The Military Police in Uganda is still busy blocking Dr Besigye 9 months after the Uganda General elections:
Dr Besigye using a Boda Boda motorcycle as a get away from the determined Military Police of Uganda. He has been stopped from using his car.
By Serestino Tusingwire,
21 November, 2016
The former Forum for Democratic Change presidential Candidate, Dr. Kizza Besigye has been seen in another rare moment this afternoon when he too walked for some distance before getting a boda boda which he used to travel to town for a meeting.
It is alleged that Police blocked his car as he was trying to leave his home in Kasangati for a certain meeting in Kampala, and this prompted him to abandon the car and use his feet leaving the empty car in the hands of police.
Government printer lies neglected. The old colonial building is in ruins at Entebbe as street publishers flourish:
Here is Joseph Kaggwa, the production manager at the Uganda Printing and Publishing Corporation.
The printing press is covered in dust, a clear sign that the machine has not been used in a long time. Kaggwa blames the flourishing street publishers for knocking UPPC out of business.
By Paul Tajuba
Posted Monday, March 9 2015
Uganda Printing and Publishing Corporation (UPPC) is stationed at Entebbe.
The Entebbe based government publishing house has no business running and the dust baked machines have become a place of abode for cockroaches and ants.
The wooden doors have seen better days as they have now become food for termites.
These are features that stand out when you go to UPPC. When the publishing house gets some business, the staff there works tirelessly to ensure that the out of use machines do not disappoint.
Back in the day
The Government Printer, as it was called before it became UPPC in 1993, had its glorious days though mainly during the colonial days, Obote and Amin regimes.
At the time, the agency was authorised to disseminate information to different government departments and ministries. Through this avenue, duplications and forgeries were minimised.
The printer also dealt in the printing and publishing of newspapers both in English and local languages, the Uganda Gazette, land titles, scholastic materials and envelopes.
Those who worked at the corporation during the golden days have a message of dire straits - asking government to intervene.
How things got out of hand
Joseph Kaggwa-Mubuya, the UPPC production manager has worked at the corporation for nearly 30 years. He says the troubles of the printer started in 1993 when the agency was turned into a corporation but was never given funding.
According to the 1992 UPPC Act, government is mandated to give UPPC money for its operations but the Act is silent on how much government should submit.
Subsequently, UPPC, though under the office for Presidency, has never received money that could have been used to purchase modern printing machines.
Actually, the “newest” machine at the agency was imported in 1991.
In the 1990s when liberalisation of the economy was at its peak, the printing school at the agency collapsed.
“You cannot trace the history of printing in Uganda from UPPC. It used to be the skills centre where even staff would go abroad to enhance their skills but that is gone,” Kaggwa –Mubuya sadly states.
Gud Mbareba, the printing finishing superviser at the agency says the final blow that UPPC got was in 1996 when there was massive staff retrenchment.
He says, “some of the most experienced people were laid off thus the school had to collapse.”
Rebirth
Some of the axed staff found solace at Nasser Road and it was not long before the groupo had established a printing and publishing empire at the strategically located area.
“All those who first owned printers on Nasser Road are former employees of UPPC because they had the expertise and money to buy modern machines. Now UPPC can’t compete with them” Mbareba says.
While Nasser Road is booming with publishing work, at UPPC silence reigns supreme with the machines lying idle.
Government asks for an extra Shs800 billion:
Mr Matia Kasaija
By Yasiin Mugerwa
Posted Monday, 9 March, 2015
IN SUMMARY
In the supplementary request, government would, for instance, spend Shs3 billion on workshops and seminars alone and another Shs4.1 billion on travel expenses.
Uganda Parliament-Wasteful budget requests such as special meals, welfare, workshops, foreign trips and allowances as highlighted in the new government supplementary request have kicked off a fuss in a new budget dispute over the request for an extra Shs800 billion the government urgently needs to cater for “unforeseen emergencies”.
The new request, if approved by Parliament, will increase the 2014/2015 budget from Shs15 trillion to about Shs16 trillion amid complaints that the money is going into consumptive areas.
In the supplementary request, government would, for instance, spend Shs3 billion on workshops and seminars alone and another Shs4.1 billion on travel expenses.
Opposition members have, however, criticised the latest cash request as “a political supplementary request” intended to help the ruling party raise cash to finance its campaigns.
“This supplementary request is suspect. What has been paraded as money for travel abroad, workshops and seminars could be money for campaigns,” said Mr Gerald Karuhanga (Youth Western).
The Budget Committee is expected to convene later this week to start scrutinising Mr Matia Kasaija’s maiden cash request as Finance minister designate.
The rising figures
Even before his swearing-in, Mr Kasaija last week requested for Shs847.2b up from the Shs237 billion requested in 2013/14 financial year.
As a rule, supplementary budgets should be a result of unforeseen actions such as natural disasters. However, in some instances, ministries have asked for more funds in the course of a financial year to deal with recurrent costs such as salaries.
Explaining what looks like a policy-reversal on wastage, ministry of Finance spokesperson Jim Mugunga said: “As a policy, there was an across-the-board hold on non-core international travels and workshops. This was meant to manage available resources then. It does not necessarily make workshops and travel unnecessary in functions of government.”
Deputy NRM spokesperson Ofwono Opondo said the NRM party does not get campaign cash from the Treasury and described Opposition accusations as “cheap political games”.
ymugerwa@ug.
nationmedia.
com
Political Parties in Uganda reject the EC use of national ID register as NRM government prepares another rigged national election for 2016:
Gen David Sejusa (R) with the vice chairperson of People’s Progressive Party (PPP) Dick Odur (2nd R) address the press at PPP offices in Ntinda yesterday.
PHOTO BY ABUBAKER LUBOWA
By Winnie Tabitha & Albert Tumwine
Posted Wednesday, April 29 2015
Kampala,Uganda, The Opposition has rejected a move by the Electoral Commission (EC) to use data collected during the compilation of the national identification registration exercise to update the national voters’ register ahead of the 2016 general elections.
Speaking at separate events, various political party leaders said the national ID registration exercise was full of errors and as a result, most Ugandans were not registered.
Addressing a news conference at the DP party headquarters in Kampala yesterday, the party spokesperson, Mr Kenneth Kakande, said: “Many people on the national register did not register for the national IDs and that means if the EC uses the ID project register, many Ugandans are going to be disenfranchised,” Mr Kakande said.
