Much ado made about the IGG reappointment
Jun 18, 2009
I was a Constitutional Assembly delegate, together with Justice Faith Mwondha. Throughout my 13 years in Parliament, I fought to bring respect to the parliamentary institutions and its committees. I also made many changes to strengthen the leadership code
By Elly Karuhanga
I was a Constitutional Assembly delegate, together with Justice Faith Mwondha. Throughout my 13 years in Parliament, I fought to bring respect to the parliamentary institutions and its committees. I also made many changes to strengthen the leadership code and the office of the Insepector General of Government (IGG).
I have been listening to many radio stations, reading several articles in newspapers and listening to statements made by people I expect to express researched opinions and frankly, I am disappointed.
Recently a columnist in a local daily, a brilliant young man called Gawaya Tegulle, compared the IGG to the Lord Jesus Christ. My good friend Ofwono Opondo attacked a “corrupt gang passing as public officers†who “oppose the IGGâ€.
Much ado has been made about the appointment and reappointment of Justice Faith Mwondha as IGG.
At the outset, let me state that I have the highest regard for the person of Justice Mwondha, whom I have personally known and worked with for decades. Love or loathe her, no one can doubt her tenacity and her ability to pull her punches.
She has brought, in a way only she could, bark and bite to the Inspectorate of Government. She has instilled the fear of God in public officers from local to central government. Whether one is chief administrative officer, a general or a permanent secretary, she has instilled the necessary fear.
Many lawyers have benefited from Justice Mwondha. Owing to her, many public officials are instructing lawyers to defend them in the courts of law against the IGG, including our law firm. Whatever you may think her weaknesses are, the learned judge has made that office stronger than she found it.
However, what is at stake today is not politics. It is not previous performance. It is the law. Fundamentally, a free and democratic society is one built on law. We must aspire to be the country ruled not by the rule of men, but by the rule of law.
For example, we have supported President Museveni because of his achievements. After his term of office expires he must return to those who appointed him for another term. There can be no alternative. He cannot tell us that because of new roads, success in CHOGM, peace in the north, expanded education, management of sustained economic growth and immunisation there should be no election. It would be an insult for him to say he was already vetted in 1996 and there is no need for him to be vetted again.
Unfortunately, Justice Mwondha has not seen this. My Lord, think what you want about our MPs but they are our MPs. We elected them. We empowered them through the Constitution. It is them who make the laws, together with the President and the Courts of Judicature. Is there a law which compels the IGG to go Parliament? Initially, I was of the mistaken view that she did not require parliamentary approval. I thought that a renewed contract did not need to go through the same process as a first contract. Consequently, when my opinion was sought, I supported the IGG.
Then the controversy erupted. I went back and had a second look. I found that she, indeed, needs parliamentary approval. The Constitution provides that the IGG shall be appointed by the President with the approval of Parliament. She shall serve for a term of four years. She shall only be eligible for reappointment once.
Nowhere does it talk about renewal of a contract. A person appointed IGG is only eligible for reappointment once in their lifetime. It does not need to be immediately after their first term. It could be 10 years later.
Having been in the Constitutional Assembly with Justice Mwondha, let me explain the reasoning behind parliamentary approvals. All constitutional offices require parliamentary approval. We put this in the Constitution to strengthen the institutions of the President and Parliament.
Prior to the 1995 Constitution, previous governments had given themselves the power of life and death. Presidents acted without restraint. We, together with Faith Mwondha, as she then was, changed that with the consent of the President. We decided that the President would exercise his authority within certain limits. His power of appointment was to be shared with Parliament.
Thus, independent bodies established under the Constitution all need parliamentary approval, both on appointment and reappointment. Commissioners of the Public Service Commission or the Education Service Commission have been appointed and reappointed in recent history. All of them have obtained parliamentary approval for their reappointments.
The former IGG and Deputy IGG were also reappointed and obtained parliamentary approval. It did not matter that they had disagreed with the Solicitor General, had arrested the former Attorney General, a permanent secretary and an incumbent MP. They, nonetheless, appeared and were approved.
Much ado is being made about the reappointment of ministers. Ministers are not reappointed; they are reshuffled. It is true that their appointments are approved by Parliament but the President can revoke them as and when he wishes. They are appointed at his pleasure. He hires and fires them. The respondents cannot sue the President like a public officer can sue for wrongful dismissal.
