Court should rule on Public Order Act

This is why we implore the court that it should be now that the justices declare themselves on whether POMA is inconsistent with, or contravenes the 1995 Constitution and similar international legal instruments to which Uganda has signed up to. FILE PHOTO

What you need to know:

  • The issue: Police brutality
  • Our view: The court should declare whether the police, sister security agencies, and RDCs have such wide-ranging powers as they have wielded outside the stipulated basic “notification.”

The enforcement of Public Order Management Act (POMA), 2013, by the police has been cast in dark light again. The police and sister security agencies stand accused, by among others, human rights activists, of selectively and partially enforcing POMA to brutalise and frustrate Opposition political mobilisation.
In the last two weeks alone, the police have confronted, blocked, and brutalised Opposition FDC mobilisation drives in Kabale, Mbarara, Tororo, and in Jinja.

Resident district commissioners (RDCs), who are ruling NRM party functionaries, are also reported to have stormed radio stations in Kabala and Jinja towns and switched off air talk show involving Opposition politicians, all in the name of enforcing POMA.
On Monday, a section of Opposition MPs added their voice to question Inspector General of Police Martins Okoth-Ochola as to why the Force continues to brutally disrupt legitimate Opposition political rallies and meetings.

These are key and legitimate concerns and the trend should stop or be stopped.
But it is now five years since a case challenging the legality of the controversial POMA was lodged for determination by the Constitutional Court. Yet similar actions by the police were commonplace in the run-up to the 2016 General Election mobilisation and campaigns.

The same brutality by the police against Opposition activities and programmes, now coming just one year to another General Election in 2021, is worrisome.
This is why we implore the court that it should be now that the justices declare themselves on whether POMA is inconsistent with, or contravenes the 1995 Constitution and similar international legal instruments to which Uganda has signed up to.

The court should also declare whether the police, sister security agencies, and RDCs have such wide-ranging powers as they have wielded outside the stipulated basic “notification” and have now extended it to stopping public gatherings. Or even whether the police and related agencies have sweeping powers beyond providing advice on issues such as the venue, traffic and crowd control as provided for in POMA.
This declaration should be now, or else the inaction by the Judiciary on this key petition risks being interpreted as deliberate and meant to keep in force a contested law to favour the ruling party and disfavour the Opposition in their contest for State power.

In sum, the civil society petition on POMA is cardinal to levelling the political playground and balancing political contestations among political players both in government and the Opposition.
As is often said, justice delayed is justice denied.
Let the Constitutional Court declare its stance on POMA now.

Our commitment to you

We pledge:
• To be accurate and fair in all we do.
• To be respectful to all in our pursuit of the truth.
• To decline any compensation beyond that provided by Monitor Publications Ltd. for what we do in our news gathering and decision-making.
Further, we ask that we be informed whenever you feel that we have fallen short in our attempt to keep these commitments.