of Parliament,†said Okello on behalf of the panel of five judges.
Okello, however, said they acknowledged that the petitioners had a prima facie (meaning a possible case).