Gov't, Buganda want Bunyoro petition quashed

By Betty Amamukirori     

The Attorney General and Buganda Kingdom have asked court to quash Bunyoro Kitara’s petition seeking an interpretation of the 1900 Buganda agreement, because it is based on agreements that were expunged from the Ugandan laws.  

The Principal State Attorney, Henry Oluka, told the constitutional court that the petition does not raise any matter that requires constitutional interpretation because its main facts revolve around repealed agreements like the 1894, 1900, 1961, and 1954 Buganda agreements.

“These agreements were expunged from the laws of Uganda and cannot be the subject of adjudication in this court. They are not jurisdictional in this court,” Oluka said.

Oluka disagreed with the Bunyoro’s request for an interpretation of chapter four of the Ugandan constitution, which talks about the protection of fundamental human rights, arguing that the rights have not been explicitly brought out in the petition.

“I find that there are no issues for constitutional application and pray that court refers the matter back to high court for an evidential definition and enforcement of any rights that may have been infringed on this matter,” he said.

He warned that any attempt to review the provisions of 1894, 1900, 1962 agreements and section 26 of the constitution will have far reaching implications to the country.  

In October 2011, Bunyoro Kitara Reparation Agency limited (BUKITAREPA) and seven other individuals filed a constitutional petition on behalf of Bunyoro Kitara Kingdom, seeking an interpretation of chapter 32 of the constitution which calls upon the State to take affirmative action for people marginalized on the basis of historical factors among other issues.

They also wanted the 1900 agreement to be interpreted to determine its validity, since it purportedly formed the foundation of the constitutional development of Uganda.

The seven other petitioners include; Henry Ford Miirima, Doviko Batwale, Kandoli Kazairwe, Tom Kavuba, George Iga Endayange, Leo Ssebalaba, Karoli Ssentalo.

David Mpanga the legal representative of Buganda Kingdom said the issues are prematurely brought to the constitutional court because they were raised before commencement of proceedings in the lower court.

The court was presided over by a Coram of five justices led by Deputy Chief Justice Steven Kavuma. Others are; Richard Buteera, Lillian Tibatemwa, Ruby Aweri and Eldad Mwangusya.

The plaintiff’s lawyer, Ayena Odongo, in his reply said that the issues were brought to court after commencement in the lower courts (land division).

He said during the hearing, court agreed that there were issues that required a constitutional interpretation and accordingly, he was asked to draft proposals for questions to be referred for interpretation.

Odongo argued that the matter before the lower court does not only revolve around the 1900 agreement but also touches other issues like the interpretation of article 32 of the constitution.

“The question of the 1900 agreement is still relevant for interpretation today because it was used as the launching pad for the establishment of what became Uganda,” he stated.

This case stems from a 2004 civil suit filed by the Kingdom against the Kabaka of Buganda, the central Government, Uganda Land Commission and the Administrator General seeking the nullification of the Mailo and Crown land tenure system on Bugangaizi and Buyaga counties.

The plaintiffs are also seeking for a declaration that Buyaga and Bugangaizi were never ceded to the Kabaka of Buganda and that the counties never became Crown and Mailo land as a result of the 1900 Buganda agreement.

They wanted court to dismantle the Ruteete and Kisiita resettlement areas created in 1972 and 1993 to enable the Banyoro reposes the land.

However, the case was referred to the constitutional court for an interpretation of the 1900 agreement and article 32 of the constitution.

Justice Kavuma said the ruling on whether the petition will be heard or not, will be on notice.