Addressing journalists during the party’s weekly press conference on Monday, Forum for Democratic Change spokesperson John Kikonyogo expressed dismay at the way EC is handling the entire exercise.
“We have failed to get an explanation from the EC on why the old register was discarded and we want them to tell us how those people they are adding to the list applied,” Mr Kikonyogo said.
Democratic Party (DP) secretary general Mathias Nsubuga said the EC should use the previous register. He claimed the Opposition has evidence to the effect that more than 3,000 people appearing on national ID register are not Ugandans.
Uganda Media Centre executive director Ofwono Opondo, however, defended the EC, stressing that whatever is being done is within the law.
EC spokesperson Jotham Taremwa, said the government made the decision that all government departments should use the collected national voters’ data banks for future purposes.
Meanwhile, former coordinator of intelligence services, Gen David Sejusa has said there is no point in going for an election that will be “stolen”.
Mr Sejusa said the criteria of registering voters did not put into consideration verification of citizens.
“You were all registered, but what system was used to establish that you are a citizen of this country? How many of you were asked for a birth certificate, none!” Mr Sejusa said.
Article 61 (e) of the 1995 Constitution mandates the Electoral Commission to compile, maintain, revise and update the national voters register (the same is repeated under the EC Act Section 18).
But Parliament this year passed the Registration of Persons Bill that establishes a national identification register of all persons in Uganda and provides for access and use of the information contained in the national identification register.
editorial@ug.
nationmedia.
com
ETTAMBIRO
LY'AMUKABYA AWO E KYEBANDO OKULIRAANA E KKANISA YA BAHAI E KANYANYA.
KABAKA ATYA OKUMUJJA KU BWAKABAKA
BAMUTEGEE
ZA NTI ABAZUNGU OBWAKABAKA BABUWA N'ABAKAZI.
ABAYIMBI KYEBAVA BAYIMBA NTI:
EKIMAZE EMBUZI E KYEBANDO, SSALAMBWA LY'EWAMALA.
BULI EVAAYO LIBOJJA MU BBWA.
EKIMAZE EMBUZI EZ'EKISIBO,
SSALAMBWA LY'EWAMALA,
BULI EVAAYO LIBOJJA MU BBWA.
EBYAFAAYO 1927
Abasoga nabo baaweereza entungo ensekule eri Kattikiro Apollo Kaggwa agende e Bungereza okuloopa Gavana Sir Frederick Crowford olwokumuwummuza.
Ekyakabi olwatuuka e Nairobi entungo ne bagibba. Era nalwala nanyo. Eyo gye yafiira nga 14/02/1927. Yaleetebwa n'aziikibwa e Mannyangwa nga 21/02/1927. Omuyimbi kwekuyimba bwati:
Okumanya ng'Abakyukuyu babbi, Kawalya baamubbako akatwalo k'entungo. Ab'eBusoga baamuweereza nsekule, Ate Kawalya yali musiru bambi, Anti entungo yagikubamu ejjiiko,
Yalaama nti we balinziika balimangawo entungo, Abaana gye banaalyanga, Nga bazze okulima NNUMETE KAMWA!
The Electoral and constitutional reforms in Uganda:
By Stephen Kafeero
Posted Wednesday, February 18 2015
KAMPALA, UGANDA.
The Electoral and constitutional reform activists have warned they will occupy Parliament if by the end of March 2015, MPs and government continue to ignore the Citizen’s Compact.
The compact contains a set of reforms aimed at ensuring a credible election in 2016.
Mr Godber Tumushabe, the head of the consultation secretariat of the Citizens Coalition for Free and Fair Elections, said the failure by MPs to take the reforms process seriously will compel them to move on the House.
“We have looked at the potential triggers because we are not anarchists. MPs have to invite us by their actions. We must also create a credible threat for these MPs and the President to know that if we are ignored, something big will happen,” Mr Tumushabe said on Monday.
According to their plan, the activists’ campaign will be triggered by MPs if they ignore the issues contained in the compact; if Parliament and the Executive delay in tabling and discussing the reforms and if Parliament reduces the debate on reforms to token issues.
However, Prime Minister Ruhakana Rugunda on Monday told Daily Monitor that there should be no cause for worry because government is at the forefront of pushing for reforms.
“Government is spearheading the reforms process. We shall come out with a comprehensive position and that is why government has not commented on specific reforms because we are consulting the various stakeholders.”
Key reforms proposed
• President’s tenure should be restored to two five-year terms.
• Size of Parliament should be reduced in line with modest resources of the State.
• New independent and impartial electoral commission must be established.
• New verifiable register of all voters, which should include eligible Ugandans in the diaspora, must be compiled.
• Voting for LC3, LC5, Parliament and President should be conducted on one day.
• Military should have no involvement whatsoever in the electoral process.
• President should relinquish command of the armed forces to the Joint Chiefs, and must not serve as chairman of UDPF High Command during elections.
• Workers should be removed from special interest group representation since issues of workers can be represented by all MPs.
• Army representatives should be removed from Parliament.
• The National Institute for Political Education at Kyankwanzi should be abolished and replaced by a National Institute for Administration under an independent Board of Directors.
• Cabinet ministers should not be MPs.
• The office of the Resident District Commissioner should be abolished.
Mukula, Ecweru and MP Ochen in fresh feud over human rights in Uganda:
This is now a problem in the International Criminal Court as testimony in the Hague, Europe:
9 June, 2019
By Simon Peter Emwamu & Patrick Elobu Angonu
When Joseph Kony’s Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) launched its operations in Teso sub-region on June 15, 2003, thousands were horrified and devastated.
The eerie cloud of uncertainty ruled the community, which for years had weathered turbulent times of cattle rustling and settled into subsistence farming.
Due to unpreparedness of the State apparatus to shield the unsuspecting residents from LRA, the residents were ravaged by the six-month mayhem.
The people were hauled into squalid camps to live a life punctuated with famine, anguish and some were relegated to life on the streets. The rebels, who shot their way through Obalanga Sub-county, Amuria District, launched attacks on IDP camps and villages, mutilating and bludgeoning many before disappearing with scores of children who have never been seen to date.
Due to the untimely response of the UPDF, the population united and formed a militia that was later christened The Arrow Group, comprising of Arrow Girls and Arrow Boys.
The first local resistance against the LRA was started by Mr Julius Ochen, then LC5 councillor for Katakwi District representing Obalanga Sub-county. Ochen is the current MP for Kapelebyong County.
