{UAH} Tumwebaze should be arrested for contempt of court
|
4:30 AM |
No comments |
The minister goes on to state: "The interim injunction is impossible to implement as we cannot stop a meeting that has already occurred. In fact the seat of the lord mayor has already been declared vacant and the Electoral Commission has been accordingly informed."
This came hot on the heels of the High court which had issued an interim injunction barring the minister, the authority councillors and others from implementing the Catherine Bamugemereire tribunal report until the main suit in Erias Lukwago V Attorney General was determined.
The minister is, therefore, acting in contempt of court contrary to Article 28(12) of the Constitution. The main aim of the injunction in this case is that continuing with the implementation of the Judge Bamugemereire tribunal report shall render nugatory the [main] application by the lord mayor, which application is actually intended to review the tribunal report.
It is a given constitutional right under Article 42 of the Constitution that a person aggrieved by a decision taken against him or her by an administrative officer or body has a right of appeal. It is clear and apparent that the outcome of the Bamugemereire tribunal is adverse to the lord mayor, and thus, under Article 42, the lord mayor has a right of appeal.
Similarly, the minister says in his statement that he has sought the attorney general's guidance on the matter. Whereas the minister, Tumwebaze, is at liberty to consult the attorney general as the government's chief legal adviser, under Article 119, the minister is not at liberty to ignore an existing court order because it is adverse to him and the majority of the KCCA councillors.
This in itself portends of contempt of court and runs counter to Article 2(2) of the Constitution, which states that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The courts of law in Uganda are independent, and cannot be directed or influenced by any person or authority under Article 128 of the Constitution, the attorney general inclusive.
The Electoral Commission cannot also conduct a by-election to replace the lord mayor in violation of an existing court order. This would be against the rule of law and good governance in the country.
The minister's argument and that of the attorney general that the minister was not served with a court order is a sham and indeed a sign of dishonesty on the side of the minister. For the minister was served with the court order duly issued by the High court by the councillor Allan Ssewanyana (Makindye West).
The minister ignored Ssewanyana, insisting that the latter was just intent on disrupting the meeting. All this is on record and well reflected in the meeting of the council that took place on November 25.
The judiciary is one of the three arms of the state and of the government of Uganda. Thus, a cabinet minister cannot and should not be seen to violate or ignore a valid court order.
The way forward for the minister and all those who may be aggrieved by the court order is to appeal against it. Otherwise, the official statement issued by the minister on this court order not only tantamounts to contempt of court but is also a blatant abuse of the rule of law.The author is a senior lecturer, Makerere University school of Law.
--
H.OGWAPITI
-----------------------------------------------------
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
---Theodore Roosevelt
0 comments:
Post a Comment