Court petitioned over media ban on FDC activities

Human rights watchdog Legal Brains Trust (LBT), has petitioned court, querying government's move to ban live coverage of Forum for Democratic Change (FDC's) defiance campaign. 

On May 13, LBT filed an application for judicial review at the civil division of the High Court in Kampala, saying the move is an infringement on human rights and civil liberties. 

Judicial review is conducted by the High Court in relation to proceedings plus decisions taken by subordinate courts and inferior tribunals or bodies. 

Government's chief legal advisor the Attorney General (AG) is listed as the respondent. Through Centre for Legal Aid, LBT wants court to quash the Cabinet's directive of May 5, and prohibit its implementation or enforcement. 

The watchdog asserts that Ugandans have been kept in the dark about key political events and activities of the leading Opposition political party contrary to the tenets of democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

"The impugned ban is an unlawful, unnecessary, disproportionate, unacceptable and demonstrably unjustifiable limitation on a bundle of civil and political rights, including the right to freedom of expression, freedom of speech, freedom of the press and other media, freedom of thought, conscience and belief, freedom of assembly, and freedom to demonstrate peacefully and unarmed and to petition Government for redress of one's grievances," the petition reads in part.

The application is supported by the affidavit of LBT communications chief Marvin Saasi. He states that under its ‘Government Reform and Oversight' programme, LBT  monitors  activities of all organs and agencies of the State to ensure that they respect, uphold and promote constitutionally guaranteed rights as well as democracy and the rule of law.

Saasi says on the morning of May 5, he watched a live news telecast on NBS Television, saw and heard Information and National Guidance minister Jim Muhwezi, issue a press release on the ban. 

He notes that as an experienced investigator and reporter of human rights violations, the ban is unlawful, unnecessary, arbitrary, irrational, unfair, disproportionate, unacceptable and demonstrably unjustifiable.

"The blanket ban is an insidious restriction on editorial freedom and broadcasting rights of media owners and media workers who were condemned and censured by Cabinet without prior consultation or fair hearing. It has also had the undemocratic effect of gagging the largest Opposition party, while giving unlimited publicity to its opponents.

Yesterday, the Solicitor General Francis Atoke, told New Vision that the AG was yet to be served the documents.