The feat by Mr Ochen saw the arrival of generals Moses Ali and Jeje Odongo to supervise the arrow group that was placed under the leadership of the UPDF. This was after President Museveni held a war cabinet in Soroti to plan how to repulse the LRA from Teso. That meeting directed UPDF to arm the militias following a petition by Teso MPs, read by former Soroti Woman MP Alice Alaso in a separate meeting between Gen Museveni and Teso leadership.
The insurgency also saw the arrival of Mr Musa Ecweru, then Kasese RDC, who relocated to Soroti to reinforce the militias. Ecweru is now State minister for Relief and Disaster Preparedness.
The Soroti war cabinet directed that the leadership and coordination of the Arrow Group be streamlined. This occasioned a meeting at Soroti Hotel where Opposition leaders were locked out, allowing Mike Mukula to take position of chairperson of the Arrow Group while then State minister for Security Betty Akech took up position of coordinator of Elephant Brigade militia in Acholi sub-region while Mr Okot Ogong was appointed the coordinator of Amuka (Rhino) militia in Lango sub-region.
There is contestation over who was the brainchild of the arrow militias between Ochen, on the one hand, and Musa Ecweru and Mike Mukula on the other. Each claims credit for helping the UPDF flash out LRA from Teso in 2004.
ICC testimony The bad blood between MP Ochen, minister Ecweru, and NRM vice chairperson Mukula again came to the fore after the MP testified in the case against former LRA commander Dominic Ongwen at The Hague, Netherlands, on March 25. During his cross-examination at the ICC presided over by judge Bertram Schmitt and Ayena Odongo as defence lawyer, Ochen cited lack of political will to end the war, claiming it was “deliberately” prolonged to punish the north and north eastern regions for supporting previous governments.
In his lengthy testimony, Ochen referred to how government soldiers benefited from the war, and the existence of unmarked mass graves containing remains of persons allegedly killed by NRA. Ochen also accuses Ecweru and Mukula of picking the remains of a man killed in crossfire and displaying it at Soroti Sports Ground as the body of Ongwen.
“I gave the truth, nothing but the truth about what I know about Dominic Ongwen, and the untold story of the misery that Teso has gone through, which for many years remained untold to the outside world,” Mr Ochen told Sunday Monitor after returning from the ICC. “I never saw Ongwen anywhere in Teso, if they who claim to have seen him as Arrow commanders saw him, they should wait for their turn to testify. I don’t absolve LRA of its atrocities in Teso, Lango, and Acholi. It is a constant, they committed crime. But I never saw Dominic Ongwen in Teso.”
But Ecweru says Ochen is a liar and a traitor, adding that security agencies know that Ongwen operated in Teso and abductions were made under his orders.
“My people of Teso treat Ochen as a betrayer,” he says. Former Soroti Municipality MP Mukula on the other hand says Ochen is a “Yudah” (traitor). “We shaded blood to pacify Teso from the hands of LRA, leaving orphans as result of that war. We have been betrayed by this testimony at ICC,” he added. “To you the press, look at Honourable Ochen as a populist. We can expose him the more, we have information of how he ended up at ICC.”
But Ochen maintains that his selection was merit-based following his record in documenting the atrocities in Teso right from his youthful days, then as LC5 councillor and social worker with the Catholic Church.
Mr Mukula also adds that they never claimed that Ongwen was killed, but rather it was LRA commanders Tabu Ley and Opio. “During that onslaught we had information that Ongwen was among the brigade that made way to Teso, and the only person to have remained behind was LRA boss Joseph Kony. There is no way MP Ochen could deny that Dominic Ongwen was not here. Communication with his boss Kony that was intercepted by the UPDF clearly showed his presence here,” Mukula says.
Compensation The arrow militias insist they have never been fully compensated, pointing fingers at their commanders. And Mr Ochen has always inquired about a tractor given to the Arrow Boys, putting him on a collision course with Mukula and Ecweru. Asked about the issue of the Arrow Group emoluments and whereabouts of the tractor, the State minister for Relief and Disaster Preparedness refused to respond on the matter.
“I have other better things to do than reply to an idiot,” the minister said. But Mr Mukula says all benefits for the arrow boys were paid up by the late Brig Noble Mayombo, and 1,800 boys were recruited into police while more than 2,000 were absorbed in the UPDF.
Mr Mukula says the tractor is still intact and all Arrow Boys interested in using it only have to fuel it, adding that ox ploughs were given to the group and they are also among the key beneficiaries of Operation Wealth Creation. “I am not interested in opening old wounds, but our brother should tread carefully. We have deeper information about him,” Mr Mukula warns.
The Age limit Bill: The MP whip of the NRM wants only the Majority NRM Parliament to decide on behalf of all Ugandans:
By Moses Mulondo, Paul Kiwuuwa
Added 17th October 2017
In the NRM caucus that was convened last week Friday, Nankabirwa said her office had prepared a message which the NRM MPs would use to promote the Bill
M/s Nankabirwa Sentamu the chief Parliamentary whip of the NRM majority political party in the Uganda Parliament
The Government Chief Whip, Ruth Nankabirwa, has revealed the message they have prepared for the NRM MPs to use in promoting the constitutional amendment Bill 2017 which seeks to remove the upper and lower age limits for presidential candidates.
In the NRM caucus that was convened last Friday, Nankabirwa said her office has prepared a message which the NRM MPs will use to promote the Bill.
In an interview, Nankabirwa noted that the message contains explanations of the legal issues surrounding the amendment justifying why a referendum over the matter would not be necessary.
“Some people have been misleading the public that the matter requires a referendum. This is a matter that requires MPs to decide on behalf of the people,” she elaborated.
The other component of the promotional message is the research findings that there is no other country in the world that has an upper age limit.
The promotional message is also premised on the Supreme Court ruling which required the Government to enact necessary constitutional amendments and electoral reforms within two years.
“You know, that Bill has other proposals, but article 102b has overshadowed other areas which we need to amend. For instance, 10 days are not enough for someone to gather evidence to petition a presidential election.
The electoral commission is given only 20 days to organise a fresh election after court has nullified the election. Those days are very inadequate. Even Kenya which has 60 days, the days do not seem to be adequate enough,” she argued.
The other explanation to give citizens in the consultations is to refer them to article 1 of the Constitution which states that power belongs to the people.
“So, in that regard, we shall tell people that everyone should have a chance to contest for any office regardless of age and then the voters will make their choice of who they want to be their leader,” she explained.
