Arua rejects Terego county
Jun 15, 2010
Arua district council was on Monday thrown into confusion after one of the councillors moved a motion to block Parliament decision to take Terego county back to Arua.
By Frank Mugabi
Arua district council was on Monday thrown into confusion after one of the councillors moved a motion to block Parliament decision to take Terego county back to Arua.
Stephen Arubaku, the Rigbo sub-county representative, said the decision was unconstitutional and tantamount to provocation because the people of Arua were not consulted.
“The Constitution states that power belongs to the people who shall exercise their sovereignty,†Arubaku said.
Recently, 16 new districts were created including Maracha, which was initially granted district status together with Terego county.
However, for over five months, residents of the two counties curved out of Arua disagreed on the location of the headquarters and name of the district.
In a bid to resolve the conflict, Parliament on May 3 decided that Maracha remains a district but Terego be returned to Arua district.
Arubaku said efforts to resolve the issue locally had been futile because councillors from Terego were uncooperative and adamant.
He accused them of twice walking out of council sessions in Arua that sought to settle the controversy.
“Parliament is imposing on us the same councillors who grossly disagreed with us, are uncooperative, sectarian and tribalistic, with nepotism rooted deep in their blood,†Arubaku noted.
He warned that if councillors from Terego attend the council sessions in Arua, they would be treated as strangers.
Most councillors backed Arubaku’s motion but opposed his attack on the district LC5 chairman, Richard Andama Ferua.
The vice-chairman, Kamilo Sabo, reaffirmed that nobody in Arua wanted Terego to return.
He, however, cautioned on the legal implications that could arise since the matter was challenged in the Constitutional Court.
Sam Nyakua, the youth representative and finance secretary, said Parliament was being unfair to the people of Terego if the ultimate objective of the creation of new districts is to take services nearer to the people.
He said Terego was wide and populated enough to deserve a district of its own.
The speaker, Hajjat Hanifa Rwizigala, deferred further debate of the motion to the next council session.
She also urged Arubaku to rephrase the motion document, eliminating sections that attacked the district LC5 chairman, before the council could adopt it.
Arua district council was on Monday thrown into confusion after one of the councillors moved a motion to block Parliament decision to take Terego county back to Arua.
Stephen Arubaku, the Rigbo sub-county representative, said the decision was unconstitutional and tantamount to provocation because the people of Arua were not consulted.
“The Constitution states that power belongs to the people who shall exercise their sovereignty,†Arubaku said.
Recently, 16 new districts were created including Maracha, which was initially granted district status together with Terego county.
However, for over five months, residents of the two counties curved out of Arua disagreed on the location of the headquarters and name of the district.
In a bid to resolve the conflict, Parliament on May 3 decided that Maracha remains a district but Terego be returned to Arua district.
Arubaku said efforts to resolve the issue locally had been futile because councillors from Terego were uncooperative and adamant.
He accused them of twice walking out of council sessions in Arua that sought to settle the controversy.
“Parliament is imposing on us the same councillors who grossly disagreed with us, are uncooperative, sectarian and tribalistic, with nepotism rooted deep in their blood,†Arubaku noted.
He warned that if councillors from Terego attend the council sessions in Arua, they would be treated as strangers.
Most councillors backed Arubaku’s motion but opposed his attack on the district LC5 chairman, Richard Andama Ferua.
The vice-chairman, Kamilo Sabo, reaffirmed that nobody in Arua wanted Terego to return.
He, however, cautioned on the legal implications that could arise since the matter was challenged in the Constitutional Court.
Sam Nyakua, the youth representative and finance secretary, said Parliament was being unfair to the people of Terego if the ultimate objective of the creation of new districts is to take services nearer to the people.
He said Terego was wide and populated enough to deserve a district of its own.
The speaker, Hajjat Hanifa Rwizigala, deferred further debate of the motion to the next council session.
She also urged Arubaku to rephrase the motion document, eliminating sections that attacked the district LC5 chairman, before the council could adopt it.