Ugandan Constitution Pdf Download
Therese Cowden
The Republic of Uganda is bordered on the east by Kenya, on the southeast by Lake Victoria, on the south by Tanzania and Rwanda, on the west by Zaire, and on the north by Sudan. It is also predominantly Roman Catholic country with many different co existing ethnic groups. Uganda has undergone a turbulent constitutional history with up to four constitutions since gaining independence from the United Kingdom.
Before the British and Germans contended for control over the territory, Uganda had three different indigenous political systems: the Hima caste system, the Bunyoro royal clan system and the Buganda kingship system. In 1894, the British succeeded in establishing a protectorate and made the Buganda, also called the people of Buganda, administrators competent to collect taxes. A British-style high court of Uganda and an appeals court for all eastern African protectorates were established in 1902. At the same time, a special commissioner was installed to perform executive, legislative and judicial powers. In 1955, a constitutional monarchy with a ministerial government based on the British model and in 1957 political parties emerged and direct elections were held.
Uganda became an independent Commonwealth nation on October 9, 1962 under a constitution much influenced by the British. The constitution distributed powers between the centre and the regions, albeit disproportionately. The Buganda kingdom was given more powers at the expense of the other three kingdoms, namely the Ankole, Toro and Bunyoro, and the other districts. The powers granted to the four kingdoms also handicapped the Parliament, which was elected by direct universal suffrage, except for parliamentarians from Buganda who were indirectly elected through the Council of Buganda. Apart from the periodically elected Parliament, the constitution provided for a Cabinet, drawn from and responsible to Parliament, and defined the powers of major government organs, civil service and judiciary. One year later, an amendment introduced a ceremonial President to replace the Governor General as a head of state and Kabaka Mutesa became the first elected president on 9 October 1963.
On 21 December 1988 the National Resistance Council (NRC) enacted Statute No.5 of 1988 which established the Uganda Constitutional Commission and gave it responsibility to start the process of developing a new Constitution. The mandate of the Commission was to consult the people and make proposals for a democratic permanent constitution based on national consensus. In its final report of December 1992, the Commission stated that the majority of Ugandans preferred a Constituent Assembly directly elected by the people in order to be as full representative as possible and provide greater legitimacy. It proposed that an Assembly should be composed mainly of directly elected delegates plus representatives of some interest groups. The proposal was accepted by government and thus the Constituent Assembly consisted of 284 delegates elected by universal suffrage representing 214 electoral areas designated plus additional representatives of specific stakeholders. Nevertheless, some people feared that the delegates to the Constituent Assembly might tailor the constitution to suit their future political ambitions.
Regarding questions as to the interpretation of the Constitution, the Court of Appeal sits as a Constitutional Court with a bench of five of its members. The Constitutional Court, which is not expressly mentioned as a court of judicature in article 129, has the power to interpret the constitution. Any person alleging an infringement of the Constitution as laid down in article 137 may petition the Court for a declaration to that effect. The Court may then grant an order of redress or refer the matter to the High Court to investigate and determine the latter. Questions as to the interpretation of the constitution can also be referred by other courts of law.
The judges, 4 to 1 ruled that parliament's removal of the age cap did not contravene the country's constitution paving way for incumbent President Yoweri Museveni to possibly contest in the 2021 elections if he wishes.
Over the next 12 hours, the young people invaded street after street in Lira, chanting anti-constitutional change slogans, lifting up placards and even setting some tires on fire. The small group soon grew into large crowds in all corners of Lira. The protesters had allies everywhere, and as soon as the police set out to stop a protest on a given street, someone would call the protesters and inform them. They would quickly disperse and reorganize at a different place, and the police would arrive too late, finding no one to arrest.
