{{The East African Court of Justice yesterday declined to stop the impeachment of the East African Legislative Assembly (Eala) Speaker, Ms Margaret Nantongo Zziwa.}}
The court ruled that the legislators’ move to throw her out of office did not infringe on the treaty that established the East African Community (EAC).
According to the court, the details filed were not good enough to stop the process. But Mbidde Foundation Limited of Uganda and Ms Zziwa can still seek an injunction, according to Principal Judge Jean-Bosco Butasi, if they can produce sufficient evidence to merit stopping the move against the Speaker.
Represented by Mr Fred Mukasa Mbidde and Jet Mwebaze, the applicants also sought an order stopping Eala from conducting any investigation into the matter pending the hearing and determination of the main case.
But the court yesterday rejected the applicants’ claims that presenting the petition to the Assembly constituted an infringement of the EAC Treaty. The Principal Judge said in the ruling at the EACJ’s new chambers: “Those Rules of Procedure were promulgated under Articles 49 (2) and 60 of the Treaty. No material was availed to this Court as would suggest that the Rules per se infringe Treaty provisions.”
He added: “At this stage, we find that the presentation of the petition to the House was in compliance with Rules duly promulgated under the EAC Treaty and, therefore, in compliance with the Treaty.”
Secondly, he said, the removal of the Speaker of the Assembly was a function of Eala as provided by Article 53 of the Treaty with the procedure for such removal detailed in Rule 9 of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure.
He went on to say that Article 49 (2) (g) of the EAC Treaty does not mandate the regional Parliament to formulate its own rules of procedure as well as those which pertain to its committees, of which, the Committee on Legal, Rules and Privileges is one such committee.
Justice Butasi defended the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure, stressing that the perceived bias on the Committee as was neither frivolous nor vexatious, adding that the material produced in Court by the Respondents “does not prima facie demostrate an act of Treaty infringement such as would invoke the provisions of Article 30 (1) of the Treaty.
The Applicants had argued that if the interim order to stop the impeachment of the Speaker was not granted, she and Mbidde Foundation Limited would suffer “irreparable damages which will not be compensated.”
They also added that the political career of Ms Zziwa and the smooth running of Eala would be affected. They submitted that there was a prima facie case to be determined by the Court and asked the EACJ to grant the order sought with costs.
But the Court said it was not satisfied that Mbidde Foundation demostrated any injury it is likely to suffer, referring to an affidavit of one Moses Kyeyune Mukasa to the effect that the organisation wanted to protect Uganda’s rotational interest in the office of the Speaker as well as the rights of the incumbent Speaker.
“But this does not provide material that demonstrated the injury that party is likely to suffer if the injunction is refused,” the ruling stressed.
NMG
Leave a Reply