Some NRM MPs reject indoor consultations
In the NRM caucus meeting of last Friday, MPs were advised to conduct indoor consultative meetings and to have a harmonised message.
But some legislators did not accept the idea of consulting their constituencies selectively.
Pader woman MP Lowila Oketayot said, “We did not take a vote on the proposal of consulting voters from indoor meetings. That was just a proposal. For me I cannot use it in my constituency because it does not make sense. We have to consult all our voters in the constituency. That is what it means to be a people’s Parliament,” Oketayot argued.
Ngora County MP David Bara also said he did not buy the idea of holding indoor meetings because it is discriminatory to his voters.
“This is not a matter for NRM. It is a matter for all Ugandans from across the political divide. For me elders in my constituency had instructed me not to take a position of the age limit debate until I have consulted the constituency. I will, therefore, defend the position of my constituency,” Abara argued.
Meanwhile Nankabirwa dismissed reports that they have given NRM MPs money to compromise their constituencies to support the Bill.
“We have not given out any money. The only money we expect to be given is from Parliament and it has not been released yet,” she explained.
However, the Leader of Opposition, Winnie Kiiza, who is part of the parliamentary commission, vowed to oppose the decision to give special funds to MPs to consult, saying that MPs are facilitated to do so on daily basis.
The new Constitution of Uganda made only about 20 years ago should not be tampered with by politicians:
Constitutional lawyer in Uganda, Mr Peter Mulira
17 October, 2017
By Peter MuliraThe political mayhem surrounding the presidential age-limit debate forced many people to opt out of the debate and leave the fate of the country in the hands of Members of Parliament.
However, after listening to the wisdom of some senior citizens who spoke at a workshop organised by the Elders Forum last Friday, one was forced to reflect on the current political situation in the country in which constitutional matters are being confused with political issues. A national constitution should be above politics and that is why the Constitution itself makes a distinction between the political work of Parliament and its special powers to amend the Constitution. Article 79 of the Constitution sets out the political functions of Parliament to include: • The power to make laws on any matter for the peace, order, development and good governance of Uganda. • The power to confer authority on any person or body to make provisions having the force of law.
• The duty to protect the constitution and promote the democratic governance of Uganda.
In furtherance of these functions, Parliament is given power under Article 94 to make rules to regulate its procedure and Article 94(4)(b) specifically gives a Member of Parliament the right to move a private member’s Bill subject to the following limitations • The member moving the private member’s Bill must seek assistance of the department of government whose area of operation is affected by the Bill. • The Attorney General’s office must be involved in drafting of the Bill. Article 259 of Chapter Eighteen of the Constitution gives special powers to Parliament to amend the Constitution. These powers are separate from the political powers, which are bestowed on Parliament. Accordingly, the rules governing the procedure to enact laws cannot be used for purposes of amending the Constitution. Indeed Article 259 provides that ‘Parliament may amend any provision of the Constitution according to procedure laid down in this chapter’, meaning Chapter Eighteen and not Chapter Five.
The only way the Constitution can be amended is by first and foremost enacting a law implementing the provision of Chapter Eighteen and making rules under that law providing for procedure for such amendment. The Bill before Parliament was introduced by a private member according to rules, which govern the political work of Parliament, which makes it unconstitutional. Secondly, even if the current rules of parliamentary procedure were considered to be applicable, the preparation of the Bill would still render it unconstitutional because it was not done according to the requirements of the Constitution.
Article 94(c) and (d) require that the member moving the Bill should have sought the assistance of the Ministry of Constitutional Affairs as the department of government most affected by the Bill as well as the professional assistance of the office of the Attorney General should have been sought in its drafting.
These provisions are important and are in line with the idea that the Constitution should not be capriciously and indiscriminately tampered with by politicians. Lastly a bill to amend the constitution can only be assented to by the President if it is accompanied by a certificate of the Speaker that the provisions of chapter eighteen have been complied with in relation to it.
This chapter does not confer on a private member the right to move a bill to amend the constitution. As such Hon.Raphel Magyezi’s bill is irregularly and unconstitutionally before august house. The political and constitutional confusion caused by Hon. Magyezi’s bill can only be sorted out through sober dialogue and the willingness to accept wise counsel.
Mr Mulira is a lawyer. peter.mulira89@gmail.com
How case backlog came to dog Constitutional court
September 15, 2017
Written by Sulaiman Kakaire
Constitutional court will later this year mark 22 years since its establishment to determine the constitutionality of laws and particular acts or omissions by any person.
In this first of three-part series, SULAIMAN KAKAIRE examines whether more than two decades later the court has lived up to this dream by highlighting how it had a fresh start and ended up in a backlog crisis.
The sun is almost setting down at one of the three-star hotels in town, where the legal team representing embattled feminist activist, Dr Stella Nyanzi, is embroiled in a discussion of how they will have to deal with the introduction of an application by the state seeking to examine the mental capacity of their client who is subject to criminal proceedings.
The application is brought under the Mental Treatment Act 1938 (MTA). To the reasoning of Nyanzi’s defence team comprising of majorly human rights activist lawyers, it is quite surprising to them, if not embarrassing, that the prosecution could introduce an application under the MTA.
They proposed several options, including criminal revision but they seemed to agree on taking the matter to the Constitutional court to challenge the constitutionality of the application. However, therein lay serious concern.
Outgoing deputy Chief Justice Steven Kavuma
“Going to the Constitutional court is ideally the right thing because it settles this matter with a precedent but when will that decision come? Perhaps after five years or more. We need to deal with this as an urgent matter. Maybe, that option is thought of to strategically stifle the whole proceedings,” one of the lawyers opined.
This lawyer’s thoughts are reminiscent of the psyche of the users of the Constitutional court.
Peter Walubiri, a seasoned constitutional law litigator, observes that: “I have litigated in that court since its inception and I agree to the fact that the court has over time been made inefficient...what it is known for now is to give postmortem orders. This is not normal...Ideally, a litigant goes to court to seek for declarations that promote or protect their rights but when the court delays to adjudicate then, it perpetuates injustice.”
HISTORICAL CONTEXT
According to the report of the Constitutional Review Commission (CRC), which gathered the public opinions as to what was to be included in the 1995 Constitution, there was consensus amongst the Uganda population on the need for a permanent institution to safeguard human rights.
In his book entitled The Search for National Consensus, former chief justice Benjamin Odoki, who also chaired the CRC, writes that it was this general consensus that made them propose for the establishment of the Human Rights Court/Commission, Constitutional court, etc).
