Contact Us

O

observer.ug

@observer Wed, 30 Oct 2024 12:10:57

10 witnesses, many doubts: Defense shakes prosecution in Katanga trial

The high-profile trial of Molly Katanga has unfolded with intense courtroom exchanges and startling revelations that call into question the credibility of prosecution witnesses and the handling of evidence. Before the trial broke off on October 18, defense attorneys had systematically challenged the testimony of each witness, exposing contradictions, procedural missteps, and investigative errors that could ultimately weaken the prosecution’s case. The defense’s strategy of probing these contradictions raises questions not only about individual witness reliability but also about investigative rigour and the handling of evidence in high-stakes trials. As the trial resumes on November 5, the defense appears poised to dismantle the foundations of the prosecution’s arguments WITNESS TESTIMONIES UNDER FIRE  The credibility of prosecution witnesses has been central to the defense’s strategy, with each cross-examination revealing inconsistencies that raise significant doubt. Notably, Naome Nyangweso, the ninth prosecution witness and stepsister of the deceased, Henry Katanga, faced rigorous questioning by defense attorney Jet Tumwebaze. Nyangweso’s testimony included claims that she had recorded her police statements in Runyankore due to her limited grasp of English, yet Tumwebaze argued that her statements were initially documented in English, a discrepancy that highlights potential translation issues. Tumwebaze pressed Nyangweso on her proficiency in English, suggesting that her choice of language in court was a tactic to delay cross-examination. In a pointed exchange, Tumwebaze questioned her capacity as the Local Council 1 chairperson, a role requiring written communication in English. “Is it fair to say that your use of Runyankore is to slow down the cross-examination?” Tumwebaze asked, challenging the witness’s integrity and implying calculated obstruction. Language barriers in courtrooms have often led to procedural delays, but the defense’s accusation here raises deeper questions about transparency and the fair administration of justice. DISCREPANCIES IN STATEMENTS AND SIGNATURES Further, Tumwebaze scrutinized the three police statements given by Nyangweso, all reportedly signed by her, yet each had different signatures. Tumwebaze questioned the authenticity of the signatures, casting doubt on whether all three statements were indeed her own. Additionally, he pointed out that the statements listed different names for Nyangweso’s father, inconsistencies that prompted the defense to suggest she may have provided false information under oath in previous legal proceedings. One of the most explosive moments came when Tumwebaze highlighted omissions in Nyangweso’s police statements concerning a claim made in her examination-in-chief: that Henry had warned her of an alleged threat to his life from his wife, Molly. Although Nyangweso testified in court that Henry confided his fears to her, this crucial piece of information was missing from all three of her recorded statements. “You didn’t mention that he said Molly Katanga wanted to kill him, as you testified earlier,” Tumwebaze remarked. The omission prompted the presiding judge, Justice Isaac Muwata, to intervene and seek clarification. However, Nyangweso deflected, responding that Henry had called Molly “very dangerous.” Her refusal to examine her previous statements to verify this discrepancy, further cast doubt on her reliability as a witness. FORENSIC EVIDENCE IN QUESTION The defense’s scrutiny extended beyond witness testimonies, delving into the forensic evidence presented by the prosecution. Police forensic expert Andrew Mubiru, who had examined the alleged murder weapon, was confronted with accusations of analyzing the wrong firearm. Defense attorney MacDosman Kabega argued that Mubiru’s analysis may have involved a pistol with a serial number unrelated to the case at hand. Despite Mubiru’s assertion that he analyzed only what was submitted to him, Kabega questioned the integrity of the evidence collection process, and highlighted inconsistencies in handling the exhibits, pointing to potential gaps in forensic protocols. Kabega also noted the outdated software used in the analysis, which he argued compromised the validity of the forensic findings. Additionally, he suggested that certain exhibits, such as blood samples allegedly found throughout the scene, were selectively omitted to construct a narrative against Ms. Katanga. By casting doubt on the thoroughness of forensic procedures, the defense has opened a debate on the reliability of the prosecution’s physical evidence, further weakening its case. OTHER WITNESSES FAIL TO CONNECT The prosecution’s witness lineup suffered further setbacks when additional testimonies failed to strengthen their case against Molly. Ronald Ruranga, a self-described lawyer, was revealed to lack a practising certificate, undermining his credibility. When questioned about his legal credentials, Ruranga was unable to produce documents confirming his status, leaving his testimony vulnerable to challenge. POLICE OFFICER CHANGES STATEMENT ON KEY DETAILS One of the central moments in court came with the testimony of Peter Ogwang, a police officer attached to Bugolobi police station, who was among the first on the scene of Katanga’s death. Ogwang’s initial statement, made two days after the incident, provided an account of his arrival at the scene and his interactions with