IGG dilemma awaits court interpretation
Apr 29, 2009
PRIME Minister Prof. Apolo Nsibambi has said the reappointment of Justice Faith Mwondha as IGG is awaiting the Constitutional Court’s interpretation.
By Barbara Among, Catherine Bekunda and Cyprian Musoke
PRIME Minister Prof. Apolo Nsibambi has said the reappointment of Justice Faith Mwondha as IGG is awaiting the Constitutional Court’s interpretation.
“The issue of contention is whether or not a person who has been serving as IGG and is eligible for reappointment requires vetting by Parliament,†Nsibambi told legislators yesterday.
He said in the meantime, Raphael Baku had been reappointed as deputy IGG and asked to take charge of the inspectorate.
Baku said yesterday that he had started work and had received his instrument of appointment.
“I am taking charge of the institution,†he said.
The MPs, however, questioned Baku’s appointment as acting IGG, arguing that the Constitution did not provide for the post and that the inspectorate had not been fully instituted and was, therefore, legally non-existent.
They charged that the Government had negated the advice of the Attorney General that Mwonda should appear before Parliament appointments committee.
“Does it mean the President has given a vote of no confidence in the Attorney General? Why do we cause controversy where there should be none,†asked Bugweri South MP Abdu Katuntu.
He asked whether the petitioners had restrained the President from appointing another IGG.
Two separate groups have filed petitions in the Constitutional Court challenging the Attorney General’s view that Mwondha has to be vetted again.
The first petition was filed by Joseph Nturwabakye and the Legal Brains Trust Limited and the second by a group of 22 people, including Sheila Kawamara-Mishambi, former member of the East African Legislative Assembly, in support of the reappointment of Mwondha without being vetted.
The second petition was supported by an affidavit sworn by President Museveni, saying he had not revoked Mwondha’s reappointment.
The leader of opposition in Parliament, Prof. Ogenga Latigo, wondered why the President was seeking advice from other institutions and ignoring the Governments’ legal adviser.
“The President should be bound by the Attorney General’s advice, the way Parliament is,†he said.
Responding to queries, Nsibambi said: “If you think the President has violated the Constitution, you are free to take him to court.â€
Justice Mwondha recently objected to her being subjected to fresh vetting, arguing that it was unconstitutional because she had already been vetted during the first appointed in 2005.
Before her term expired in February, Mwondha refused to appear before the legal affairs committee to discuss her office’s budget and activities.
The MPs threatened to block her budget.
PRIME Minister Prof. Apolo Nsibambi has said the reappointment of Justice Faith Mwondha as IGG is awaiting the Constitutional Court’s interpretation.
“The issue of contention is whether or not a person who has been serving as IGG and is eligible for reappointment requires vetting by Parliament,†Nsibambi told legislators yesterday.
He said in the meantime, Raphael Baku had been reappointed as deputy IGG and asked to take charge of the inspectorate.
Baku said yesterday that he had started work and had received his instrument of appointment.
“I am taking charge of the institution,†he said.
The MPs, however, questioned Baku’s appointment as acting IGG, arguing that the Constitution did not provide for the post and that the inspectorate had not been fully instituted and was, therefore, legally non-existent.
They charged that the Government had negated the advice of the Attorney General that Mwonda should appear before Parliament appointments committee.
“Does it mean the President has given a vote of no confidence in the Attorney General? Why do we cause controversy where there should be none,†asked Bugweri South MP Abdu Katuntu.
He asked whether the petitioners had restrained the President from appointing another IGG.
Two separate groups have filed petitions in the Constitutional Court challenging the Attorney General’s view that Mwondha has to be vetted again.
The first petition was filed by Joseph Nturwabakye and the Legal Brains Trust Limited and the second by a group of 22 people, including Sheila Kawamara-Mishambi, former member of the East African Legislative Assembly, in support of the reappointment of Mwondha without being vetted.
The second petition was supported by an affidavit sworn by President Museveni, saying he had not revoked Mwondha’s reappointment.
The leader of opposition in Parliament, Prof. Ogenga Latigo, wondered why the President was seeking advice from other institutions and ignoring the Governments’ legal adviser.
“The President should be bound by the Attorney General’s advice, the way Parliament is,†he said.
Responding to queries, Nsibambi said: “If you think the President has violated the Constitution, you are free to take him to court.â€
Justice Mwondha recently objected to her being subjected to fresh vetting, arguing that it was unconstitutional because she had already been vetted during the first appointed in 2005.
Before her term expired in February, Mwondha refused to appear before the legal affairs committee to discuss her office’s budget and activities.
The MPs threatened to block her budget.