Lawyers do not make law, governments do
May 09, 2011
WHILE most of the newspapers in the world had the death of Osama Bin Laden as their cover story last Tuesday, Uganda’s Daily Monitor had its cover story “Lawyers call strike over govt brutalityâ€. When I read the story, I did not see the cause for alarm.
By Moses Byaruhanga
WHILE most of the newspapers in the world had the death of Osama Bin Laden as their cover story last Tuesday, Uganda’s Daily Monitor had its cover story “Lawyers call strike over govt brutalityâ€. When I read the story, I did not see the cause for alarm.
If our lawyers are concerned about the rule of law in respect to the opposition’s demonstrations, then they should guide Ugandans on what the law spells out for everyone to see who is at fault. It is a fact that any Ugandan is free to demonstrate peacefully in accordance with Article 29 (d) of the Constitution.
The same Constitution under Article 40 gives Ugandans economic rights which include the right to engage in trade or business. Furthermore, the Constitution gives limitations to the rights and states that; in enjoyment of one’s rights, “no person shall prejudice the fundamental or other human rights and freedoms of others or the public interestâ€.
The question arises that who arbitrates when people are enjoying their rights? Supposing I am exercising my right to move around the country can I enter my vehicle and drive on any side of the road. In Uganda I will have to keep left.
If one kept right, the Police would come in and if one refuses to obey the Police on the pretext that they are enjoying their rights, the consequences are known.
In the case of demonstrations, while they are a right, they should be regulated especially if one wants to use a public road. It is against this background that the Police Act under Section 32 (1) (b) the Police is empowered to “direct the conduct of assemblies and processions on public roads or streets or at places of public resort and the route by which and the times at which any procession may passâ€. What does the above mean in respect to Besigye’s demonstrations?
It means that he should have informed the Police about the route he intended to use and the time he intended to use the said route for demonstration.
Besigye claims that he simply came out of his house to walk alone. Remember that they had announced that they would carry out their demos on Mondays and Thursdays, hence, none of the walkers can claim that theirs were not demonstrations, but simply walking for which they did not have to inform the Police. That argument only takes Ugandans for a ride. In any case, Besigye being a political leader with a following, even if he wanted to walk alone, his supporters would follow him along the way. For that reason it is pertinent that he informs Police about his intended walks. The Police’s concern is that Besigye by not informing them the route and the time of his demonstration he is in breach of the section of the Police Act referred to above, hence, stopping him from continuing with his demonstrations whenever he has attempted them.
Last week he claimed that he wanted to withdraw money from his bank in Wandegeya, who does not know that these days one can withdraw money from any branch. The Police stopped him from continuing to Wandegeya because the crowds that had gathered there and those that were following him were likely to disrupt order in Wandegeya if he had continued that side.
That aside, Besigye’s demonstrations have resulted into violence with his followers pelting police officers with stones, barricading roads, looting market vendors like they did in Kireka and vandalising taxis because UTODA refused to join them.
Under Section 65 of the penal code, when a peaceful assembly turns violent, it becomes a riot and the people participating in it are rioters. On conviction one serves a year in jail. Most of the walk-to-work demos has turned violent; hence, we should be talking about riots and not demonstrations. The Police have been cracking down rioters.
The events of last Friday, where people were organised by the opposition to riot ostensibly demonstrating against the manner in which Besigye had been arrested the previous day were unlawful and should be condemned by the striking lawyers. The rioters were allegedly paid by the organisers, given old tyres for burning in the middle of roads. In Kibuli, the local people chased away a group of youth who had been ferried there to cause trouble.
Last Sunday, the Police arrested people with a lorry full of old tryes for distribution for burning on the roads. This burning of tyres and barricading of roads should be condemned by any peace loving Ugandan. The lawyers are saying that the Government is brutal what is their opinion of the rioters of last Friday? Were they civil?
Obviously the Police should handle any citizen in accordance with the law. Nonetheless, Besigye and his group should conduct themselves in accordance with the law.
I read in the papers recently that the Mayor of Washington had been denied by police to demonstrate over some thing. Why would anyone in America be denied their right to demonstrate? Before the Royal Wedding in the London last Friday, there were groups which wanted to demonstrate peacefully against the wedding.
The London Metropolitan Police refused them the right to do so and gave a statement that appeared on CNN Friday morning to the effect that “demonstrators will be dealt with robustly and decisivelyâ€. Why would anyone be denied a right to demonstrate in London? Don’t Londoners and the Washington Mayor have rights to demonstrate like Besigye? If they have and are denied by the Police in keeping law and order why does refusing Besigye demonstrate become so big an issue that every Tom and Dick comes to lecture to the Government?
There are those who have been saying that if Museveni won the elections how come people are demonstrating? Well many of the NRM supporters have been itching to confront the Besigye group, but we have restrained them. If that were allowed you would end up with what happened in the post election Kenya where opposing political groups confronted each other not through the vote, but through violent acts and riots.
Lastly businesses are hurting as a result of Besigye’s demonstrations cum riots. Shops and offices are opening three days a week. Besigye thinks that by hurting businesses, people will be angry against Museveni and sympathise with the opposition. In my opinion that is a miscalculation on his part.
Lawyers do not make law politicians and governments do. Where the laws dealing with rioters who disrupt the economy and dealing with demonstrations in general are weak, we shall have to amend them in the near future to suit the circumstances. NRM has the numbers in Parliament to deal with these governance issues to stabilise the country.
