Ruhindi to MPs: I did not do anything extraordinary

Abdu Katuntu [committee chairman]: Many ministries and agencies require money and that money may not be considered or appropriated until this process is finished. So can you please take this process very seriously.
Try to give the clarifications as precise and honest and we move on such that we are able to produce our report within the 60 days which we were given and then government functions normally. For purposes of the record, yesterday I received a request which I did not discuss and which I will not discuss.
But I used my discretion as chair to give the learned Attorney General Peter Nyombi a break. We might be able to see him later. But he will not be around for this meeting. At an appropriate time, we will interact with him. He was not feeling well. But we will leave it that.
Let us update ourselves. Solicitor General, you were supposed to forward us documents. May I be updated whether you did?
Atoke: Yesterday, you directed that we submit the contract with external counsel by 5pm. We were unable to submit by 5pm. By the time we called the clerk, he had already left and we told him we would submit first thing in the morning, which we did.
Katuntu: Because I left office at 7:30pm and it had not been brought to my attention. Clerk, can you confirm for purposes of the record. And I hope it was sent by copy of letter.
John Bosco Kagoro (clerk): It was delivered this morning and it is by copy of letter as you directed.
Katuntu: We shall have that contract and we will have time to dig into it. We hope this should be our last meeting and I really hope that it does. If it doesn’t, then it will spill over into another day. We are going to meet from Monday to Friday.
The issue about constituency [travels] should not arise. And if it’s necessary, the last two weeks we may meet even on Saturdays. Members, those who had clarifications they were seeking can we start from there?
Abraham Byandala [Katikamu North MP]: They had promised to avail us with a list of people who travelled with the MPs.
Katuntu: Can we have that list, Mr SG?
Atoke: I have the list here. I can submit lists of names for the meeting that was held on August 22 to 31, 2012, in London. The list comprises of the team from government, it includes Peter Nyombi, Attorney General, Harriet Lwabi [director, First Parliamentary Counsel], Robinah Rwakoojo [acting director, civil litigation], Elizabeth Nakungu [commissioner], Mary Nankabirwa [principal state attorney], George Kalwemera [state attorney], Harriet Tukamushaba [state attorney], Martin Mwabutysa [state attorney], Doris Akol [commissioner, legal services and board affairs, URA], Honey Malinga [assistant commissioner, Energy ministry], Ali Ssekatawa [assistant commissioner, URA], Robinah Nakakawa [manager, URA], Sam Kayima [acting manager, URA] and Alex Nyombi. MPs were Steven Tashobya, Bakka Mugabi, Florence Namayanja, Gerald Karuhanga and Bernard Atiku.
Katuntu: Do you have minutes of those meetings?
Atoke: The minutes are there.
Katuntu: You know we did ask to have all the minutes of all meetings touching the subject matter that we are investigating.
Atoke: We do not have the minutes right here, we just came with the lists.
Katuntu: When will you provide them?
Atoke: I seek your indulgence that we provide them on Friday if it’s okay with the committee.
Katuntu: No problem. We even requested you to provide the accountabilities of the supplementary requests and the budgets. We gave you up to Tuesday. Bring these minutes together with the others. This could be the last meeting but we may have an exit meeting in case we may need clarifications from the meetings and documents you are submitting on Tuesday. Can we start off?
Atoke: I have the second list of meetings between 16 and 27 October, 2011. [Reads names of officials who attended]
Jack Odur [Kibanda South MP]: I want to know whether we have any document which we are discussing; the judgment or arbitration? Do we have any document to ascertain whether we won the case?
Katuntu: We had a conversation with URA regarding that particular issue and they had their own limitations waiting for the teams from the Attorney General’s Chambers. You have been indisposed for some time and I will need to update you. The question is pertinent. Mr SG, we need to look at that award by the tribunal, and can we get the formal award?
