For Gen Nyakairima, I fear the curse of blind optimism
Gen Aronda Nyakairima was on Thursday approved to head the Internal Affairs ministry. PHOTO BY FAISWAL KASIRYE
Last week, I advised members of the Appointments Committee of Parliament to forget the politics and defend the Constitution. I reminded them of Article 208(2) which says: “The Uganda Peoples Defence Forces shall be non-partisan, national in character, patriotic, professional, disciplined, productive and subordinate to civilian authority.”
This implies that there is need to divorce the army from politics and avoid the past mistakes of using the army to perpetuate in power an individual to whom it is beholden.
In light of this constitutional provision, my reading of the law is that for the Appointments Committee to approve Gen Aronda Nyakairima as minister of Internal Affairs without urging him to first resign from the army and Parliament, they have dragged our national army — the UPDF into what Democratic Party leader Norbert Mao once called the gutter “politics of kumanyoko”. This is not good for our country.
The absurdity in Gen Nyakairima disputed endorsement, plotted by the ruling party members, is yet another testament that highlights the sickness of an institution that had given Ugandans hope to dream.
Constitution abused
In the Gen Nyakairima saga, the unanswered question to the frivolous members of the Committee is: If the law has “many lacunas” as Speaker Rebecca Kadaga would want us to believe, then why did the same Committee compel Lt Gen Jeje Odongo to retire from the Army in 2009?
It is strange that even in the face of wise counsel from Uganda Law Society -warning that because a minister occupies a political office, it is practically unlikely that Gen Nyakairima would be non-partisan, the Committee went ahead and approved the former army boss. While the approval is at the discretion of Parliament, ULS president Ruth Sebatindira told the Committee that such considerations must be lawful and not political.
Gen Nyakairima is not supernatural and for that matter to conjure up impressions that as a minister, he will not sing the NRM’s hymn, is taking us for a ride. In reality, all through his tenure as a minister and at the same time a serving army officer, Gen Nyakairima is going to be trapped between a rock and a hard place. In our “politics of kumanyoko”, no minister can serve two masters.
Either he will hate the opposition and love the NRM government, or he will be devoted to the tenets of Article 208(2) and risk being called opposition sympathiser. It’s a difficult balancing act.
In the Appointments Committee, the politics of numbers often take precedence. However, on a matter that hammers the heart of the Constitution; one wonders whether it made sense for the 13 NRM MPs to represent 34 million Ugandans. This matter should have been referred to the House through an appeal from the President in accordance with Rule 160.
Under this window, where the President’s nominee is not approved by the Committee, the President may appeal to the House to take a decision on the matter. But they chose to ignore this for political expediency.
The voting
I am told when the issue of Gen Nyakairima was put to vote, 13 voted in favour, six against and one NRM MP (Stephen Kagwera) abstained because unlike others, his conscience reminded him to be mindful of the curse of blind optimism.
The disputed legal opinion from the learned Attorney General, Mr Peter Nyombi, which confused the Committee; is more reason for Ugandans to stand up to the creeping bully in Parliament.
Gen Nyakairima’s approval through a sham vote process in the Appointments Committee is the latest indication of the growing impunity in the House of chameleons. Here, we can only complain that the NRM members on the Appointments Committee no longer take counsel, that they have gone rogue.
While the Committee decision to seek help from the finest legal brains in the country looked like a honest decision, it turned out to be a desperate move to save face. Even so, they failed.
Some members of the Committee told me that after Betty Amongi (Oyam South, UPC) moved a harmless motion that they seek Constitutional Court interpretation before approving Gen Nyakairima, I am told Deputy Speaker Jacob Oulanyah rejected the proposal, saying: “In law, we have to first see Gen Nyakairima being partisan,” adding that “we must see him committing the crime.”
But Ms Kadaga reminded her deputy that there is something the lawyers call “case law” where one seeks court interpretation on a matter which is not explicitly clear to avoid different interpretations.
Others led by David Ochwa (Agule) and Rosemary Nyakikongoro (Sheema) shouted on top of their voices; “lets vote, let void” like a senseless hired mob. At this time, Nandala Mafabi, the Leader of Opposition, Sam Otada and Mathias Mpuuga tried to remind the NRM MPs about the promise they made to the nation - to defend and protect the Constitution - but in vain.
If the approval of a military man is not another dark chapter in our murky politics, then, it’s another nail in the casket.
***********************
Still in the House this week, in desperation to pick the pieces in what now appears like a stage-managed war against corruption; our MPs are turning into pranksters.
I appreciate the desire to follow the norm in developed countries where resignation is not often forced but rather a moral issue, however, when you investigate these things, you will realise that evidence is crucial.
The contestation on the floor was whether it wouldn’t be prudent for the government to remove the three permanent secretaries named in corruption scandals. Mr Pius Bigirimana (now Gender), Dr Asuman Lukwago (Health) and Dr Stephen Kagoda (Internal Affairs) were at the centre of the debate, with MPs demanding that the Secretary to the Treasury appoints new people who can be ‘trusted’ with public funds.
SG advice
However, the Acting Solicitor General, Mr Christopher Gashirabake, has advised that the cardinal rule of natural justice is that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. His explanation is that the presumption of innocence and the right to a defence are two important principles in the fight against corruption. In essence, you are innocent until proven guilty.
It is not clear how Parliament is going to proceed since the three have not been found guilty yet the allegations against them have not been substantiated.
The right thing to do in the circumstance is for Parliament to ask the Speaker’s office to ensure that Public Accounts Committee report on the financial scam in Prime Minister’s Office gets space on the Order Paper.
Parliament should also exert pressure on the government to appoint the Director of Public Prosecutions and the deputy to expedite investigations. This is the problem.