individuals present. During this statement, he recalled being informed of a suspected suicide by shooting through a phone call from Dr Charles Otai, as well as observing evidence such as a pistol and blood in the room. However, during cross-examination, defense lawyer Kabega uncovered notable gaps in Ogwang’s original testimony. Although Owang had previously stated that Patricia, a witness at the scene, suggested reporting the incident as an accident, this crucial detail was absent from his initial statement. When pressed to explain the omission, Ogwang admitted he “might have forgotten” to include it, a response that raised questions about the thoroughness of his documentation. Kabega further noted that Ogwang’s statement neglected to mention the presence of Martha, another key individual, at the scene. These omissions, according to the defense, undermine the accuracy of Ogwang’s account and cast doubt on the reliability of critical information collected in the case’s early stages. The significance of these omissions extends beyond simple human error. Defense counsel argued that lapses like these could suggest procedural issues in documenting crime scenes, potentially affecting the integrity of evidence. Ogwang’s revised testimony invites concerns about whether investigative protocols were adequately followed, raising broader questions about the consistency and reliability of police procedures in such serious cases. FAMILY MEMBER’S TESTIMONY CONTRADICTED BY PHONE RECORDS Further complicating the prosecution’s case was the testimony of Timothy Nyangweso, a nephew of the deceased. Nyangweso, a presenter with the Uganda Broadcasting Corporation and a church minister, stated that he had contacted Martha, Katanga’s daughter, on November 2, 2023, and learned of her father’s death through this conversation. However, in an incisive cross-examination, Kabega introduced a call data list that showed no record of any such call on the date Nyangweso specified. This contradiction called into question the accuracy of Timothy Nyangweso’s account. The absence of a documented call implies either a lapse in memory or, as the defense suggested, a deliberate attempt to misrepresent facts. The discrepancy presents a significant challenge to the prosecution’s narrative, as it casts doubt on a family member’s reliability and the credibility of one of the few personal accounts connecting Martha to events following her father’s death. By challenging the authenticity of Nyangweso’s statements, the defense has raised concerns over the quality of the evidence upon which the prosecution’s case is built. CONFLICTING ACCOUNTS OF THE INCIDENT’S INITIAL REPORT The inconsistencies in witness testimonies continued with another layer of complexity, as ASP Samuel Musede, a police officer attached to Jinja Road police division, took the stand. Musede testified that he had been contacted by Patricia, a daughter of the deceased, who reported the death as a possible suicide. Musede’s account, however, conflicted with Ogwang’s earlier statement suggesting that Patricia wanted the incident documented as an accident, creating an ambiguity around the circumstances of Katanga’s death and how it was initially reported. This lack of alignment between police witnesses presents a challenge to the pros- ecution’s case. Defense counsel Kabega underscored that inconsistent statements, especially from law enforcement personnel, could indicate lapses in evidence gathering and documentation. Such discrepancies, Kabega argued, could weaken the prosecution’s case by introducing doubt about the reliability of information presented to the court, especially regarding the initial understanding of the incident as a suicide or accident. THE LARGER IMPLICATIONS The Katanga trial has brought into focus a range of judicial and procedural concerns, from translation and record-keeping accuracy to forensic standards. The defense’s ability to expose inconsistencies and potential investigative errors has raised broader questions about the standards applied in gathering evidence and presenting witness testimonies. Language issues, which surfaced repeatedly in Nyangweso’s cross-examination, underscore the importance of accurate translations in ensuring fair proceedings, especially in cases involving witnesses who may not be fluent in English. Additionally, the handling of forensic evidence in this case reveals systemic issues within Uganda’s investigative procedures. Defense arguments regarding outdated software, missing exhibits, and questionable evidence chain-of-custody practices highlight the need for more stringent forensic standards and transparency in handling evidence. The defense’s focus on these points not only benefits their client but also draws public attention to gaps in the judicial system that, if unaddressed, could compromise the integrity of future cases. As the Katanga trial continues, the presiding judge will need to consider these procedural irregularities and witness credibility issues. With the defense systematically chipping away at the prosecution’s case, the likelihood of a conviction appears increasingly uncertain. This trial has become more than a case of alleged murder; it is now a critical examination of Uganda’s judicial standards and the robustness of its investigative processes. The outcome of this case will likely influence public confidence in the legal system, as the public watches to see how the court addresses these challenges to witness credibility, evidence handling, and procedural transparency. {loadposition inarticle}