Indeed, the Constituent Assembly (CA) deemed it fit to establish the Court of Appeal as the Constitutional court to determine any question as to the interpretation of the Constitution, but, in particular, to examine whether an Act of Parliament or any other law is inconsistent with the Constitution.
Mindful of the importance of constitutional interpretation matters, the CA gave further clear directives that during the pendency of a constitutional petition, “The Court of Appeal shall proceed to hear and determine the petition as soon as possible and may, for that purpose, suspend any other matter [be it a civil or criminal appeal] pending before it.”
This provision is re-enacted under Constitutional court (Petitions and References) rules formulated by the Rules committee then chaired by Justice Odoki.
The rules committee went further to provide under Rule 10 that: “The court shall sit from day-to-day and may, for the purposes of hearing and determining the petition, sit during Saturdays, Sundays and on public holidays where the court considers it necessary for ensuring compliance with Article 137 (7) of the Constitution...”
Walubiri, who is currently leading the legal team representing Nyanzi in the Constitutional court, told The Observer that whereas the historical context shows that there was hope in the court to act as the custodian of constitutionalism, it has instead become the greatest disappointment in the struggle for constitutionalism.
“The court does not handle matters with utmost urgency or expeditiously as provided by law and in the long run, it has become inefficient in its cardinal role,” he said.
According to the records, the first cases that were filed in the court while being headed by the then deputy chief justice, Seith Manyindo, were determined within a year. For instance, the case of David Tinyefuza vs Attorney General was filed in December 1996 and determined on April 25, 1997.
Other cases filed and determined during the same year include Serapio Rukundo vs Attorney General [1997], Uganda Journalists Safety Committee and Others v Attorney General (Ruling), Charles Onyango and Another v Attorney General, and James Rwanyarare and Another v Attorney General.
All these cases were filed and determined in 1997. Towards the end of 2000, this trend changed as cases started to last for more than a year.
Indeed, the judiciary carried out the national court case census in order to determine the extent of case backlog in the courts. As of January 2017, the findings indicate the Constitutional court has 359 pending cases, out of which 213 cases were backlog representing 59 per cent. Meanwhile, constitutional applications constituted 45 per cent of the case backlog in the same court.
According to the report, there are 117 constitutional petition cases considered to be backlog and 96 constitutional cases applications. Of these, nine petitions and three applications have been in the court for more than 10 years.
Generally, the report indicates that poor work attitude and poor performance by some judicial and non-judicial officers in the judiciary are the causes of backlog.
Other factors are corruption, ineffective support supervision, lack of skills and lack of knowhow, leadership vacuum for prolonged period, poor case management including lack of control of court processes and management of requests for adjournment.
CAUSE OF BACKLOG
Weighing in the possible causes of backlog at the Constitutional court, Patricia Mutesi, a senior principal state attorney in the attorney general’s chambers, told The Observer that backlog was inevitable because as more people became aware of their rights, they flooded the court.
“This increased the workload in the court and yet the number of justices in the court was not being increased to match the rate of cases being filed in the court,” she said.
Mutesi argues that although the court is empowered to enforce human rights, this is possible with a qualifier: “it can only do so upon determining a question that deserves constitutional interpretation.”
Justice Kenneth Kakuru (L) and Justice Remmy Kasule
Towards the close of 1990s, the court became aware of this perception and it had to clarify it in the case of Ismail Serugo v Kampala City Council and Attorney General, where it expressed its reservations that it is not a competent authority for enforcing human rights per se as most Ugandans had perceived it.
However, it could only go into the arena of enforcing human rights upon interpretation of the Constitution. But, even after the Serugo decision, the backlog continued to build up.
Mutesi argues that the subsequent backlog must be understood from the period when the Court of Appeal ran short of coram, especially at a time when some justices retired from the court.
“Between 2009 [and] 2011 there was a build-up of cases because the Court of Appeal had only four justices yet listening to a constitutional petition required five; so, the backlog can also be attributed to this period,” she said.
“There are litigants who started to abuse the court, especially those who were being investigated to face criminal prosecutions. They would file a petition and, subsequent to it, apply to stay proceedings knowing very well that the court will take long to listen to the petitions.”
In the 1997 cases of John Arutu vs Attorney General and Charles Onyango and Another v Attorney General, the Constitutional court held that where criminal proceedings are pending in another court in respect to the same matter, then the petition, the Constitutional court petition, should be stayed pending the determination of the criminal matter.
Whereas this had been intended to avoid abuse of the court most, especially where litigants could stifle criminal proceedings with constitutional petitions, this position of the law was reversed in 2008 by the Supreme court in the case of Charles Onyango Obbo vs Attorney General, wherein it was held that where the constitutional validity of any law or action awaits determination by the Constitutional court, it is important to expedite the determination in order to avoid applying a law or taking action whose validity is questionable.
The Obbo decision opened floodgates yet again. Indeed, the committee that investigated backlog took note of this by stating: “There are lots of unnecessary references to the Constitutional court, possibly used as a stalling device. As a result, the higher court then gets bogged down with these cases, and the lower court has to wait for a decision before it can continue.’’
MANAGEMENT CRISIS
Isaac Ssemakadde, the chief executive officer of Legal Brains Trust, a civil society organisation that has several public interest cases pending before the Constitutional court, observed that backlog must be understood in the context of rule 20 of the Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules that grants mandate to the deputy chief justice to manage cases in the court.
“In my view, this should be the context under which we should understand the backlog. If the court was okay during the times of justices Manyindo, [Leticia] Kikonyogo, [Mpagi] Bahigeine and [Constance] Byamugisha, why is it that it has become less efficient during [Steven] Kavuma’s tenure? I think there is a management gridlock during his tenure,” he said.
Ssemakadde argues that vacancies in the court have always been there but good managers knew how to deal with it.
“Manyindo’s court used to adopt judges from the High court. This is how justices [Fredrick] Egonda-Ntende and [Patrick] Tabaro came to be identified with the jurisprudence of the court. If not, they became instrumental in shaping it. We have judges at the High court who can manage this task. These people can help in dealing with the backlog. That is how he could have dealt with the situation,” Ssemakadde added.
Walubiri agrees with Ssemakadde and adds: “The current managers have failed to regulate continuous travels by the justices. Sometimes the case is fixed but of the five judges one is absent or two because they have gone for medical treatment or attending a workshop. There are better days to attend workshops. Why fix a case on a day when someone is due to travel out of the country?”