The writer is a senior presidential advisor on political affairs
WHILE most of the newspapers in the world had the death of Osama Bin Laden as their cover story last Tuesday, Uganda’s Daily Monitor had its cover story “Lawyers call strike over govt brutalityâ€. When I read the story, I did not see the cause for alarm.
If our lawyers are concerned about the rule of law in respect to the opposition’s demonstrations, then they should guide Ugandans on what the law spells out for everyone to see who is at fault. It is a fact that any Ugandan is free to demonstrate peacefully in accordance with Article 29 (d) of the Constitution.
The same Constitution under Article 40 gives Ugandans economic rights which include the right to engage in trade or business. Furthermore, the Constitution gives limitations to the rights and states that; in enjoyment of one’s rights, “no person shall prejudice the fundamental or other human rights and freedoms of others or the public interestâ€.
The question arises that who arbitrates when people are enjoying their rights? Supposing I am exercising my right to move around the country can I enter my vehicle and drive on any side of the road. In Uganda I will have to keep left.
If one kept right, the Police would come in and if one refuses to obey the Police on the pretext that they are enjoying their rights, the consequences are known.
In the case of demonstrations, while they are a right, they should be regulated especially if one wants to use a public road. It is against this background that the Police Act under Section 32 (1) (b) the Police is empowered to “direct the conduct of assemblies and processions on public roads or streets or at places of public resort and the route by which and the times at which any procession may passâ€. What does the above mean in respect to Besigye’s demonstrations?
It means that he should have informed the Police about the route he intended to use and the time he intended to use the said route for demonstration.
Besigye claims that he simply came out of his house to walk alone. Remember that they had announced that they would carry out their demos on Mondays and Thursdays, hence, none of the walkers can claim that theirs were not demonstrations, but simply walking for which they did not have to inform the Police. That argument only takes Ugandans for a ride. In any case, Besigye being a political leader with a following, even if he wanted to walk alone, his supporters would follow him along the way. For that reason it is pertinent that he informs Police about his intended walks. The Police’s concern is that Besigye by not informing them the route and the time of his demonstration he is in breach of the section of the Police Act referred to above, hence, stopping him from continuing with his demonstrations whenever he has attempted them.
Last week he claimed that he wanted to withdraw money from his bank in Wandegeya, who does not know that these days one can withdraw money from any branch. The Police stopped him from continuing to Wandegeya because the crowds that had gathered there and those that were following him were likely to disrupt order in Wandegeya if he had continued that side.
That aside, Besigye’s demonstrations have resulted into violence with his followers pelting police officers with stones, barricading roads, looting market vendors like they did in Kireka and vandalising taxis because UTODA refused to join them.
Under Section 65 of the penal code, when a peaceful assembly turns violent, it becomes a riot and the people participating in it are rioters. On conviction one serves a year in jail. Most of the walk-to-work demos has turned violent; hence, we should be talking about riots and not demonstrations. The Police have been cracking down rioters.
The events of last Friday, where people were organised by the opposition to riot ostensibly demonstrating against the manner in which Besigye had been arrested the previous day were unlawful and should be condemned by the striking lawyers. The rioters were allegedly paid by the organisers, given old tyres for burning in the middle of roads. In Kibuli, the local people chased away a group of youth who had been ferried there to cause trouble.
Last Sunday, the Police arrested people with a lorry full of old tryes for distribution for burning on the roads. This burning of tyres and barricading of roads should be condemned by any peace loving Ugandan. The lawyers are saying that the Government is brutal what is their opinion of the rioters of last Friday? Were they civil?
Obviously the Police should handle any citizen in accordance with the law. Nonetheless, Besigye and his group should conduct themselves in accordance with the law.
I read in the papers recently that the Mayor of Washington had been denied by police to demonstrate over some thing. Why would anyone in America be denied their right to demonstrate? Before the Royal Wedding in the London last Friday, there were groups which wanted to demonstrate peacefully against the wedding.
The London Metropolitan Police refused them the right to do so and gave a statement that appeared on CNN Friday morning to the effect that “demonstrators will be dealt with robustly and decisivelyâ€. Why would anyone be denied a right to demonstrate in London? Don’t Londoners and the Washington Mayor have rights to demonstrate like Besigye? If they have and are denied by the Police in keeping law and order why does refusing Besigye demonstrate become so big an issue that every Tom and Dick comes to lecture to the Government?
There are those who have been saying that if Museveni won the elections how come people are demonstrating? Well many of the NRM supporters have been itching to confront the Besigye group, but we have restrained them. If that were allowed you would end up with what happened in the post election Kenya where opposing political groups confronted each other not through the vote, but through violent acts and riots.
Lastly businesses are hurting as a result of Besigye’s demonstrations cum riots. Shops and offices are opening three days a week. Besigye thinks that by hurting businesses, people will be angry against Museveni and sympathise with the opposition. In my opinion that is a miscalculation on his part.
Lawyers do not make law politicians and governments do. Where the laws dealing with rioters who disrupt the economy and dealing with demonstrations in general are weak, we shall have to amend them in the near future to suit the circumstances. NRM has the numbers in Parliament to deal with these governance issues to stabilise the country.
The writer is a senior presidential advisor on political affairs