read more
O

observer.ug

@observer Wed, 30 Oct 2024 12:41:25

Ugandan police defy orders to avoid sanctions

Ugandan police officers are reportedly defying official directives largely to avoid sanctions from the USA and European countries, The Observer has learned. In September, the USA Department of State imposed sanctions on four Uganda Police Force (UPF) officers for their alleged involvement in serious human rights violations, including torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. These sanctions mark a significant move by the USA, targeting high-ranking UPF officers as part of an accountability initiative aimed at addressing abuses within Uganda’s security forces. The officers under sanction include figures alleged to have orchestrated or condoned actions that directly violate international human rights standards. This development places increased pressure on Uganda’s police force to review practices and oversight mechanisms, yet some officers appear resistant to internal directives designed to mitigate further international scrutiny. Among those designated are Bob Kagarura, former Wamala Regional Police Commander; Alex Mwine, former District Police Commander for Mityana; Elly Womanya, a former Senior Commissioner and Deputy Director of the UPF’s Criminal Investigations Division overseeing the Special Investigations Unit (SIU); and Hamdani Twesigye, then-Deputy Inspector of Police assigned to the SIU. According to US Department of State spokesperson Matthew Miller, these sanctions make Kagarura, Mwine, Womanya, Twesigye, and their immediate families ineligible for entry into the United States. Miller affirmed the credibility of allegations against these officers, which were corroborated by Ugandan civil court documents, civil society organisations, and independent journalists. “The United States, by publicly designating these individuals, reaffirms its commitment to upholding human rights for all Ugandans and ensuring accountability for human rights violations,” Miller stated. BACKGROUND OF THE SANCTIONS The sanctions stem from a high- profile case involving Mityana County MP Francis Zaake, whose arrest and alleged mistreatment drew national and international attention. Zaake was apprehended at his home in Mityana in 2020 for distributing food during the Covid-19 lockdown, allegedly in violation of ministry of Health standard operating procedures. Following his arrest, Zaake was held at Mityana police station before being transferred to the Police Special Investigations Directorate (SID) at Kireka, where he claims he experienced severe abuse. Zaake contends that during his detention, police officers conducted a search of his home without a warrant, and that he endured physical abuse, including beatings, pepper spray, and verbal harassment directed at his ethnicity and political affiliations. Additionally, he claims he was detained in ungazetted facilities. Although Nakawa Chief Magistrate’s court ordered his unconditional release on April 27, 2020, Zaake was instead released on police bond two days later. Zaake subsequently filed a lawsuit in 2020 against the attorney general and the officers allegedly involved in his mistreatment, including the recently sanctioned Kagarura, Mwine, Womanya and Twesigye. His complaint outlined that he was held incommunicado, subjected to torture, and detained without trial in multiple locations, including Mityana police station, Uganda Police Force’s Special Investigations Unit headquarters at Kireka, the Chieftaincy of Military Intelligence headquarters in Mbuya, and two hospitals. Most of these sites, he claimed, are not officially designated detention centres. In August 2021, High court judge Esta Nambayo ruled that the physical harm inflicted on Zaake during his detention constituted a violation of his fundamental rights to dignity and freedom from torture and awarded him Shs 75 million in compensation. BROADER IMPLICATIONS FOR UGANDA’S POLICE FORCE The USA sanctions represent a significant diplomatic move, signalling a growing international focus on human rights practices within Uganda’s law enforcement agencies. The sanctions not only restrict travel for the designated officers and their families but also serve as a statement on accountability in cases of human rights violations. The sanctions come amid broader concerns within Uganda about law enforcement practices, transparency, and the treatment of political dissidents and opposition figures. By sanctioning these officers, the