KAMPALA, Uganda
The ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) party is opposed to calls demanding that the government declares a state of emergency because which would result in the postponement of the 2021 general polls.
A state of emergency is where government suspends normal constitutional procedures to regain control. It is usually declared during national disasters, war and civil unrest, a pandemic or epidemic among other risks.
Ever since
the Electoral Commission released a revised roadmap, banning the mass rallies
and campaigns, opposition groups and other stakeholders have cried foul, saying
the proposed digital campaigns are going to disenfranchise a lot of people who
have no access to electricity, radio, social media or TV.
Several political actors in the country have called for the postponement
of next year's elections due to the coronavirus pandemic. But NRM party
officials led by the secretary-general Justine Kasule Lumumba and NRM’s legal
director, Oscar Kihika while appearing before the Legal and Parliamentary
Affairs committee, said President Yoweri Museveni isn’t satisfied that the
current COVID-19 circumstances require a declaration of state of emergency
provided for under Article 110 of the Constitution.
“Clearly as things stand, the president is not satisfied. This Article
expressly provides that the president must be satisfied before he declares a
state of emergency. Now, obviously the declaration of a state of emergency is
not a simple matter because most of the arguments that we have heard is that
there should be a state of emergency and what follows thereafter is a
postponement of the election. That decision is a very serious one because you
are pulling the power of people of selecting their leaders away from the
people. I believe that His Excellency doesn’t take this matter very lightly,”
Kihika said.
According to Kihika the president is convinced that elections with
restrictions can be held under satisfied current circumstances and hence no
need to declare a state of emergency. The lawyer further explained that
declaration of a state of emergency brings in serious consequences relating to
civil liberties and can lead to abuse of power.
"The last time the government declared a state of emergency which
was in 1966, we all know what happened thereafter. Because the moment you
declare a state of emergency there are serious consequences which relate to
civil liberties and those consequences and those powers that follow through the
declaration of a state of emergency can very much lead to abuse of those
powers. And as a result, it is very easy as indeed happened in 1966 to lose the
support of the population." said Kihika.
"One, you remove the power of the people to elect their leaders.
That is a serious constitutional abrogation. If you’re going to invoke Article
110, you have to be very very careful and that decision has to be considered
extremely seriously because that is the effect. Number two, those of you who
are agitating for a state of emergency, from a legal standpoint, it has a
serious consequential effect. It takes away civil liberties which can be easily
be abused. And so when the president chooses not to take this step, you must
understand where he’s coming from. It is because he respects the power of the
people." Kihika added.
Kihika also noted that in case of a state of emergency, Uganda has an
existing law on emergencies passed in 1968 - The Emergency Power Act.
“It gives a lot of powers to the minister of Internal Affairs to pass
all manner of statutory instruments which would actually give him powers to
arrest people without due process under the excuse of trying the maintain
emergencies. Actually, when you read that Act now, there might be certain
aspects that are probably inconsistent with our current Constitution,” he said.
Kihika, however, said that up until the declaration is made, the powers
that would be concentrated in a couple of people are frightening especially if
one is not sure that the person is governing the country in the best interest
of the population.
However, Masaka Municipality MP Mathias Mpuuga downplayed Kihika's
comparisons of the current coronavirus situation to the 1966 crisis that led to
the declaration of a state of emergency.
"With due respect to senior counsel, the 66 crisis that endangered
the state of emergency and the situation we’re discussing now, to they are
really different. We’re discussing two constitutional orders and am constrained
to agree with him [Kihika] in relation to these two situations…We all know the
circumstances that endangered the 66 declaration and where we’re now in the
pandemic situation." Mpuuga said.
Kiryowa Kiwanuka another NRM lawyer also weighed, saying that the mode
of election activities always keep changing, arguing that changes in an
electoral process does not mean that the election is abnormal.
"Honourable members and chair, we can also state that even if the
regulations were not passed, this election must take place and NRM must
participate in it and we shall use the legal means available to convince the
party members on how to participate in an election without breaching the COVID
regulation. We’re within the framework, that one can give you comfort on,"
Kiwanuka said.
His statement followed a submission by Lumumba who said that there
should be an election come 2021 since it is government’s responsibility to make
sure that Ugandans exercise their right to vote as per the Constitution.
"No election or election, as NRM there should be an election and the election should be done within the time unless something out of the ordinary happens. Why? On the 12th of May 2016, HE Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, the president of the Republic of Uganda and the national chairman of NRM took an oath to protect Ugandans. The two cardinal responsibilities he took was to protect Ugandans, protect their lives and properties but also to make sure to uphold the very constitution and make sure we hold elections and hold elections in time." Lumumba said. – The Observer
No comments:
Post a Comment