Address it to the Speaker, not the clerk and if you can forward it by 2pm. Address it to the Speaker and we shall use our internal mechanisms to get it because they were raising issues of confidentiality which we have to handle technically and we shall have our internal conversations on how to handle it. Can we have that award, ruling, judgment that you have?
Atoke: May I make a request?
Moses Kasibante [Rubaga North MP]: You had ordered for another set of minutes regarding the meeting that discussed the settlement deed. And I thought they had come with the minutes as well
Katuntu: The ruling we have just made is that all minutes of all meetings regarding this matter should be forwarded latest Tuesday.
Atoke: I was requesting that you allow me submit this tomorrow.
Byandala: I want to be helped to understand what they mean by not-for-disclosure. What is this?
Katuntu: I do not know until we look at that document and study it. But speaking generally about confidentiality, it is that you do not disclose to unauthorised parties.
I would like to be as lay as possible. The question we did ask the last time, officers of URA said this judgment was being relied on by many courts and tribunals all over the world. That it was the first of its kind; that it had never happened anywhere in the world. Courts in Nigeria, Afghanistan were relying on it.
And the question I was asking them was that if it is this confidential, how come courts and tribunals are relying on this document and it’s a precedent set. We will have to study it and make the necessary decision. That’s the extent I can go because I do not know what is in this document.
Byandala: Maybe they can tell us the authorised officer. Who are these authorised officers?
Atoke: The authorised parties are the parties to the arbitration. The whole process is done under a confidentiality clause that it involves only the parties that are involved in the matter.
Katuntu: The parties are Republic of Uganda and Heritage?
Atoke: Yes.
Katuntu: Okay, I have an idea. Uganda will discuss it. Mr Atoke get the ruling and judgment you got from the tribunal and forward it to the Speaker. Let me kick off this stage. If you look at our TOR 1, to investigate the claims that public officers solicited claims from the President contrary to standard practices of rewarding public officers, you and a team comprising government lawyers, would it be correct for public officers to solicit payment, bonus or honorarium? And I am not saying you solicited.
Atoke: Solicitation under the Anti-Corruption Act is a crime so it would not be correct.
Katuntu: Fred Ruhindi. Is it correct for a public officer to solicit?
Ruhindi: I associate myself with the submission made by the SG. It’s not proper under the law.
Katuntu: Do we have any officer who has a contrary opinion? [No officer responds]. Can the record, therefore, capture that the Attorney General is of the well-considered opinion that soliciting payments by public officers is not only unethical, but criminal.
Let’s go to the individuals. Our TOR 3 talks about the role of individuals. We start with the emeritus AG. Each member of the teams will explain his role.
Ruhindi: My view is that the necessary procedures and laws were followed. The citations made by the SG and teams, in my opinion, cover this matter. I would only need to put a rider. The rider is this; yes, the prerogative of the President to make a reward of this nature is well known in our laws.
Yesterday, you were saying that maybe this matter from the presidential budget and not beyond but the prerogative, he has in law. All we need to do and let us rise up to this challenge without prejudice to the power of the President to do so; we can still look at the possibility of improving this system. But the power exists, the mandate exists in law.
Katuntu: We are actually going to look at the interpretation of Article 98 and 99 because we tried to seek your opinion and it was not exhaustive enough. When you look at the powers under Article 98, he is chief executive and he is the fountain of honour.
By virtue of those two, can a head of state deal with resources as and when he feels like? Especially when there are no enabling provisions specifically for that? And especially when there are other rules providing for honouring public servants or private citizens of exceptional achievement.
There are other laws and the SG alluded to them. Those ones clearly provide procedure and so on. We are trying to import in those two articles. It is not explicit as you are saying. By virtue of powers the President has under Article 98 and 99, can he deal with public resources, especially when they have not been budgeted for? Because appropriation of public resources is a sole function of Parliament.
Maybe if Parliament has appropriated resources for the President’s donation, then he can use it because it has already been appropriated for that. But this particular one, does it fall under that? This money was never appropriated.