United States and its allies underscore the potential for diplomatic repercussions when international human rights standards are not met. The move also aligns with global efforts to address human rights abuses and highlights ongoing challenges within Uganda’s judicial and law enforcement systems in upholding the rule of law and ensuring fair treatment for all citizens. The developments in the Zaake case, combined with the sanctions, may pressure Ugandan authorities to reassess police procedures, particularly regarding arrests, detention practices, and respect for citizens’ rights. As Uganda’s political and legal landscape evolves, the international community’s response to such cases will likely continue to shape dialogue around human rights and accountability in the country. IMPACT OF SANCTIONS ON UGANDA’S POLICE FORCE: INSIGHTS FROM THE FIELD Sanctions imposed by the United States and other countries on Ugandan police officers have stirred a mixed response within the ranks of law enforcement, according to officers interviewed for this report. While the sanctions have underscored accountability for human rights violations, they have also contributed to frustration, diminished morale, and fear among police personnel. One officer reflected on the dual impact of the sanctions. “I believe it has affected us both positively and negatively. The sanctioned commanders often express their frustration, blaming us for their blacklisting, even though we’re simply following orders. They claim these orders come from higher up,” the officer stated. This sentiment reflects a prevailing tension between field officers, who face frontline accountability, and their commanders, who direct operations but often do not defend their subordinates when situations escalate. The sanctions have also led to increased caution among officers, as they are reminded of the potential repercussions of their actions. “We were briefed about the recently sanctioned officers and reminded that our actions have consequences. Some leaders advise us to handle orders thoughtfully and avoid unnecessary confrontations,” the officer explained. However, another source noted that senior officers frequently attribute the sanctions to the actions of field officers, whom they accuse of responding too aggressively under pressure. “Our bosses often blame field officers, saying we act under stress and end up mistreating people. Since the USA. began imposing sanctions, there has been a noticeable decrease in human rights abuses during and after protests,” he observed. This awareness of potential repercussions has contributed to a shift in the way officers approach protest crackdowns. During a recent demonstration against the speaker of parliament and the East Africa crude oil pipeline, officers were instructed to handle the situation carefully to protect the reputation of the police force. According to an insider, “If you look closely, you’ll see there was no impunity or arrogance in the recent arrests. Officers have lost morale, and some even claim to be indisposed to avoid participation in actions that could lead to sanctions.” Low morale has become a recurring theme among officers, especially within the Field Force Unit (FFU). An officer described the situation as a no-win scenario: “They give us orders and direct us to execute them. But if we don’t succeed, we face charges; if we follow them too aggressively, we’re reprimanded. So, what do they expect us to do?” In an effort to address the mounting concerns among younger officers, the director of Counter-Terrorism recently held a career discussion, emphasising that accountability for human rights violations will continue, extending beyond those already sanctioned. “We are serving the Republic of Uganda, not just the current government,” he told the officers. “A time will come when the government will change, but young officers will still be here. Many senior officers are already in the ‘red zone’ with tarnished reputations. They have little chance of serving beyond this government.” The speech appeared to resonate deeply with the officers, who are increasingly aware of the long-term implications of their actions. “He told us the truth,” one officer recalled. “If something were to happen now and the government changes, those in power won’t be there to protect us. We, the younger officers, will still be here, expected to serve the nation. Many of our seniors are already sanctioned and may not have careers beyond this administration.” Another