{UAH} In Uganda, we enact the laws first and worry about their effects last - Comment -
|
1:14 PM |
No comments |
In Uganda, we enact the laws first and worry about their effects last - Comment
The International Women's Day was last weekend celebrated in Uganda amid fears by women of being publicly stripped by moral purists for alleged exposure of body parts that are, according to a new law, not supposed to be exposed.
Women rights groups said on the eve of their day that at least 50 women have been publicly undressed within less than a month since the assent to the Anti-Pornography Act.
So in the end, the people most likely to be prosecuted are those over-enthusiastic youths across the country who over-interpreted and over-welcomed the Act which the public simply refers to as the anti-mini skirt law.
You can safely predict that there won't be too many women in the country prosecuted for exposing certain body parts since the said parts have not even been defined yet. And the police has come out to strongly warn those who dare strip the women.
But this won't be the first law to target those who erroneously welcome it. Over a quarter of a century ago, Uganda enacted the anti-sectarian law that was supposed to deal with those who promote sectarianism, which in our case simply means tribal and religious bias.
But the only people so far ever targeted by the anti-sectarian law are journalists and activists who attempt to expose tribal chauvinists and religious bigots who break it. That is how hastily enacted laws end up confusing everybody.
Then a couple of years ago, there was this law empowering state agencies to eavesdrop on your private communications in order to promote security and allow everybody live in a peaceful society and safely pursue their happiness and lawful aspirations.
The secretary general of the ruling party who is today's leader of government business as prime minister, enthusiastically pushed for its enactment.
Last week, recordings of private communications by his wife were tabled as evidence in a ruling party meeting to prove his interest in pursuit of higher political goals.
He strenuously tried to deny. Would he have supported the so called phone tapping law had he known security agencies would eavesdrop on his wife as she naturally tried to propel him to greater heights?
There is something very short-termist about us Ugandans during enactment of new laws. We tend to get enthusiastic about them if we think they will serve our immediate interest and then cry foul when we fall on our sword before it slays the persons we wanted to fix.
A few years after independence, one minister pushed for the enactment of the detention without trial act. He became the first victim of the act and was thrown in the cooler for five years without a chance to be brought to court and defend himself.
It took a military coup that saw the soldiers throw open the prison gates for political prisoners for him to regain his freedom.
In 1995, several ruling party politicians supported removal of presidential term limits as a way of blocking the ascent to power of a strong opposition candidate who would have walloped any candidate other than the incumbent president.
Now they want to replace the incumbent, but he can still stand, thanks to the removal of term limits. They are frustrated. Will Ugandans ever learn to legislate for the long, rather than short term?
Related Posts:
{UAH} From CNN: Hear from the reporter who had tense exchange with Trump- {UAH} From CNN: Twitter removes Trump's Nickelback video after copyright complaint
- {UAH} INTERESTING, From CNN: Indian royals win $43 million in dispute over bank deposit from 1948
- {UAH} From CNN: Huge reward offered for gold toilet stolen from Blenheim Palace
- {UAH} From CNN: Teenage football star sacked for stealing teammate's $76,000 watch
0 comments:
Post a Comment