More needs to be explained about law and justice in Uganda

A lay person who has worked for a long time in the Judiciary and knows that every single judge or judicial officer appointed gets his own or her own instrument of appointment, asked why in the case of the incumbent Chief Justice and Deputy Chief Justice they were issued one appointment instrument where they were jointly named to hold the above respective offices.

She further wondered why in their appointment letter, the appointment recited “in consultation with the Judicial Service Commission” instead of the usual citation of “on the advice of the Judicial Service Commission”.

The answer came from members of the Judicial Service Commission who knew the political background and reasons for the joint appointment of Chief Justice Bart Katureebe and Deputy Chief Justice Steven Kavuma. In Golf jargon, the instrument would be described as a head up.

There have been other head ups since the NRM acquired the instruments of power and government in 1986. I alluded to several of them in an earlier article published.

Analysis of other events and decisions whether legislated for, implemented and enforced reveal serious breaches of the Constitution and laws of Uganda, but the elite and persons deriving maximum benefits or who fear the regime comply with the illegalities they know are wrong or simply fear to discuss or challenge them.

In consequence suspects, culprits, convicts and beneficiaries of wrong doing in Uganda are the ones qualified, or preferable to be appointed or retained in positions or responsibilities in government and public services.

In the Judiciary, cases with unimpeachable documentary evidence and credible witnesses are lost by innocent litigants for political or monetary reasons, far removed from the four corners of law and justice.

Some cases are immediately heard and their judgments or rulings given and published in preference to those filed earlier by what are perceived to be critics or enemies of the NRM or its leadership.

Prior to the February general election, the President, who is the NRM party national chairman, promised to create new districts in counties and sub-counties which are economically poor in exchange for votes.

Electorates voted in favour of the NRM because of those promises, but the districts created from political expedience have not functioned well or established good services to endure or become viable.

Where the elections resulted in favour of Opposition parties, the NRM has tended to deny aid to them or as in the case of Kampala to take them over and rule them against the accusations by NRM critics and Opposition that to do so would be a violation of the Constitution and the current laws of local government.

Opposition to these head ups has been quiet, muffled or silenced by fear. The NGOs, which usually shout when government fails, have vocally and by publications, raised demand for explanations without angering the government.

There is a vast difference between what NGOs accurately see and write about and the manner they campaign or plan for execution of their proposals. It is thus that government is requested to provide the answers and explanations.

The February elections were observed by leaders of the Commonwealth, USA, and the European Union.

Following their collective findings, most of them said there should be a dialogue between President Museveni and leaders of the Opposition, one of the observers, General Olusegun Obasanjo, wrote a letter published by the media worldwide that those results did not reflect the will of the people of Uganda. All this needs to be explained.

Prof Kanyeihamba is a retired Supreme Court judge. [email protected]