officer noted that the fear induced by USA sanctions has grown within the police force. However, due to the structured chain of command, declining deployment orders is rarely an option. “Like the military, police operate on orders; you can’t decline a deployment. When a commander orders you to take action, you follow through. Refusing isn’t an option,” he said, underscoring the rigidity of the police structure. These sanctions have cast a shadow over the force’s reputation, both internally and in the public eye. “The sanctions tarnish our image as an institution and in the eyes of the public. We are often perceived as rogue armed individuals who disregard human rights,” the officer added. For many low- ranking officers, the sanctions have complicated their roles, often making them bear the brunt of public criticism despite acting on orders. “It’s clear we are following directives, but we’re the ones who end up facing the consequences,” he said. As sanctions continue to shape the dynamics within Uganda’s police force, the effects are felt at every level—from senior commanders to frontline officers. The unfolding consequences of these international pressures are reshaping attitudes within the force, fostering greater caution, and challenging the balance between executing orders and respecting human rights. POLICE ADDRESS RECENT SANCTIONS AS LIST OF BLACKLISTED UGANDANS GROWS In response to recent USA sanctions imposed on Ugandan police officers, police spokesperson Rusoke Kituuma stated that the Ugandan police institution has Maj Gen Tumusiime Katsigazi opted not to formally respond, citing the absence of direct communication from the USA government. “When a foreign government has not communicated, and we can choose whether to respond or not,” Rusoke told The Observer, underscoring the institution’s stance of selective engagement with foreign sanctions. EXPANSION OF THE USA SANCTIONS LIST IN UGANDA The latest round of sanctions adds to an expanding roster of high-profile Ugandans who have been blacklisted by the United States over the years for alleged corruption, human rights abuses and other serious violations. In 2018, former Foreign Affairs minister Sam Kutesa, who served as president of the UN General Assembly from 2014 to 2015, was implicated in a bribery scandal involving Chinese national Patrick Ho of the China Energy Fund Committee (CEFC). Kutesa was accused of accepting a $500,000 bribe from Ho to secure “business advantages” for the Chinese energy corporation. Although Kutesa has denied any wrongdoing, his inclusion on the USA watchlist brought significant scrutiny to Uganda’s handling of high-level corruption. Former Inspector General of Police (IGP) General Kale Kayihura, a prominent figure in Uganda’s security sector, faced USA sanctions in 2019 for alleged involvement in corruption, human rights abuses, and bribery. The U.S. Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) accused Kayihura of leading a police force known for serious human rights abuses against Ugandan citizens. In a statement, Treasury under secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Sigal Mandelker stated, “We are targeting Uganda’s former police inspector general Kale Kayihura for using corruption and bribery to strengthen his political position, as units under his command committed serious human rights abuses.” The sanctions extended to Kayihura’s immediate family, affecting their access to USA assets and travel. In December 2021, Major General Abel Kandiho, former head of the Chieftaincy of Military Intelligence (CMI), was also sanctioned by OFAC. Kandiho was implicated alongside high-profile Iranian and Syrian officials in allegations of serious human rights abuses. According to the Treasury Department, Kandiho’s tenure at CMI was marked by repressive measures targeting civilians, political dissidents, and peaceful protesters. IMPLICATIONS FOR UGANDA’S INTERNATIONAL REPUTATION These sanctions reflect an intensifying focus by the United States on Uganda’s human rights record, corruption and governance issues. By targeting senior officials in the police, intelligence, and political sectors, the USA has signalled its intention to hold Ugandan leaders accountable for actions perceived as undermining human rights and democratic principles. As more Ugandans are added to international sanctions lists, the impact on Uganda’s international standing and diplomatic relations with Western nations may continue to grow. {loadposition inarticle}

