The law was unfair to Ntungamo women
Oct 27, 2010
REPORTS that Ntungamo women were jailed over failure by their husbands to pay off loans brings to reality Charles Dicken’s Oliver Twist phrase that “the law is an ass.â€
REPORTS that Ntungamo women were jailed over failure by their husbands to pay off loans brings to reality Charles Dicken’s Oliver Twist phrase that “the law is an ass.â€
In its latest report, the Uganda Human Rights Commission said the women were sent to the gallows by private money lenders after their spouses defaulted on the loans and went into hiding.
While the wives were culpable for witnessing the loans, the law should be amended to take into account societal realities. It is difficult in a patrilineal society like Uganda, for a wife to refuse to endorse a request by a husband without dire consequences of violence or even divorce.
More so, laws that subsume women lose their legal rights once married have no place in a modern society where men and women should be treated as equal in their individual rights. Human rights activists should, therefore, launch a campaign to ensure that such laws are amended to reflect the realities on the ground. They should also investigate with a view to redress, whether due process of the law was exhausted before the Ntungamo women were jailed.
Although ignorance is no defence, Section 19 of the Penal Code Act also says that, other than in treason and murder offences, it shall be good defence to prove that the offence was not committed under the coercion of the husband. Did prosecution prove that the husbands never coerced the women into endorsing the loans? Did the magistrate evoke the Illiterate Persons Act to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the women understood what they were signing? Did prosecution prove that they had failed to trace the principal offenders?
While the operations of microfinance institutions and loan sharks should be re-examined, the law should be amended to take into account societal realities.
In its latest report, the Uganda Human Rights Commission said the women were sent to the gallows by private money lenders after their spouses defaulted on the loans and went into hiding.
While the wives were culpable for witnessing the loans, the law should be amended to take into account societal realities. It is difficult in a patrilineal society like Uganda, for a wife to refuse to endorse a request by a husband without dire consequences of violence or even divorce.
More so, laws that subsume women lose their legal rights once married have no place in a modern society where men and women should be treated as equal in their individual rights. Human rights activists should, therefore, launch a campaign to ensure that such laws are amended to reflect the realities on the ground. They should also investigate with a view to redress, whether due process of the law was exhausted before the Ntungamo women were jailed.
Although ignorance is no defence, Section 19 of the Penal Code Act also says that, other than in treason and murder offences, it shall be good defence to prove that the offence was not committed under the coercion of the husband. Did prosecution prove that the husbands never coerced the women into endorsing the loans? Did the magistrate evoke the Illiterate Persons Act to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the women understood what they were signing? Did prosecution prove that they had failed to trace the principal offenders?
While the operations of microfinance institutions and loan sharks should be re-examined, the law should be amended to take into account societal realities.