Walubiri further argues that you can also make provision for summarised judgments and detailed reasoning can come later.
“There are instances when [Seth] Manyindo’s court used to do this,” he said.
Whereas Kavuma has been put on the spotlight by some activist lawyers, Walubiri says that he is not a poor manager per se but his love for promotion diverted him.
“Kavuma initially let the justices to do what they wanted but when he increasingly wanted to be Odoki’s successor, he started acting in a very funny way. He could fix cases and select a panel based on the political nature of the case. This was very bad on his part. But, well, the jury is out there,” Walubiri said.
On his part, Justice Kenneth Kakuru, who formerly litigated in the court and is a justice in the court, told The Observer he cannot agree more on poor management of the court.
“I do not think that backlog could have been an issue if there was good management. For instance, we have been here since 2013 but some of these cases are not fixed. Why? I think it is poor administration,” Kakuru said.
Justice Kakuru argues that if the panel of Seven Justices managed to dispose of many cases, how could a panel of 14 fail?
“From the 14, you can get five justices to sit as permanent members of the Constitutional court, three to listen to appeals, three to listen to civil appeals and the other three can be for reserve. I personally do not have too many matters pending before me yet the court has backlog. I cannot allocate these cases to myself,” he said.
But, Kakuru also adds that in addition to the poor administration, the court is poorly funded, something that can be traced from the time of its formation.
“When there were proposals to establish this court, the donors were opposed to it on grounds that it is going to constrain the national resource envelope. In their view, they thought that so long as you have the High court and Supreme court, they would deal with matters.
As a compromise position, when the court of appeal was being established, it was resolved that it should also act as the court of appeal. Ideally, this made economic sense, but practically it does not because the constitutional court does not get enough resources. Its budget is for instance, less than that of a division of the High court; the divisions are funded by donors. This court is not funded,” Kakuru said.
On his part, Ladislaus Rwakafuuzi, a human rights lawyer and litigator in the court, told The Observer that the sole cause of backlog and inefficiency of the court is the appointing authority.
“The person who appoints the judges is responsible for creating this situation. He deliberately refused to appoint justices until he landed on his trusted cadres. That is how we got these bad managers in the court.
I think that the previous people had some sense of justice which is not the case with the current people. Maybe if the new DCJ changes things,” Rwakafuuzi said.
This article is a product of The Watchdog and was produced with support from the African Centre for Media Excellence (ACME).
In Uganda, the Chief Justice regrets the stupid court order that his deputy served out to Parliament to stop Parliament to work:
SUNDAY JANUARY 22 2017
The Chief Justice begs to be understood that however erroneous the orders of Justice Kavuma were, it should not be interpreted that the whole NRM Judiciary is corrupt.
By ANTHONY WESAKA
UGANDA, KAMPALA- Chief Justice Bart Katureebe has hit back at Parliament Speaker Rebecca Kadaga, rejecting her assertions that some civil servants are conniving with the Judiciary, which he heads, to gag the oversight role of Parliament.
In a letter dated January 13 to The Speaker of the Uganda NRM Parliament, M/s Kadaga, the Chief Justice laments that, however, erroneous the orders of his deputy, Justice Steven Kavuma were, it should not have been interpreted as if the Judiciary connived with some wrong elements to gag the oversight role of Parliament, that Ms Kadaga heads.
“It’s important to appreciate that individual judicial officers, or a panel of judges may make decisions that may aggrieve a party. The constitutional way to proceed is to appeal such decisions to a higher court for review,” Justice Katureebe counseled in his letter copied to President Museveni.
Other senior government officials copied-in include Premier Ruhakana Rugunda, Attorney General William Byaruhanga, EC chairperson Justice Simon Byabakama and the head of Public Service, Mr John Mitala.
“Surely, a decision, however erroneous, made by one judge or a court cannot be taken as a conspiracy by the Judiciary to gag Parliament...” he added.
Ms Kadaga had dubbed as “stupid order” an injunction issued by Katureebe’s deputy Kavuma that sought to stop Parliament from inquiring into the Shs6b oil cash bonuses given to 42 government NRM orientated officials.
Ms Kadaga then followed this up with a letter to President Museveni protesting what she termed suffocation of the work of the NRM majority controlled Parliament by some elements in the civil service. Core to Ms Kadaga’s letter was that the conduct of some civil servants and deputy Chief Justice Kavuma was intended to erode the doctrine of separation of powers with the Judiciary in connivance with some elements in the civil service to gag Parliament.
Justice Katureebe assures Ms Kadaga in the letter that the NRM elected Judiciary, which he leads, will never connive to gag the NRM majority-controlled Parliament of Uganda.
He adds that any misbehaving officer must be investigated and handled according to the law.
“I want to assure you that the Judiciary will never connive with or gag Parliament. In the same vein, I must emphasise the need for mutual respect between the various arms of government...” Justice Katureebe writes in his letter to Ms Kadaga.
“A wrong decision must be appealed and any officer who acts contrary to the law must be investigated and dealt with by the relevant authorities. The public expects us to be civil and respectful to each other and solve problems in accordance with the established procedure,” he added.
The issuance of the interim orders by Justice Kavuma on January 9, came a day before Parliament was scheduled to commence inquiry into the said oil money bonuses. The controversy climaxed on Tuesday, January 10, when in a heated parliamentary sitting, Speaker Kadaga threw out Justice Kavuma’s orders that she referred to as “stupid orders.”
Ms Kadaga said the orders were intended to gag Parliament from performing its oversight role and that the same could not be acceptable. A visibly angry Kadaga backed by MPs from across the political divide, ordered deputy Attorney General Mwesigwa Rukutana, to go back to Justice Kavuma’s court and have the “stupid orders” vacated.
Ms Kadaga then suspended parliamentary business indefinitely until such a time when the “stupid orders” of Justice Kavuma had been vacated. But following pressure created by the so-called “stupid orders” that brought the two arms of government, Parliament and Judiciary on a collision path, Mr Eric Sabiiti then voluntarily withdrew his petition on Friday last week, a move that has seen Parliament resume business. Mr Sabiiti has since been asked by EC top management to show cause why he involved himself in instituting a petition aimed at stopping Parliament from inquiring into the Shillings 6b oil cash bonuses without clearance from his superiors as the law demands.
awesaka@ug.nationmedia.com
Nb
The political divide in the Parliament of Uganda has only about 50 Members of Parliament that oppose government out of over 400 Members occupying Parliament. However these MPs are well paid so that they can depict a universal democratic image to this political legislature.