read more
O

observer.ug

@observer Thu, 31 Oct 2024 10:04:51

Isaac Ssemakadde’s bold move is decolonizing Uganda Law Society

Every citizen has a duty to safeguard the Constitution, to defend its principles with unwavering resolve. This isn’t just a task for lawyers in courtrooms, arguing over interpretations. It is a responsibility that demands action, a fight for the very spirit of the law. For far too long, the Uganda Law Society, the bedrock of legal practice in our nation, had been held captive to a colonial legacy. The Attorney General and Solicitor General, by virtue of their positions, held an unyielding grip, their authority fueled by antiquated rules – relics of a bygone era. These rules, etched into sections 4(1) and 9 of the Uganda Law Society Act, were crafted by a British-dominated Legislative Council back in 1956. The urgency behind establishing a Bar Association during the 1953-1955 Kabaka crisis paints a clear picture. The British colonists, masters of political maneuvering, understood the power of law. They sought to control our own brilliant legal minds - Abu Kakyama Mayanja, Benedicto Kiwanuka, Andrew Fredrick Mpanga, Jehoash Mayanja-Nkangi, and many others – by ensuring their inclusion within the Law Society. The repugnant provisions of the Uganda Law Society Act were not authored by Ugandan lawyers. And even after independence in 1962, a strange silence fell over the legal profession. We seemed to accept this colonial inheritance, allowing the British-era rules to define our very existence. But then, on October 14, 2024, a hurricane swept through the legal landscape. Isaac Kimaze Ssemakadde, the newly elected president of the Uganda Law Society, took bold action. Through Executive Order RNB No 1/2024, he expelled the Attorney General and Solicitor General from the Law Society, initiating forensic investigations into their conduct. Ssemakadde, the lion-killer, embodies the will of the people, a resounding victory for those who believe in the true spirit of the Constitution. He has rekindled the flame of autonomy enshrined within the 1995 Constitution, a spirit that resonates deeply with the majority of legal professionals. BREAKING FREE: THE RIGHT TO ASSOCIATION The truth is, individual and collective rights are inherent. They are not gifts from the state, but fundamental rights that must be upheld by the government. Article 20 of the Constitution makes this clear. Yet, the ex-officio membership of the Attorney General and Solicitor General in the Law Society blatantly violates the right to freedom of association guaranteed by Article 29(1)(e) of the Constitution. This right is enshrined internationally, in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, and the International Bar Association’s Standards for the Independence of the Legal Profession. UN Special Rapporteur Maina Kiai, in his 2015 final report, underscored the right of association, condemning legislation that forces associations to bend to state ideologies. Article 40 of the Constitution safeguards workers’ freedom to associate, free of government interference, a principle enshrined in the landmark case of Sam Lyomoki vs Attorney General. The Attorney General and Solicitor General cannot claim ignorance of these legal precedents. Our post-colonial 1995 Constitution effectively banished state officials, including the Attorney General and Solicitor General, from all workers’ associations. This was a necessary step towards a truly independent legal profession. To put it simply, you wouldn’t let a fox lead a committee guarding a henhouse. NO COURT REQUIRED: THE POWER OF THE CONSTITUTION Did Ssemakadde need to seek court intervention to expel the Attorney General and Solicitor General? Absolutely not. His actions were grounded in the very foundation of our nation’s legal framework. Article 274 mandates that laws enacted before 1995 must be interpreted in alignment with the Constitution. The supremacy clause (Article 2) renders sections 4(1) and 9 of the 1956 Uganda Law Society Act, which directly contradict the constitutional right to freedom of association, void. No court order is needed for this interpretation. The Privy Council in 1961 provided a definitive understanding of the word “void.” As Lord Denning stated in Benjamin Leonard Macfoy vs United Africa Company Limited, “If an act is void, then it is in law a nullity. It is not only bad, but incurably bad. There is no need