{UAH} Let us prepare for next phase of election, court!

By Odoobo C. Bichachi

More by this Author

As the election campaigns near the finishing line, the theatre of politics will – like day follows night – move from public rallies to the courts of law – and yes, the court of public opinion. The media will again play a critical role in covering the two courts – one based on the law and the other on perception – as it has done with the campaigns. It is, therefore, important that journalists start preparing now for this phase to avoid the kneejerk reporting that has characterised coverage of the campaigns so far.

Journalists should not simply wait for the time when lawyers show up in court and like clockwork, jump in to report who said what without giving their audiences perspective and background. They should now start working on articles that will build up to the court processes, not wait to do them amid the arguments in court. It becomes very difficult!

Indeed, without diminishing the incredible work (time and energy expended), journalists have put in covering this election (some breaking limbs), the reporting has largely been about he/she said, teargas here or there, insults here and there, lies here and there, crowds, etc, with little, if any, focus on issues the country should be looking at in "deciding" who the next chief executive will be, or the nuances shaping the election, or holding candidates to their word. Perhaps, to use a football analogy, it is because commentary of a game is dictated by the flow of the game, quality of players, nature of refereeing and the weather!

Still, media has a responsibility not simply to act as a mirror or loudspeaker, but to "mediate" the information by what they show or not to show, and how deliberate they approach the reporting. The Judiciary is already preparing itself (see "Supreme Court judges brace for poll petitions," Daily Monitor, December 16) by holding a symposium bringing together judges and lawyers that have been involved in previous presidential elections to review and discuss issues that influenced outcome of the petitions and what lessons to pick.

However, if they meet unprepared journalists, then the courts could "get away with murder", so to speak! One starting point for journalists could be where then Chief Justice Bert Katureebe ended his judgment in Amama Mbabazi v Museveni & Others. He said:

"Having made due inquiry into the petition and on the basis of our findings set out in the judgment:

l We hereby declare that the 1st respondent was validly elected as President in accordance with Article 104 of the Constitution and Section 59 of the Presidential Elections Act.

l Accordingly, this petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Before we take leave of this matter, we would like to point out a number of areas of concern:

Some of the areas that seem to come up at every presidential election include:

(i) An incumbent's use of his position to the disadvantage of other candidates

(ii) Use of State resources

(iii) Unequal use of State-owned media

(iv) Late enactment of relevant legislation, etc.

We must also note that in the past two presidential election petitions, this Court made some important observations and recommendations with regard to the need for legal reform in the area of elections generally and presidential election in particular. Many of these calls have remained unanswered by the Executive and the Legislature."

So, how different is the situation coming into this election and court with regard to four points the CJ noted above? How different is the Judiciary expected to handle election petitions? Will these be a reference point at all? Experts can speak freely about them now, not when the matter comes to court.

Finally, as politics moves to courts, the mudslinging too will – at least about the judges. One infamous reference is the tag "cadre judges," whose epitome was widely believed to have been a former deputy Chief Justice. While politicians may liberally use this tag, journalists are expected to be civil and stand above the emotions.

The NMG Editorial Policy guides thus:

"The media/journalists should, as a matter of caution, avoid unfair and unwarranted criticism which by innuendo attributes an oblique or extraneous motive to a judge or any judicial officer for performing an act in the course of his/her official duties even if such criticism does not in law amount to contempt of court."

Send your feedback/complaints to public-editor@ug.nationmedia.com or call/text on +256 776 500725. 

--

"When a man is stung by a bee, he doesn't set off to destroy all beehives"

--
Disclaimer:Everyone posting to this Forum bears the sole responsibility for any legal consequences of his or her postings, and hence statements and facts must be presented responsibly. Your continued membership signifies that you agree to this disclaimer and pledge to abide by our Rules and Guidelines.To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ugandans-at-heart+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ugandans at Heart (UAH) Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ugandans-at-heart+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ugandans-at-heart/CAFxDTfq12zWgJjqiwHf_2z311hrj9kYFby0SQQ9aBXpNu138NQ%40mail.gmail.com.