Their term of office expires with that of the President. Not so with the IGG or any of the commissioners. It is amazing, that Justice Faith Mwondha, currently a judge of the High Court, is comparing the office of the IGG to people who can be dismissed over the radio for no reason.
She needs to know that the IGG is not a representative of the President in the Inspectorate. The IGG is independent of any person or authority. The term of office of the IGG is not dependent on that of the President. Further, the IGG cannot be sacked over radio but only by a tribunal appointed specifically to investigate the IGG.
A lot has been said by the learned judge that the advice of the Attorney General is irrelevant and should be ignored. Anyone who wishes to do that, does so at their own peril.
The Supreme Court of Uganda has already pronounced itself on this in the celebrated case of the Bank of Uganda versus Banco Arabe Espanol. The Supreme Court is the highest court of the land and its pronouncements are very much part of our law and the Constitution.
The judge and former IGG took good time to attack the institution of Parliament as a “council of the wicked†and has held it in contempt and disrepute. She has attacked and vilified the Speaker and Deputy Speaker.
Mwondha has belittled the private secretary of the President. She has been relentless in the personal attacks she has heaped on the head of the Public Service for merely seeking legal advice and correctly doing his job.
She has not spared the Solicitor General, the Attorney General and the entire Ministry of Justice. She has held in contempt the Appointments Committee of Parliament. Her deputy has not been spared from her attacks.
How will the former IGG conduct public work alone? How will she fight corruption alone? Simply because these offices take a different view from hers, she has accused them of a “well orchestrated plot to bring down the NRM Governmentâ€. And she then accused them of attempting to overthrow the Constitution. The Constitution defines this as treason. It does not help the fight against corruption or misuse of office if the Government’s ombudsman makes statements that are ridiculous and likely to bring it into disrepute.
The IGG spent a lot of energy in various public statements, letters and interviews to remind us of her faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
I commend her for her firm belief in scriptural teaching. I do not pretend to know more about scripture than the learned judge. But the Bible says: ‘Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.’
I also advise that you read the story of David and Saul. Readers will find it amazing how David respected institutions even at great personal sacrifice, risk and danger. Notwithstanding the greatest temptation, he refused to destroy and defile the institution of the King.
It would be a colossal blunder, one Africans have continuously made, to undermine public institutions.
I advise the learned judge of the High Court to accord the highest respect to public office and the established rule of law and respect for constitutionalism.
The writer is a member of the Uganda Law Society
I was a Constitutional Assembly delegate, together with Justice Faith Mwondha. Throughout my 13 years in Parliament, I fought to bring respect to the parliamentary institutions and its committees. I also made many changes to strengthen the leadership code and the office of the Insepector General of Government (IGG).
I have been listening to many radio stations, reading several articles in newspapers and listening to statements made by people I expect to express researched opinions and frankly, I am disappointed.
Recently a columnist in a local daily, a brilliant young man called Gawaya Tegulle, compared the IGG to the Lord Jesus Christ. My good friend Ofwono Opondo attacked a “corrupt gang passing as public officers†who “oppose the IGGâ€.
Much ado has been made about the appointment and reappointment of Justice Faith Mwondha as IGG.
At the outset, let me state that I have the highest regard for the person of Justice Mwondha, whom I have personally known and worked with for decades. Love or loathe her, no one can doubt her tenacity and her ability to pull her punches.
She has brought, in a way only she could, bark and bite to the Inspectorate of Government. She has instilled the fear of God in public officers from local to central government. Whether one is chief administrative officer, a general or a permanent secretary, she has instilled the necessary fear.
Many lawyers have benefited from Justice Mwondha. Owing to her, many public officials are instructing lawyers to defend them in the courts of law against the IGG, including our law firm. Whatever you may think her weaknesses are, the learned judge has made that office stronger than she found it.
However, what is at stake today is not politics. It is not previous performance. It is the law. Fundamentally, a free and democratic society is one built on law. We must aspire to be the country ruled not by the rule of men, but by the rule of law.
For example, we have supported President Museveni because of his achievements. After his term of office expires he must return to those who appointed him for another term. There can be no alternative. He cannot tell us that because of new roads, success in CHOGM, peace in the north, expanded education, management of sustained economic growth and immunisation there should be no election. It would be an insult for him to say he was already vetted in 1996 and there is no need for him to be vetted again.
