Establish commission of inquiry into security agencies

With John Kakande Agroup of MPs led by Daniel Omara Atubo (Otuke) is soon moving a motion for Parliament to investigate reports of human rights violations by the Chieftaincy of Military Intelligence (CMI). Appearing before the Committee on Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, September 6, Constantine Karusoke, a Uganda Human Rights Commissioner, stated that CMI and the Internal Security Organisation (ISO) have continued to detain suspects unlawfully in police stations despite the abolition of ‘safe houses’ in 1998. Karusoke explained that the Police had no powers over the suspects detained in their stations by CMI and ISO. “Safe houses were abolished when we raised the matter with the President in 1998-1999. He directed the minister for internal affairs at that time to abolish them. But it has now taken another form. These suspects are now detained in police stations,” Karusoke told the Committee chaired by Adolf Mwesige. In his response to the allegations, Lt. Colonel Noble Mayombo, the Acting Chief of Military Intelligence stated that his agency “has no cells in any police station in Uganda” and that the ‘cells’ (safe houses) talked about were “reserved for terrorism suspects by the National Security Council and are under the Joint Anti-Terrorism Task Force accessible to all the people of Uganda including the Uganda Human Rights Commission (UHRC).” I also think it is high time that a commission of inquiry is established into the roles and activities of all the security intelligence agencies, not just CMI. There seems to be a duplication of functions. The CMI itself appear to be overshadowing the Police, ISO and ESO in its operations. Col. Mayombo’s statement has raised more questions than answers. For instance, Col. Mayombo argued that certain Police cells were ‘reserved’ for the Joint Anti-Terrorism Task Force. Is the task force operating as a distinct security agency? Under what legal framework is the task force operating? Is it operating under the Statute governing ISO or Police? Under what law are suspects in the ‘reserved cells’? Nevertheless, the inquiry should not be conducted by a parliamentary committee. Parliament should simply ask Government to set up a judicial commission to investigate alleged human rights violations as well as the roles and activities of the different intelligence agencies. The findings would be credible if the inquiry is conducted by an independent judicial commission. A parliamentary probe into activities of security intelligence agencies would be marred by politics and the findings would thus be rendered questionable. It is high time Government enacts a law to deal specifically with the new phenomenon of terrorism. The existing law on terrorism is not applicable because it was conceived for totally different reasons. It was intended to deal with a different category of offenders, not the present type of terrorism. The so-called safe houses came into being due largely to the phenomenon of terrorism. It was argued that suspected terrorists should not be handled like ordinary suspects by the Police. This made some sense, but it needed a defined legal framework. In particular there have been accusations that people not connected to terrorism have also been kept in reserved cells at as ‘terrorism suspects’. I recall that there was an attempt in the past to enact an anti-terrorism legislation, but the matter was apparently dropped because the draft Terrorism Bill contained some contentious provisions that appeared to infringe on the fundamental human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. The matter should be revisited. The country definitely needs an anti-terrorism law that, among other things, should define which security agency is responsible for fighting terrorism and the punishment for convicted terrorists. ends