Bakampa Brian
Baryaguma
In late January
2017, President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, of the Republic of Uganda, appointed
ambassadors, and heads of diplomatic missions, and forwarded the appointees’
names to Parliament for approval, in accordance with Article 122(1) of the
Constitution.
Appointee No. 35
was His Highness Gabula William, appointed Ambassador, in charge of Special
Duties, in the Office of the President. His Highness Gabula is a traditional
leader in Uganda, serving as the King of Busoga Kingdom. His official title,
among the Basoga, is Kyabazinga. His
appointment was controversial, with some people supporting, and others opposing
it. Those against seem to have been the majority or most vocal; because I am
reliably informed that he later rejected the appointment.
The reasons, and
merits or demerits of the Kyabazinga’s appointment as ambassador, are not my
concern, and point of discussion here. Those are largely speculative, and I
wouldn’t like to engage in speculation. Rather, my points of interest are legal
matters that came up in the debate.
The first, and
most important, was a quasi-legal issue on the appointment’s social implication
on the status of the Kyabazinga, and pride of Busoga kingdom in general. As
required by Article 122(1) of the Constitution, such appointments must be
approved by Parliament, which is headed by a Speaker. There is a specific
committee of Parliament that vets and approves (or disapproves) presidential
appointments. It is called the Appointments Committee, and according to the
Rules of Procedure of Parliament, it is chaired by the Speaker of Parliament.
In Uganda’s case today, the Speaker is a Musoga lady, Right Honorable Rebecca
Alitwala Kadaga. She is a no nonsense, and very independent minded legislator. As
far as Busoga society, and kingdom affairs are concerned, culturally speaking,
Rt. Hon. Rebecca Kadaga, is a subject of the Kyabazinga, and therefore
subordinate to him. Those opposed to the appointment partly based their
objection on this, saying that the King cannot appear before his subject, to
justify himself, for whatever reason. They even issued threats of a
constitutional petition challenging the appointment in courts of law.
Yet Rt. Hon.
Kadaga, as Speaker of the Parliament of the Republic of Uganda, is a national
leader who therefore, necessarily is superior to cultural leaders, because
Uganda is a republic, not a monarchy. Therefore, national leaders take
precedence over traditional or cultural leaders. Indeed, Article 98(2) of our
Constitution states that, ‘The President shall take precedence over all persons
in Uganda, and in descending order, the Vice President, the Speaker and the
Chief Justice shall take precedence over all other persons in Uganda.’ Please note
that the Constitution says ALL PERSONS, which means that
there are no exceptions envisaged here. Therefore, Speaker Kadaga takes
precedence over, and is therefore, superior to her traditional leader, His
Highness Gabula William. If the Kyabazinga does anything (like accepting a
presidential appointment) that requires him to appear before his otherwise
cultural subject, he must comply. One cannot eat his cake, and also have it.
The law must be followed.
The second issue
was on the legality of the appointment. The argument was that according to
Article 246(3)(f) of the Constitution, traditional or cultural leaders, like
the Kyabazinga, are prohibited from having or exercising ‘… any administrative,
legislative or executive powers of Government or local government.’ This
argument is correct, because being an ambassador, necessarily entails having or
exercising administrative powers of government. I contend that those without
any administrative, legislative or executive powers are lower than, and
subordinate to, those with them.
No comments:
Post a Comment