A Chief Judge in Uganda, of the NRM appointment, Judge Katureebe warns the government of Uganda, over the constant arrests of Opposition leaders:
Written by Sulaiman Kakaire
Created: 24 June 2016
The Ugandan NRM Chief Judge who has written to judges and other judicial officers admonishing them to follow the law of the NRM constitution.
In response to Dr Kizza Besigye’s May 30 letter, which in effect, questioned the neutrality of judicial officers, Chief Justice Bart Katureebe has told government that the judiciary will only be guided by law in handling cases involving the former presidential candidate.
In the letter addressed to Francis Gimara, the president of the Uganda Law Society, Katureebe said every person arrested for any offence must be treated in accordance with the constitution and established procedures.
“The right to a fair trial must not be compromised in anyway,” Katureebe said in response to Gimara, who had written to him seeking to know how the chief justice had responded to Dr Besigye’s concerns about the administration of justice in the country.
Kizza Besigye surrounded by Prisons guards arrives at Nakawa Chief Magistrates court not again!
On June 21, Gimara wrote to Katureebe requesting to know how the CJ had addressed issues raised by Besigye, particularly those concerning the administration of justice. “His [Besigye] letter raises several matters some of which are beyond the mandate of the judiciary. We, however, are concerned about several matters he has raised that touch on the administration of justice,” the letter partly reads.
In response, Katureebe reveals that he has already spoken with some members of the executive; “to whom I have made it clear that the judiciary will only be guided by law in handling any case before it.”
BESIGYE LETTER
On May 30, 2016, Besigye wrote to Katureebe seeking for the latter’s intervention to ensure that his rights are not trampled on. Besigye claims that from 2011 to 2016, he became “the subject of regular harassment, accosting, intimidation and multiple arrests.”
Besigye said that as a result, he has “seen the inside of police cells in various parts of the country although my most regular visits have been to Naggalama police station.”
Besigye said that in the majority of cases where he has attempted to travel to the centre of Kampala city to conduct his personal business, seek medical care or engage in social activities such as weddings, church services or public sporting events, or attend political meetings of the Forum for Democratic Change, he has been a victim of violent arrests.
“Sometimes, I am returned to my home in Kasangati. Frequently I am first detained at Naggalama for hours and then dumped at my home between 11pm and midnight,” he noted.
Besigye added that when the police found this strategy ineffective, they resorted to confining him at his home in Kasangati “with no access to the outside world, either through human contact or through other communication methods.”
After his most recent incarceration at home, which lasted more than 30 days, Besigye said he sought the intervention of the Chief magistrate’s court at Kasangati in an application seeking to secure his release.
“The application was argued in April 2016 and adjourned for a ruling to be delivered the following day. In a surprising turn of events, the file was recalled to the High court the same afternoon it had been argued, allegedly for revision. The revision was allegedly requested for by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) who was not even a party to the application,” Besigye explained.
Kizza Besigye in the dock at Nakawa court
According to the four-time presidential candidate, those events and others such as Justice Steven Kavuma’s ex-parte ruling banning the FDC’s defiance campaign, bring into question the neutrality of the judiciary.
“The independence of the judiciary is increasingly being questioned and as the head of this arm of government, it is incumbent on you to come out boldly and clearly and act to ensure proper administration of justice. As my experiences illustrate, justice is being administered at the whims of the judicial officers to whom the cases are allocated or through interference and undue influence practiced on those individual judicial officers,” the letter reads further.
Besigye, who is currently committed to Luzira prison on treason charges, said he has not been taken to court but has since been advised that “the court was being moved to hear my case at Luzira prison ostensibly because of security issues.”
He said the pattern of events is what compelled him to seek the direct intervention of the chief justice.
DETAILED RESPONSE
In his response, Katureebe said he had no information about the arrest of Dr Besigye or his subsequent appearance in a court in the north-eastern district of Moroto at night. However, Katureebe said that the actions of the magistrate were justified.
“I understand the magistrate was informed that Dr Besigye was being brought to his court that day. Given the constitutional provision that a person arrested for an offence must be produced in court within 48 hours, the magistrate decided to stay at the court longer until Dr Besigye was produced.
“In the circumstances, I believe the magistrate did the right thing. Had he closed court and left at 5pm, he would have denied Dr Besigye the opportunity to appear before a court of law.”
As regards the transfer of Besigye’s trial from Nakawa Chief magistrate’s court to Luzira, Katureebe says when he was informed about it through Dr Besigye’s letter, he immediately discussed the matter with the principal judge and later issued written instructions “that he [Principal judge] brings to the attention of all judicial officers the provisions of Article 28 of the constitution particularly that the accused must be produced before a proper court established by law and is entitled to a public hearing...I also enclosed to him a copy of Dr Besigye’s complaint to me.”
Katureebe further said he had written to the deputy chief Justice, Steven Kavuma, about Besigye’s complaints.
“My emphasis to all has been that courts must adjudicate on these matters in full compliance with law and known established procedures so that justice is not only done but is seen to be done, and that the right to fair trial is non-derogable,” he said.
Katureebe also said that on June 8, he received a request from the DPP for him to invoke his powers under section 7 of the Magistrates’ Court Act and transfer criminal case No. CRB 332/2016, Uganda Vs Dr Kizza Besigye “from the LDC court, where it should have been lodged, to Kasangati court where apparently it was being prosecuted.
He said he declined to grant the request because he was not convinced; “that the interest of justice envisaged in that section would be realised. My advice was that an accused person must first and foremost be produced in the court within the jurisdiction.”
In the letter, Katureebe also admits to have written to Dr Besigye on June 17, as regards the latter’s letter, and in the said response he assured Besigye that the judiciary would ensure that his trial takes place in an open court established by law and in accordance with the law.
Speaking to The Observer yesterday, Gimara said he received the letter and he welcomed the response from the CJ. “I stand with the CJ on all the steps taken. We shall continue to raise the flag whenever required,” he said.
Nb
Typical of Chief Judges of Uganda. One in history happens to be Chief Judge Ben Kiwanuka. He was released from Luzira Prison. He was made Chief Judge by the regime of Idi Amin. A few months later, he was pulled out of the Kampala Court Chambers and instantly killed.
They never seem to know any thing of what is happening outside of their legal chambers.