When you look at our TOR 2, it says investigate the basis on which the payments were made to the officials, including the full account of the role of each beneficiary played in the court cases. That’s the question we would like to answer and I would like to start with you Mr Ruhindi.
Ruhindi: You have listened to the submission of the SG as far as the origins of this matter are concerned. I became deputy AG in 2006. In 2011, this matter came up. I became Attorney General on March 1, 2015, as this matter was winding up in arbitration.
My role in this matter was in my capacity as deputy AG and as I said yesterday, the principal players have already been known to you, the leader of that team has already been known to you. It was my former colleague, the honourable Peter Nyombi.
When you are deputy, you are a deputy, you deputise as and when you are called upon. But when you are a deputy, you are a player in the team. Even when you are on reserve, you must be prepared because at any point, you can be called upon.
I played a big role, particularly whenever they would be in London, I would be in Uganda ensuring that they are well; I appeared before the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee seeking for their resources to support them in London.
The good thing with the AG’s chambers is that we work as a system. There are officers who generate memos, those memos go to HODs, and those HODs forward them to SG, SG to Deputy AG and then AG.
And at the end of the day, when need arises you give an opinion on the subject matter. I must say that understanding this case put me on good footing because immediately after conclusion of this matter, Tullow came in. Had I not been on all fours, it would have been problematic for me to lead the team on the Tullow issues and many others are still there.
Katuntu: We just want to answer this TOR 2, the role of each beneficiary because if we speak in general terms, then we will not capture the role. What was your role? We just want to get your role and record it. From there, we are going to determine whether it was proper for the President to exercise his powers, if I may agree with you for now, to award public servants for exceptional achievement. We want to know the role of each party because you did not get the same amount of money. You are a non-core and I find it strange for the whole AG to get a bronze handshake. Can you give us your answer explicitly?
Ruhindi: Explicitly, I cannot go beyond that. I was deputising the Attorney General. I cannot recall how many times officers approached me asking for legal opinion on the matter. I cannot recall. I have told you that this process of Heritage fed into Tullow and there is no way they could have handled Tullow without knowledge of this matter.
I have told you I appeared before the committee sourcing for supplementary requests. Whenever they would travel to London, I would be in office for policy issues either in Parliament or Cabinet. The Bill on petroleum, Oil and Gas, I was a very key player. To me, I can’t go beyond that. You have already spelt out my position as a non-core member. I got Shs72m.
Katuntu: May we know. Who determined that Hon Ruhindi is a non-core, that the AG or Deputy AG is non-core?
Ruhindi: I have no problem with it.
Katuntu: Nobody is asking whether you have a problem with it. The committee’s interest is who determined that you are actually non-core?
Christopher Gashirabake [director, legal advisory services, Justice ministry]: This issue of categorisation was alluded to yesterday. This was during the June 2, 2015, meeting in AG’s chambers. The meeting that I chaired.
Katuntu: You are the one who took the decision that the learned Attorney General is non-core?
Gashirabake: I did not take the decision as a person. We took the decision as a meeting.
Katuntu: Well, the decision which this committee will take will be taken as Katuntu’s decision. Was this Gashirabake’s decision? Is that the meeting you talked of that this particular item was not minuted?
Gashirabake: Yes, Mr chairman.
Katuntu: That is where the problem is. You were chair of the meeting, you did not take the decision and then there are no minutes. What was the basis of that decision?
The categorisation of officers into core, non-core and support staff was based on the following:
• The core team comprised of officers who handled the arbitration from inception to conclusion.
• The non-core team comprised of officers who tremendously contributed to the success of the case thorough provision of relevant information, policy guidance, availing historical chronology of the case and assistance in document production. The officers who conducted assessments and who participated in the amicable settlement meetings of Uganda.
• The support staff who were running up and down, photocopying and spending a lot of time with us.
