Speaker follows rules in guiding the House

On 24 January 2023, the  Daily Monitor carried an article titled, “The Speaker’s Veto”, in which the writer questioned Speaker Anita Among’s decision to decline debate on the report on Uganda Airlines by the Committee on Public Accounts (Commissions, Statutory Authorities and State Enterprises).

The writer stated that during a plenary sitting on 17 January 2023, Speaker Among ruled against debate on the report on grounds that it was leaked.

The writer went ahead to state that the Speaker’s decision was unilateral and was not backed by any parliamentary Rules of Procedure, adding that the Speaker has no authority to “veto” reports on grounds that they have been leaked.

This is far from the truth. Parliament approved, in an omnibus manner, the Auditor General’s reports that were ready plus entities that were pending consideration by the accountability committees and this included the report on Uganda Airlines.

Omnibus approval of reports from accountability committees is a precedent that was set on 7 May 2021, when Hon. Nathan Nandala Mafabi presented a motion during plenary sitting, asking for an omnibus adoption of reports.

The Speaker’s decision on 17 January 2023 was therefore premised on the precedent set, taking into account Article 163 (5) of the Constitution.

It states, “Parliament shall, within six months after the submission of the report referred to in clause (4) of this article, debate and consider the report and take appropriate action.”

Even with the omnibus approval, the government still considers the issues raised by the Auditor General, who is an officer of Parliament, and Treasury Memoranda, detailing the action taken against culpable officials named in the reports, are presented to Parliament by the Executive.

It is also important to note that Rule 7 of the Rules of Procedure gives the presiding officer powers to form a precedent that guides the House during any sitting.

Furthermore, Rule 8(1) states that,  “In case of any doubt and for any question of procedure not provided in these Rules, the Speaker shall decide, having regard to the practices of the House, the Constitutional provisions and practices of other Commonwealth Parliaments in so far as they may be applicable to Uganda’s Parliament.”

Additionally, Rule 8(2) states that the Speaker’s ruling shall become part of the Rules of Procedure of Parliament until such a time when a substantive amendment to the Rules is made in respect to the ruling.

It is also important to note that Rule 216 (1) of the Rules of Procedure of Parliament prohibits the publication of Committee reports before they are laid on the Table.

It states,   “A Committee shall have power to authorise the Clerk to Parliament to supply a copy of its report to an officer of a Government department, to a witness who has given evidence to a Committee, or to its Sub-committee as the Committee considers appropriate, to lobby journalists and to other representatives as the Committee deems fit, after the report has been laid on the Table, but before then, a Member or any other person shall not publish such report.”

Whereas Rule 181 (5) of the Rules of Procedure mandates the chairperson of COSASE to present a report before the House for purposes of debate within six months of referral of the report of the Auditor General to the Committee, Rule 7 (5) gives the Speaker power to decline debate on any contribution.

The Speaker, therefore, acted under the Rules of Procedure and the precedent set by the previous parliaments to decline debate on the leaked report.

It is important to note that the Rules of Procedure create an avenue, under Rule 87(2), for Members to challenge the decisions of the Speaker through a substantive motion. However, such a challenge has not been lodged against the Speaker’s decision. This would imply that the House is unanimous in support of the decision taken by the Speaker.

Evelyn Angiji, is an Information Officer,Parliament of Uganda.