Unfortunately, Justice Mwondha has not seen this. My Lord, think what you want about our MPs but they are our MPs. We elected them. We empowered them through the Constitution. It is them who make the laws, together with the President and the Courts of Judicature. Is there a law which compels the IGG to go Parliament? Initially, I was of the mistaken view that she did not require parliamentary approval. I thought that a renewed contract did not need to go through the same process as a first contract. Consequently, when my opinion was sought, I supported the IGG.
Then the controversy erupted. I went back and had a second look. I found that she, indeed, needs parliamentary approval. The Constitution provides that the IGG shall be appointed by the President with the approval of Parliament. She shall serve for a term of four years. She shall only be eligible for reappointment once.
Nowhere does it talk about renewal of a contract. A person appointed IGG is only eligible for reappointment once in their lifetime. It does not need to be immediately after their first term. It could be 10 years later.
Having been in the Constitutional Assembly with Justice Mwondha, let me explain the reasoning behind parliamentary approvals. All constitutional offices require parliamentary approval. We put this in the Constitution to strengthen the institutions of the President and Parliament.
Prior to the 1995 Constitution, previous governments had given themselves the power of life and death. Presidents acted without restraint. We, together with Faith Mwondha, as she then was, changed that with the consent of the President. We decided that the President would exercise his authority within certain limits. His power of appointment was to be shared with Parliament.
Thus, independent bodies established under the Constitution all need parliamentary approval, both on appointment and reappointment. Commissioners of the Public Service Commission or the Education Service Commission have been appointed and reappointed in recent history. All of them have obtained parliamentary approval for their reappointments.
The former IGG and Deputy IGG were also reappointed and obtained parliamentary approval. It did not matter that they had disagreed with the Solicitor General, had arrested the former Attorney General, a permanent secretary and an incumbent MP. They, nonetheless, appeared and were approved.
Much ado is being made about the reappointment of ministers. Ministers are not reappointed; they are reshuffled. It is true that their appointments are approved by Parliament but the President can revoke them as and when he wishes. They are appointed at his pleasure. He hires and fires them. The respondents cannot sue the President like a public officer can sue for wrongful dismissal.
Their term of office expires with that of the President. Not so with the IGG or any of the commissioners. It is amazing, that Justice Faith Mwondha, currently a judge of the High Court, is comparing the office of the IGG to people who can be dismissed over the radio for no reason.
She needs to know that the IGG is not a representative of the President in the Inspectorate. The IGG is independent of any person or authority. The term of office of the IGG is not dependent on that of the President. Further, the IGG cannot be sacked over radio but only by a tribunal appointed specifically to investigate the IGG.
A lot has been said by the learned judge that the advice of the Attorney General is irrelevant and should be ignored. Anyone who wishes to do that, does so at their own peril.
The Supreme Court of Uganda has already pronounced itself on this in the celebrated case of the Bank of Uganda versus Banco Arabe Espanol. The Supreme Court is the highest court of the land and its pronouncements are very much part of our law and the Constitution.
The judge and former IGG took good time to attack the institution of Parliament as a “council of the wicked†and has held it in contempt and disrepute. She has attacked and vilified the Speaker and Deputy Speaker.
Mwondha has belittled the private secretary of the President. She has been relentless in the personal attacks she has heaped on the head of the Public Service for merely seeking legal advice and correctly doing his job.
She has not spared the Solicitor General, the Attorney General and the entire Ministry of Justice. She has held in contempt the Appointments Committee of Parliament. Her deputy has not been spared from her attacks.
How will the former IGG conduct public work alone? How will she fight corruption alone? Simply because these offices take a different view from hers, she has accused them of a “well orchestrated plot to bring down the NRM Governmentâ€. And she then accused them of attempting to overthrow the Constitution. The Constitution defines this as treason. It does not help the fight against corruption or misuse of office if the Government’s ombudsman makes statements that are ridiculous and likely to bring it into disrepute.
The IGG spent a lot of energy in various public statements, letters and interviews to remind us of her faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
I commend her for her firm belief in scriptural teaching. I do not pretend to know more about scripture than the learned judge. But the Bible says: ‘Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.’
I also advise that you read the story of David and Saul. Readers will find it amazing how David respected institutions even at great personal sacrifice, risk and danger. Notwithstanding the greatest temptation, he refused to destroy and defile the institution of the King.
It would be a colossal blunder, one Africans have continuously made, to undermine public institutions.
I advise the learned judge of the High Court to accord the highest respect to public office and the established rule of law and respect for constitutionalism.
The writer is a member of the Uganda Law Society