Are We Faced With A Constitutional Crisis?

Aug 05, 2003

AS of now, all Movement committees in the country are illegal.

By Joshua Kato
As of now, all Movement committees in the country are illegal. This is because their term of existence ended on July 11 this year. The committees were elected in 1998 for a five-year term. Some people are even talking of a constitutional crisis.
In legal terms, the Movement does not have a national chairman or vice-chairman. LC 1 leaders who are automatically chairmen of the Movement in their villages are no longer supposed to play the role of Movement chairmen.
This is the main reason why justice and constitutional affairs minister, Janat Mukwaya tabled the Movement amendment extension bill 2003 in Parliament calling for the postponement of the Movement elections until 2005.
Mukwaya explained that this would save the country close to sh1b and time spent during the campaigning.
She also argues that it will be a waste of time to elect Movement leaders, at a time when the country is moving into a transition from Movement style leadership to multiparty leadership.
Reports from Parliament indicate that Mukwaya was calling for a quick debate of the bill, so that the current Movement leaders are legalised. The act is to be back-dated and deemed to have come into force on July 11, which was the latest day of the elections. Parliament speaker Ssekandi handed over the bill t the legal and parliamentary affairs committee of Parliament.
However, the Bill has already been halted by serious legal complications. Abdul Katuntu, vice-chairman of the legal and parliamentary affairs committee debating the bill raised an objection, saying that the organs that are being debated for extension were declared illegal by the Constitutional Court.
“We do not want to pass a law that will be challenged in courts of law the next day, leading to the loss of millions of taxpayer’s money,” Katuntu says.
Other reports from the committee say that they have resolved to first study the detailed judgement of the court in March, to establish the legality of movement organs.
However, Edward Ssekandi, the speaker of parliament, says all that the legal and parliamentary affairs committee is required to do is to study it and advise Parliament accordingly.
The Democratic Party (DP) has threatened to take government to court if the bill is turned into law. “We urge DP members of Parliament, not only to reject the new draft law, but also to repeal the Movement Act,” says DP lawyer, Erias Lukwago.
He says that the issue of saving over sh1b should not arise, since they are not supposed to be funded by the state. “The Movement is a political party declared so in March. Whatever they do, should not be discussed in a national fora like Parliament, but rather they should discuss them among themselves, without burdening the taxpayer,” he says.
Uganda people’s Congress (UPC) has also vowed to do the same.
Alhajji Moses Kigongo echoed the same views about the behaviour of MPs: “I would like to remind those that may want to use the bill for furtherance of their personal and partisan interests, that Parliament is enjoined to make law for the peace, order, development and good governance of our country and this should always be the focus.”
Ofwono Opondo, director of information at the Movement Secretariat, says the action of the parliamentary committee is “mere” politicking.
“Katuntu as a lawyer should know that the Movement Act that establishes the organs of the Movement has never been taken to court and challenged in anyway,” Opondo says.
He explains that what was taken to court were articles 18 and 19 of the political parties and organisations act (PPOA).
Opondo explains that after what happened at Kyankwanzi and at the conference centre during the NEC and National Conferences, the country is headed for a different era of politics.
“Those people in the opposition are just afraid of the opening up. By the fact that we are not holding elections of movement leaders, is an indicator that we are committed to opening up. This is actually part of the transition from movement politics to multiparty rule,” he says.
However, sources report that the opposition, especially the DP had planned much more gains from the Movement elections. It is said that DP had already earmarked several of its people to stand on the Movement committees.
“We already had people in most areas of the country, especially the central region. These people were going to stand in all Movement elective offices to inflitrate the Movement, and then go back to our party at the critical moment,” reveals leaders of UYD. He says that this was a tactic used by NARC in the Kenyan elections.
The Movement has also realised that many Movement committees especially in areas where it has very little support are a liability and meaningless to its values. According to the Movement Act, LC1s are automatically village chairmen of the movement, while LC5s are automatically members of the NEC. It is well known that many district chairmen including mayor Ssebaana Kizito are sworn partyists, who do not promote the values of the Movement.
In the proposed amendment, LCs will no longer be automatic chairmen of the Movement committees.
“Even if we are to have any future Movement elections, LCs will not automatically be chairmen of the Movement committees,” says Muwanga Lutaaya, speaker UYM.
There were also fears that the Movement elections would derail the launch of the National Resistance Movement Organisation (NRMO). This is because many of the people who are promoting the new organisation would turn their attention to campaigning for the elections. Such people include the vice-chairman Alhajji Moses Kigongo and many of the foot soldiers promoting NRM-O on the ground.
“Some very vibrant young cadres had already vowed to go for the chairmanship and vice-chairmanship of the party. We don’t know what effect such a fall out could cause to the new organisation,” a source at the movement Secretariat says.

Reform Agenda’s Betty Kamya, says that there is nothing wrong with the postponement of the elections. “That was what Mukwaya was supposed to do,” she says.
Kamya questions the manner in which the government handles certain issues in a crisis. “Why didn’t they bring this bill early enough in Parliament? She asks.
Reports from Parliament indicate that at least 45 MPs opposed to the amendment bill held a meeting in which they earmarked ways of aborting it.
“We want to trap the Movement in its tricks. We want to teach them a lesson so that they don’t bring important bills late in parliament again,” one of the MPs says.
However, Ofwono scoffs at the manoeuvring capacity of the opposition MPs. “We have always found our way in the house. We shall mobilise again and we shall win,” he says.
Joseph Luzige of the President’s office says that while some people are talking of a crisis, there is none. While some people are referring to the March court ruling, it was not against the movement act, but rather against two articles 17 and 18 in the PPOA. “But even with that ruling, the government has an appeal in court. With that appeal there, whatever the court decided is in abeyance,” he says.Ends

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});