Ruling party MP Raphael Magyezi proposed an amendment bill on October 21 that would scrap the presidential age limit from the constitution. Opposition MPs protested the bill by singing the national anthem as he attempted to read it. They kept singing for more than five minutes, refusing him the chance to continue his proposal. Meanwhile, pro-Museveni MPs rose up to defend Magyezi, turning chairs into weapons as parliament descended into open fighting for several minutes. Parliament was ultimately adjourned for the day due to the chaos, but a video of the incident became a national sensation. Following its fame, the Uganda Communications Commission banned the live broadcasting of all protest events by television and radio stations, claiming they incited the public to violence.
"By a majority decision of 4 to 3 on the process of enactment of the act, fails. On the violence scuffle, inside and outside parliament, fails," he said. "On the substantiality test, fails. By unanimous decision of the court, on the vacation of office by the president after attaining the age of 75, fails. The decision of the constitutional court is upheld."
The Supreme Court sat to consider eight key issues. Pertinent among others is whether the majority of constitutional court justices erred in holding that the process of conceptualizing, debating, and enacting the Constitution Amendment Act that removed the age limit did not violate the constitution and parliamentary procedures.
They also considered whether constitutional court justices erred when they held that the removal of the age limit was not consistent with the constitution, and whether constitutional court justices erred when they held that the violence and scuffle inside and outside parliament during the enactment contravened the constitution.
Political and constitutional analysts have over the years given proposals for constitutional amendment and entrenchment of constitutionalism in Uganda. To this day, Uganda is still tracking a rugged terrain in constitutional making. Perhaps conversations need to shift to first of all address effectively the question of how Ugandans can live together, bearing in mind the diversity of a population created by means of a colonial control mechanism that clumped together nations and stateless communities to form so-called countries.
Like most African states, Uganda is merely a geographical expression whose inhabitants continue to live and, in part, govern themselves traditionally in ethnically formed communities, such as Acholi, Baganda, Bagisu, Banyankole, Banyoro, Basoga, Batoro, Iteso, Langi, Lugbara, Karimojong, and others. The new constitution should therefore seek avenues to meaningfully engage such diversity for effective development and resource allocation to meet the specific needs and aspirations of each of these communities.
When all is said and done, the proverbial question is, are the ruling elite willing to go so far as to engage in an inclusive constitutional amendment process that clearly defines the terms and principles on which all publics and diversities can continue to live together and enjoy the benefit of subscribing to Uganda as their country? This remains to be seen. While attaining a constitution that reflects the common intent of all people seems a daunting task, possibility is reinforced by necessity. Uganda must do away with the limited, coercive consultations it has engaged in over the years and take a more broad-based, societal approach that allows all those capable of making informed choices to participate in the making of the new constitution. Once this is done, we can be halfway certain that the provisions of the constitution are set by us for us, with a guarantee that in its implementation we shall hold each other accountable.
In modern constitutional democracies, constitutions provide the basis on which a prosperous society is built. This, we Ugandans must not allow to elude us. But, as the saying goes, nothing good comes easy; we will have to put our shoulders to the wheel by demanding what is best for us. The conversations must not stop, and all must participate in them.
Vagrancy laws can be used to evict or arrest workers such as street vendors who work on or transit through public spaces. Many vendors face arrest, harassment and threats of eviction from the state. This is what happened in the Malawian case of Mayeso Gwanda v The State (High Court) Constitutional Cause No. 5 of 2015. Gwanda was a street vendor who was stopped by police on his way to work early one morning. The police did not believe his explanation that he was on his way to sell plastic bags. They used the vagrancy laws to arrest him. Gwanda challenged their constitutionality. The court struck down the definition of vagrancy because it gave the police too much leeway to decide whether or not a person was a vagrant. The court also found that the definition violated the constitutional right to equality because authorities are more likely to apply and enforce it against the poor than against the rich.
Most notable in the debate around the proposed amendment has been the discussion of whether the constitution should ever be amended. The #Togikwatako campaign implies that the ruling party should not dare to review or amend any section of the constitution, despite there being a number of wider issues due for constitutional review. The current debate around amending the constitution has focused so narrowly on the issue of the age limit at the expense of wider discussions, including important issues such as land reform, reviewing the setup of the electoral commission and the role of special interest group representatives in parliament.
f448fe82f3