Yesterday, July 27th, 2018, a Ugandan court okayed the presidential age limit clearing way for the president Yoweri Museveni to be re-elected after 32 years in power. Some Justices of the Constitutional Court have reacted to the ruling.
Divaviva111 will bring to you their individual decisions on two key of the 14 issues for determination, which are the extension of additional two years of the MP’s term and the Upper Presidential age limit scrapping.
A coram of justices delivered the long awaited decision on the ‘age limit and here’s what they individually think.
JUSTICE ELIZABETH MUSOKE who struggled to read her judgment ruled “I find that the extension of the life of Parliament and Local Council leaders took away the social contract and rights they had with the electorate of five years, and not seven years.”
Adding that the scrapping of the age limit law may see a leader entrenched in the seat of power.
JUSTICE KENNETH KAKURU was very direct to point when he ruled that
“In my humble view, the principle of holding elections after every five years, to hold otherwise, is to hold absurdity. It could declare the current Members of Parliament for life just like [President Idi] Amin did,”
Justice Kakuru discounted the justification by MP Tusiime that an extension is necessary because MPs spend the first two years of their term either battling election petitions in court or acclimatizing themselves with the Rules of Procedure of Parliament.
“This explanation has no connection with the extension of term in Parliament. It appears MP Tusiime was saying that Members of Parliament are knowledgeable and do not know what they do in the first two years.
On the issue of Age Limit, Justice Kakuru had observed that there was no public participation before the amendment of the Constitution which makes it null and void. According to him, the whole process was a planned ambush. As the said Bill was presented to the Parliament, read, and passed same day, this he said amounted to a nullity.
Lastly,
Justice Alfonse Owiny-Dollo
MPs’ term. Justice Owiny-Dollo, who as the Deputy Chief Justice doubles as the head of the Constitutional Court, was the last to deliver judgment on the ‘age limit’ case. He decided that the two-year extension of the mandate of MPs was unconstitutional as the purported reasons given were unfortunately self-serving.
He added that the reasons advanced by the mover of the motion could not pass the test of reason or public interest. The Constitution provides for such an extension for only six months and only in a circumstance when the country is facing war or in a state of emergency.
Here is what he said;
“Before Parliament extends its life, there must be a war of an external aggression and there must be a state of emergency and there has to be a pronouncement to that effect which was not the case here,”
Justice Owiny-Dollo further held that: “The extension of their term of office was in breach and undermined the express powers of the social contract they had with the people who gave each MP to represent them in Parliament for five years..”
What then is the way forward? We would keep you posted on the latest happenings as regard these.
