Judges caution on Omnibus Bill
Mar 06, 2005
JUDGES have warned that using one omnibus Bill to amend different articles of the constitution could lead to legal complications.
JUDGES have warned that using one omnibus Bill to amend different articles of the constitution could lead to legal complications, writes Jude EtyangEmmanuel Mulondo
The judges advised the government to come up with different bills to amend the articles.
Led by Chief Justice Benjamin Odoki, the judges were submitting their views to the parliamentary legal affairs committee at the High Court on Friday.
The committee is scrutinising views on the Constitutional amendment Bill 2005.
“I foresee a situation where you may end up here (court),†Justice M. Mukiibi told the MPs.
The judges also said making results of a referendum binding on all organs of state, as proposed in the bill, could be dangerous. They said if passed, the clause could be used to abuse the rights of citizens.
They also opposed reducing of legal experience required for one to be a judge from the current 10 years to seven.
They said being a judge needed maturity and experience.
The judges, except Steven Kavuma, also opposed constitutionalising meetings between the President and the speaker of Parliament and the Chief Justice.
They opposed giving a speaker a casting vote, saying he must be neutral, not partisan.
“People from other parties would be fighting to catch the Speaker’s eye,†they said.
The judges advised the government to come up with different bills to amend the articles.
Led by Chief Justice Benjamin Odoki, the judges were submitting their views to the parliamentary legal affairs committee at the High Court on Friday.
The committee is scrutinising views on the Constitutional amendment Bill 2005.
“I foresee a situation where you may end up here (court),†Justice M. Mukiibi told the MPs.
The judges also said making results of a referendum binding on all organs of state, as proposed in the bill, could be dangerous. They said if passed, the clause could be used to abuse the rights of citizens.
They also opposed reducing of legal experience required for one to be a judge from the current 10 years to seven.
They said being a judge needed maturity and experience.
The judges, except Steven Kavuma, also opposed constitutionalising meetings between the President and the speaker of Parliament and the Chief Justice.
They opposed giving a speaker a casting vote, saying he must be neutral, not partisan.
“People from other parties would be fighting to catch the Speaker’s eye,†they said.