Marriage Bill: Avoid blasphemy

Parliament is still in recess, consulting voters on the relevance of the Marriage and Divorce Bill, 2009, but a lot is happening behind the scenes. First, this week we read in the press that Shs5 million was exchanging hands in the corridors of Parliament. We also read that the lawmakers who pocketed the infamous “Shs20m bribe” in the 8th Parliament have vowed not to accept the money in public interest.

One of the concerned citizens, an ardent reader of this column, in a complimentary email this week described the precarious situation in our Parliament as a “national disaster”. He wrote: “My goodness, for how long shall we ‘facilitate’ these ‘honourable’ members who are already getting fat salaries? It’s a shame that some of our representatives are terribly broke and have turned into beggars. They want the President to bail them out but how about an ordinary person like me who has nobody to bail me out? Am I less Ugandan? Where shall we end?”

There is also the theatrical story of the outspoken legislators whom the ruling party leaders accuse of criticising government failures in public and acting like opposition politicians on a mission. In fact, when you read the charges against these outspoken lawmakers, you will certainly know the extent to which the NRM party is determined to weaken the institution of Parliament under the guise of enforcing the disputed party code of conduct.

Without prejudice to the court proceedings, I will only mention here, that the outspoken lawmakers want the Civil Division of the High Court to decide on whether an MP should execute his or her mandate according to the 1995 Constitution or according to the whims of party leadership. It’s also aberrant for anybody to charge legislators for what they say within the precincts of Parliament.
This offends the Constitution and the Parliamentary Powers and Privileges’ Act. Well, these matters will be for another day.

Back to our main topic: The Marriage and Divorce Bill, 2009. Lwemiyaga County in Ssembabule District was a scene of violence during consultations on the Bill. The residents in this constituency confronted their MP and accused him of forsaking “serious” issues affecting them and wasting time discussing an “impractical” piece of legislation. This is the general feeling in the country. The popular view is that the Bill should be withdrawn.

In the midst of the unfolding drama, it was the Ethics Minister, Fr. Simon Lokodo, who last week candidly stated that by [focusing] on the marriage Bill, the legislature is wasting time and taxpayers money. Then, General Duties Minister Tarsis Kabwegyere also joined the fray, reiterating that there is no way a woman can prove before courts of law that she has been raped by her husband before concluding that the Bill, if passed into law, will face serious implementation challenges.

Interestingly, a senior official close to Deputy Attorney General Fred Ruhindi, the architect of this controversial Bill, told me last week that, privately, the minister has “serious issues” against this Bill. In all this drama, the latest indication that this Bill lacks popular support came from the President himself. In the undated 21-page paper, he rejected the provisions on property sharing after divorce and blasted middle class women whom he said have commercialised the noble institution of marriage.

Vow by the electorate
In Kole District, I am told residents have vowed not to vote for any legislator, who supports the Bill come 2016. They have made it clear that they don’t want the Bill and that there are other urgent problems affecting the country. In Luweero, some people who were trying to support the Bill, most residents called “disruptive” and “unnecessary” were publicly assaulted. And from the Greater north, east, west and central, the people have asked their MPs to give this Bill a “decent political burial” when they return to Parliament on Tuesday.

In trying to understand why the Church has rejected this Bill, I decided to engage a Christian friend in a candid discussion on the proposed law. From our discussion, it became obvious that in the Bible (Matthew 19:6) what God has joined together, man cannot put asunder. That when we marry we join together for life. That this is God’s law. That whenever we seek to separate or divorce what God coupled together, we are in effect, rebelling against God’s law. And therefore, whoever drafts a law under the guise of women deliverance misses the point and most importantly, the title of the Bill itself offends God.

Honourable ladies and gentlemen, the divorce you seek to provide for in the proposed Marriage and Divorce Bill destroys the whole purpose of the institution of marriage that is significant to God. Besides, when we divorce someone with whom we made a covenant, it makes a mockery of the God-created concept of marriage and puts the children lives in a precarious situation.

Going forward, my suggestion is that the politicians in the House must uphold the marriage canons that hold the families and the Church intact; listen to the people who want the Bill rejected in God’s name and accept that the proposed law in its current form has no place in Uganda.

[email protected]