Parliament starts debate on Public Order Bill

Apr 06, 2013

Like the Marriage and Divorce Bill, the debate on the Public Order Management Bill which kicked off on Thursday, seems to be stirring a lot of emotions.

By John Semakula
 
Like the Marriage and Divorce Bill, the debate on the Public Order Management Bill which kicked off on Thursday, seems to be stirring a lot of emotions.
 
After MPs failed to agree with the proposals brought in by the internal Affairs state minister, James Baba on Wednesday, the Speaker of Parliament Rebecca Kadaga deferred the debate for next week.
 
The heat in the debate is just a tip of the iceberg.
 
In 2011, when the bill was first tabled in Parliament, the resistance to the Bill, seeking among others things to give Police Boss, Kale Kayihura more powers to clamp on public gatherings, was equally fierce.
 
The Opposition and some human rights activists want the Bill trashed, saying it infringes on the fundamental Human rights and Freedoms.

On Wednesday, Meddie Kagwa, the chairperson of the Uganda Human Rights Commission warned Parliament against rushing to pass it because of similar concerns.

The MPs opposing the Public Order Bill, led by Muwanga Kivumbi of Butambala, have also sworn to fight to the bill to the last drop of sweat.
 
Kivumbi told Vision online that the intension of passing the Bill is to smuggle Section 32 of the Police Act that was struck off in 2008 back into the legal framework.
 
The Constitutional Court quashed Section 32 on grounds that it contravened several Articles in the Constitution that uphold the fundamental freedoms and Human rights.
 
In 2005, Kivumbi petitioned the Constitutional Court challenging the legality of the Section.
 
In the petition, Kivumbi noted the Section gave the Inspector General of Police (IGP) powers to prohibit public gatherings if he thinks it could be used to breech peace on streets and other venues.
 
Kivumbi, now the Butambala County MP, said the Section infringed on fundamental rights and freedoms of the individuals inherent and not granted by the State.
 
Through his lawyer, Ladislaus Rwakafuzi, he asked Court to strike off the Section and declare it unconstitutional.
 
He filed the petition under a pressure group called Popular Resistance against Life Presidency.
 
Kivumbi noted further in the petition that the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Constitution are supposed to be respected, upheld and promoted by all organs and agencies of the State and by all persons.

“Instead of upholding and defending the fundamental rights and freedoms, Section 32 of the Police Act gave the Police (IGP) powers to restrict political activities,” read part of the petition.

Among the fundamental rights and freedoms the Constitution upholds are freedom of speech and expression including that of the press and other media.

Others freedoms include freedom of assembly, association, practicing religion, thought and conscience.

The respondent’s lawyer, Ms Rwakojo defended Section 32 of the Police Act on grounds that the enjoyment of the rights was not absolute but subject to the law.

The respondent cited Article 43 which says that in the enjoyment of rights and freedoms prescribed in the Constitution, no person shall prejudice the fundamental or other human rights and freedoms of others or public interests.
But the five Judges concurred with Kivumbi and struck off the Section.

Presiding Judges Justices Mukasa Kikonyogo, Christine Kitumba, Constance Byamugisha, Mpagi Bahigeine and Galdino Okello advised the Police to use other means under their power and in the Police Act to stop breech of peace.

The judges said Police would take appropriate action including arresting the suspects.

It’s on that background that through Alaka and Company Advocates, Kivumbi petitioned the Constitutional Court this week challenging the Bill.

Kivumbi argues that the aim of tabling the Bill is satanic and that he wants it trashed before Parliament can debate it.
Police has insisted that to deal with the increasing chaos in the city especially on political rallies, the Public Order Management Bill must be passed by Parliament.

Last year in July, the IGP Kale Kayihura pleaded with Parliament to help Police pass the Bill that would simplify their work of keeping law and order.

Kayihura told Kadaga that Police can’t do anything without the support of parliament. Kayihura’s appeal came at the time when chaos on public rallies was at its peak in the city.

Last year in May, the NRM caucus okayed the Bill with slight amendments to some of the contentious clauses in the bill.

During the meeting, President Museveni reportedly told the MPs that he was not ready to see the efforts of his regime to bring stability and economic prosperity going to waste because of rioters and demonstrators.

The Bill has been tabled in Parliament at the time when MPs are still struggling with the Marriage and Divorce Bill, which seems to have out rightly been rejected by the public.

A glance at the Public order management bill

Clause seven of the Bill requires the organiser of the public meeting or his agent to write to the Inspector General of Police (IGP) of the intension to hold a public meeting at least seven days before the proposed date.

The notice must include the full names of the organiser, his physical address, the physical address of the venue of the public meeting plus his contacts.

The notice should also carry the date of the meeting which shall be between 6:00am to 6:00pm and the estimated number of people attending the public meeting.

Kivumbi told Sunday Vision that he is against Section 8 that requires that for the IGP to allow the public meetings to take place, he must find the venue suitable for the purposes of the crowd and traffic control in relation to the existing business.

“The IGP who has behaved in total disregard of the law after the 2008 Constitutional ruling by prohibiting public meetings should not be given powers to control rallies,” he said.

Kivumbi wants Court to block Parliament and Cabinet from discussing the Bill.

“Article 92 of the Constitution stops Parliament and any other state organ from attempting to make a law that subverts the Constitutional ruling as in this case,” he said.

Kivumbi noted that if the Government wants to make any changes in the existing laws, it should have tabled amendments to the existing Acts.

“Government is supposed to harmonise the laws and make them user friendly to the common user. But the laws are being spread in the Police Act and this Bill,” he added.  
 

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