In Uganda, a City lawyer petitions court over parading suspects. A practice commonly done by the Police of Uganda: Publish Date:3 April 2016
Mukyala Nyanzi nabakyala ba bulijjo aba Uganda, nga benyola ne Para-military police ya Uganda.
By Michael Odeng & Farooq Kasule
A city lawyer has petitioned the Constitutional Court challenging the Police practice of parading suspects in public before being arraigned in court.
Luyimbazi Nalukoola of M/S Mayanja, Nakibuule and Company Advocates filed the petition against the Attorney General (AG), arguing that parading suspects before journalists was inconsistent with Article 28 of the Constitution and violates the presumption of innocence.
“The tradition of the Uganda Police Force whereby suspected armed robbers, kidnappers and other alleged criminals are paraded in public or before the press prior to charging them in court is against the Constitution,” he contends.
Nalukoola also contends that no amount of crime, including terrorism, warrants police to parade suspects before the media since Article 28 of the Constitution presumes every man innocent till proven guilty or they plead so.
“In spite of presumption of innocence, which protects suspects by virtue of Article 28 of the Constitution and Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and People's Rights Act the law enforcement agencies in Uganda have continued to expose suspects to media trial before arraigning them in court,” Nalukoola said.
He avers that after arresting the suspects, the officers in charge call press conferences during which they inform journalists how they caught/arrested the suspects and pass verdicts against them.
He further contends that journalists who honor an invitation by police to cover a public parade of suspected criminal are just as complicit as the police in perpetrating "overzealous, irresponsible and illegal parade of suspects.”
Nalukoola affirms that such practices have denied suspects a right to fair hearing and infringes on their dignity. He added that public parade of suspects is an inhuman act meant to oppress the people.
Nalukoola avers that that by parading suspects before the media, the Police spoil the fundamental ingredients of suspect identification by the witness in the trial.
“Parading suspects before journalists and other members of the public affects the procedure of identifying suspects by the victims,” he added.
He also contends that the practice of forcing suspects to remove their shirts, belts, shoes is inhuman, degrading and in contraventions of provisions of Article 24 of the constitution.
Nalukoola is therefore seeking court declaration that the practices/ acts are in contravention of Article 28 of the constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 (as amended).
Principal judge blames govt in Lukwago case.
Kampala under Military Police rule
Of recent in the city of Kampala, Uganda, 04/04/2014.
Principal Judge Yorokamu Bamwine has said the bad blood between the Executive and the Judiciary stemming from orders on Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago smacks of insanity, tainting the credibility of courts.
Justice Bamwine’s concern stems from the order that had reinstated Mr Lukwago as Lord Mayor before an injunction issued by Justice Steven Kavuma of the Court of Appeal stayed execution of the order.
Last week Justice Lydia Mugambe had ruled that the continued ouster of Mr Lukwago from his office by KCCA and Kampala Minister, Mr Frank Tumwebaze was illegal.
The ruling effectively reinstated Mr Lukwago; however, he was on Monday thrown out three hours after he had returned to office, following government’s appeal against Justice Mugambe’s order.
“I am disturbed by the on-going disputes between two arms of government - the Executive and the Judiciary. The Executive calls the Judiciary names and the Judiciary responds likewise with equal force. Where is the sanity here?” asked Justice Bamwine in a statement to the Daily Monitor.
“The High Court makes orders; they are either rubbished by the Executive or reversed immediately. Ironically, we are witnessing this at a time when the Judiciary is all out to enhance public confidence in the institution,” he added.
The Principal Judge who heads the High Court said as the war of words escalates, peace eludes the city, the image of the Judiciary gets dented, the Executive is seen as acting high handed and the judicial system is viewed as decadent.
However, while responding to Justice Bamwine’s concerns, the Minister for Kampala and Presidency Frank Tumwebaze said Lukwago was not fighting the Executive but councillors who impeached him.
“We, however, welcome any meaningful mediation as offered by Justice Bamwine to solve the current impasse,” said Mr Tumwebaze.
In his statement, Justice Bamwine made an appeal that would allow him mediate between the two parties and have a solution to the impasse that has characterised KCCA since the election of Mr Lukwago.
In November, KCCA councillors convened a meeting chaired by Mr Tumwebaze that voted to impeach Mr Lukwago, following Justice Catherine Bumugemereira’s report that convicted the Lord Mayor of incompetency and abuse of office.
According to Justice Bamwine, the government and the Lukwago group should seek an amicable resolution and chart a way forward.
He says the saga is tarnishing the credibility of government and the Judiciary.
Police may change name, drop AK 47s military weapons.
FRIDAY, 11 APRIL 2014
A report recommends dropping of the AK 47 guns and rebranding.
In a bid to improve an increasingly-tattered image, the police is considering changing its name and standard weapon, The Observer has learnt.
According to a draft report, Uganda Police Force (UPF) may become Uganda Police Service, largely “to signal a very public commitment to a ‘community’-oriented policing philosophy [and a] culture of service to the people.”
The Uganda Police Review report was written by the Police Review Steering Committee, appointed by Gen Kale Kayihura in 2006. Headed by Assistant Inspector General of Police Julius Shariita, the committee was tasked to suggest ways of turning the force around.
Opposition politicians and pro-democracy activists have often accused the police force of being a very militaristic, partisan arm of the ruling National Resistance Movement. In the report, Shariita notes that the introduction of multiparty politics has negatively affected the image of the force.
“Therefore, police needed to undertake a review in order to rebrand, refocus, and bolster its image as a modern, professional, and educated force that can deal with all issues it faces in a community-focused manner,” Shariita wrote.
Besides the name change, the report proposes that the police drops the long-barrelled AK-47 guns for appropriate police side arms.
“This is critical to the success of any transition to a community policing orientation. This must be seen as one of the key obstacles to achieving success, and one of the key indicators of commitment to change,” the report notes.
The review found that the police was doing poorly on human rights. Suspects were being detained beyond 48 hours, tortured in some instances, detained in inadequate facilities, and were denied justice because of delays in investigation and prosecution. Children were also being detained with adults.
It’s recommended that police conducts a human rights audit and develops a human rights action plan to ensure police officers respect people’s rights.
This website uses cookies to improve functionality. By using this site, you accept the use of cookies on your device. About cookies.
Kizza Besigye surrounded by Prisons guards arrives at Nakawa Chief Magistrates court not again!
Kizza Besigye in the dock at Nakawa court