for an order of the court to set it aside.” In short, a void law doesn’t exist in the eyes of the law. This principle was reaffirmed by the Ugandan apex court in Kisugu Quarries Ltd vs Administrator General, where they stated, “You might see it with your naked eyes but it does not exist in law.” It is clear that past Uganda Law Society governing councils shirked their duty under Article 274 by failing to expel the Attorney General and Solicitor General. The Radical New Bar has taken the correct course of action. In his post on X (formerly Twitter), Senior Counsel Ssemakadde, referencing Lord Denning’s words in Parker v Parker, stated, “What is the argument on the other side? Only this, that no case has been found in which it has been done before. That argument does not appeal to me in the least. If we never do anything which has not been done before, we shall never get anywhere. The law will stand still while the rest of the world goes on, and that will be bad for both.” We cannot allow the Constitution to become a dusty relic. We must breathe life into it. The duty to uphold the Constitution is not the exclusive domain of courts. UN General Comment No 31 on article 2 of the ICCPR emphasizes the government’s responsibility to protect and fulfill human rights through non-judicial measures. States have a negative duty not to interfere with protected rights. The Attorney General and Solicitor General were, until now, operating under a colonial misconception, claiming an unwarranted ex-officio position within the National Bar Association. A LANDMARK PRECEDENT: OSOTRACO AND BEYOND The majority of those who oppose this landmark decision haven’t fully grasped the significance of Attorney General vs Osotraco Ltd, a case that stripped the post-colonial state of its immunities and unjustifiable powers. We must not allow case backlogs to grow as we wait for courts to act. The Constitution is a powerful instrument that should be used proactively, not as a last resort. The Law Society Council has the authority to take bold action, to ensure the principles of the Constitution are upheld. Under paragraphs II(v)(vi) and V(ii) of the National Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy in our Constitution, the Uganda Law Society must conform to democratic principles and retain its autonomy. The Constitution is not a car that needs constant refueling. It is a sophisticated legal vehicle capable of sustaining itself. On October 8, 1995, it became self-executory, meaning its implementation is not dependent on courts or parliamentary actions. We must not rely solely on courts to resolve every conflict with the Constitution. Articles 2 and 274 provide clear guidance. Common sense is a vital source of law. It is time we embrace both judicial and non-judicial remedies. Administrative bodies like the Uganda Law Society have the power to make decisions grounded in the Constitution. Any dissatisfaction with their decisions can be addressed through the courts. Justice Kanyeihamba, in Attorney General vs David Tinyefuza, highlighted that not every constitutional violation requires a trip to the Constitutional court. He posed three thought-provoking scenarios: A late student punished by cleaning the classroom. Should they petition the Constitutional court or address the situation with the school administration? A prison officer who opens and reads an inmate’s sealed letter. Should the inmate file a constitutional petition or take the matter to the prison administration? A resident disturbed by noisy neighbours. Should they sue or address the issue with the local government council? The Uganda Law Society, empowered by section 10 of its own Act, was well within its rights to issue Executive Order RNB No 1/2021. Court intervention was not necessary. Attorney General Kiryowa Kiwanuka is also subject to forensic investigations for alleged crimes against the bar, the government and the public, as outlined in Executive Order RNB No 1/2024. If the Attorney General and Solicitor General attempt to disrupt the ULS operations, resorting to force, intimidation, or arrests, then we will be forced to seek court intervention. The author is the founder and managing partner of Melchi Advocates and CEO of a legaltech platform called validwills.net. She is also a spokesperson of the Back On Track thinktank that supported Isaac Ssemakadde’s victorious campaign for leadership of the Uganda Law Society.