Fred Tumuheirwe Turyamuhweza (Rujumbura County MP): I need clarification from Ruhindi. I would like to thank Ruhindi for heading a winning team that brought money to Uganda. But is there anything out of the ordinary that you did in this case that was outside your expected duties as AG?
Ruhindi: You heard the submission made. I did not lead the team to London. I was part of the team. And in being part of the team, I am happy because I supported a winning team. And even the President in making this reward, he was not rewarding individuals according to individual performances.
Katuntu: No, we will ask him that. Did you discuss it with him because it’s risky if we ask the President and he says a different thing.
Ruhindi: I would say yes because the reward was to the performance of a team that brought about the result.
Katuntu: We are looking at individuals. The TOR is to examine the role played by individuals. Can Turyamuhweza put the question in his own words?
Turyamuhweza: I am asking whether the AG thinks there is anything out of the ordinary that he did that was outside his expected duties.
Ruhindi: I do not want to mix up issues. But extra-ordinariness performance, I need to be corrected. It is what was achieved; my understanding of this matter is that really it is the performance that brought about a particular result.
Katuntu: Let us answer the question as it has been put. It is a clear question. We are going to ask your colleagues and we will not accept the answer that it was a team. We want the individual contribution to the team success.
Ruhindi: From my own point of view, when I was acting as AG, I do not know that there is anything extraordinary that I did that I would not do otherwise as deputy Attorney General. Except that I was part of the team which brought a result that was appreciated nationally and by the President. Thank you.
Kasibante [Rubaga North MP): You are a good factual witness. We have been getting witnesses who have been more specific. There are those who came and said they were busy photocopying. When you were submitting, I was noting down. I want you to confirm. Your first role was that you prepared yourself? Can you confirm that?
Ruhindi: Yes.
Kasibante: What specific preparations did you do?
Ruhindi: The matter of Heritage had specific issues that were being addressed in court. There is no way that you could be deputy AG and you are not abreast with the issues. Matters went to the Tax Appeals Tribunal; they went to the International Court Arbitration. All those processes involved so many issues.
There was the issue of jurisdiction, disadvantage that a particular clause in the PSAs was amended to the detriment of Heritage; there was an issue of delayed consent to transfer. There is no way you would be deputy AG and you sit and relax. You have got to study and be abreast with the issues. Because any minute, you would be a key player.
Kasibante: So you prepared yourself to defend Uganda.
Ruhindi: Of course.
Kasibante: You used to appear before the Legal Committee. That was the other role you played?
Ruhindi: They talked about how the non-core would make a contribution and one of the areas was policy. Yes, I used to appear before the committee not only on matters related to Heritage, but also about others.
Kasibante: Did you also say you would give the AG’s opinion to the team in London?
Ruhindi: The team had a leader. If that team leader asked me to give my view, I did many.
Kasibante: Did you appear in London.
Ruhindi: No. I never went to London.
Kasibante: You are confirming, therefore, that you did not play any extraordinary role as far as this case is concerned?
Ruhindi: As to myself, as deputy AG, no. The duties I performed are the duties I would ordinarily perform. But as to the achievement attained, it was extraordinary.
Francis Mwijukye [Buhweju County]: I am looking at Ruhindi’s letter to the President which was a letter of commendation and there is where he says that the “work required unprecedented sacrifice”.
And on the team of people who played “unprecedented sacrifice”, he is Number 1 on the letter. How do you feel whereas in your letter of commendation you were Number 1, you turned into non-core?
Ruhindi: When I was writing that letter, this work was as good as completed. The arbitral award was made in February 2015. I came in office as AG on March 1. When you are writing that letter, there is an element of protocol. There is no way I could write to the President and put myself last. I was the AG when I was writing that letter. I am comfortable with what was done and I believe the people who made this judgment were correct to put me as a non-core member.

Continues Monday (20th Feb) with Solicitor General Francis Atoke explaining what he did to merit reward of Shs200m.