Members of Parliament have accused the Constitutional Court of “engaging in political activism” following its ruling last week that froze activities of the Inspectorate of Government.
Under their anti-corruption crusaders forum, the MPs demanded that the court explains its basis for stopping prosecution of three ministers accused of abuse of office in relation to the 2007 Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting (Chogm).
Dragged to the Anti-Corruption Court by the IGG, ministers Sam Kutesa (Foreign Affairs), John Nasasira (Government Chief Whip) and Mwesigwa Rukutana (Labour) opted to challenge the powers of IGG Raphael Baku to prosecute them, saying he was holding the office illegally. The ministers also stepped aside until the case was disposed of.
Last week, Justices Alice Mpagi Bahigeine, Steven Kavuma, Stella Arach Amoko, Augustine Nshimye and Remmy Kasule agreed with the politicians, saying the IGG was not duly constituted as required by the Constitution—and ruled that he could not prosecute cases related to corruption.
The ruling, the judges however noted, would not affect cases previously handled by the IGG before last week’s pronouncement.
Ignoring laws?
In August last year, the same court ruling on a petition by former Vice President Gilbert Bukenya, said despite the fact that there is no position designated as acting IGG, Mr Baku is substantively a deputy IGG who is carrying out the duties of the IGG since the position has not yet been filled. They gave him the nod to go ahead and prosecute Prof. Bukenya.
IGG Raphael Baku has been acting for the past two years after then Ombudsman Faith Mwondha refused to be subjected to parliamentary scrutiny for a second term. She was reabsorbed into the Judiciary and now serves as a judge.
Yesterday, Mr Theodore Ssekikubo, the Lwemiyaga County MP, said: “The bench has jumped into the political arena by engaging in political activism. The best they could have done was to halt the proceedings but not to dismiss the cases on mere technicalities well aware of Article 126(2) of the Constitution.”
The article demands that justice be administered without undue regard to technicalities.
Former IGG Augustine Ruzindana, now an opposition politician, also faulted the judges.
“I was the IGG and I never had any power to prosecute. In this case, court made an error, the IGG does not sit as a panel neither does he prosecute. During my tenure in office, my deputy used to make decisions and there was no need for my confirmation. If you asked me, this is a surprising judgement.”
But Judiciary Spokesperson Erias Kisawuzi said: “To err is human that’s the decision of the court. Whoever feels dissatisfied with the ruling can appeal. That’s how the judges in their wisdom arrived at the decision. The Constitutional Court is not a final court.”
President Museveni, who recently said he has not appointed an IGG because he does not want to “pick a game warden who is a poacher”, also came under criticism.
Mr Ruzindana said: “I agree there is need to appoint a substantive IGG but the problem is not the absence of the IGG, President Museveni is the problem. Corruption is not an exception, it is the norm, no matter how active the IGG is, there is nothing he can do to curb corruption. President Museveni is the biggest failure.”
Ms Cissy Kagaba, the executive director of Anti-Corruption Coalition, said President Museveni’s failure to appoint a substantive IGG defeats the fight against corruption.
MPs now say they have drafted a motion to compel President Museveni to appoint a substantive IGG and two deputy IGGs within one week.