read more
O

observer.ug

@observer Thu, 31 Oct 2024 12:24:46

3 children suffocate to death in parked vehicle in Soroti

Police in Soroti City, eastern Uganda are investigating the tragic deaths of three children, who allegedly suffocated after being left inside a locked vehicle during a burial. The victims, Sylvia Ayano (12), Micah Oboi (10), and Marvin Egunyu (6), were all pupils of St. Lucia Nursery and Primary Madera in Soroti City. They had travelled with their uncle, Charles Oboi Edimu, to attend the burial of his sister, Pauline Arupo, in Obutei A Cell, Arapai Ward yesterday Wednesday. Upon arrival, Oboi reportedly rushed to join the family introductions which coincided with his arrival, forgetting the children in the car. Even after the introductions, Oboi apparently became preoccupied with the burial proceedings and completely forgot about the children who were still locked inside the vehicle. It wasn’t until after the burial in the evening that he discovered the children unresponsive inside the car. Despite efforts to rush them to Soroti Regional Referral Hospital, the children had tragically passed away.   Vincent Opio, the councillor for Arapai Ward, confirmed the children’s deaths and noted the futile attempts to resuscitate them. Soroti City West Division police commander, Muhammed Rashid Byansi, stated that a general inquiry file has been opened to understand the circumstances of the incident, with further investigation pending. The police have since ordered a postmortem to determine the exact cause of death. Two of the deceased were children of Oboi’s brother, Anthony Olupot, and the third was the child of a niece, Aidah Idatu. {loadposition inarticle}

read more
O

observer.ug

@observer Thu, 31 Oct 2024 17:09:55

Makerere University students protest delayed release of allowances

Government-sponsored students at Makerere University are demanding the immediate release of their overdue living-out allowances. On Wednesday, the students stormed the ministry of Finance, Planning, and Economic Development, seeking answers on the delayed payments. This protest followed a message from Makerere’s dean of students, Winfred Kabumbuli, indicating that a reduction in the university’s budget by the government had disrupted operations, including the disbursement of student allowances. The delay comes just weeks before the end of the semester, leaving many students financially strained. Led by Lillian Akello, president of the Makerere University Government-Sponsored Students, the group met with state minister of Finance Henry Musasizi, who acknowledged the delay but assured students that funds would be released within two weeks. Throughout the week, students have voiced the hardships they’re facing, with some seeking food donations to assist vulnerable students, particularly female students reportedly struggling with hunger. Additional grievances include a prohibition on cooking in residence halls and the removal of low-cost food vendors from campus. However, Kabumbuli clarified in a statement that cooking in halls is restricted to ensure safety and that food vendors had not been banned but rather reorganized to improve service. Isaac Ndyabahika, a fourth-year urban and regional planning student and former president of the Government-Sponsored Students Association, emphasized that government-sponsored students are particularly affected by these delays as they rely heavily on the allowance, receiving Shs 760,000 per semester if they live off-campus or Shs 530,000 if in halls of residence. However, continuing non-resident students have received only Shs 446,000, while first-year students were given just Shs 300,000. Resident students received Shs 93,000 for food, amounts that many say are inadequate for basic needs. These financial challenges have left students facing hunger in residence halls and eviction due to unpaid rent. Makerere University has a history of student protests over delayed allowances, with students increasingly advocating for an update to the allowance rates set two decades ago. In 2022, Makerere University vice chancellor Prof Barnabas Nawangwe appealed to parliament to raise food and living allowances, citing inflation and the rising cost of living. Currently, hostels around Makerere charge between Shs 500,000 and Shs 2 million per semester, with monthly rent averaging Shs 150,000 to Shs 500,000. With limited hall spaces prioritized for science students, government-sponsored non-resident students often struggle to cover private accommodation costs, amplifying the impact of these delayed allowances. {loadposition inarticle}

read more