President Museveni on Monday criticised
Constitutional Court judges for deciding as unconstitutional lawmakers’
revision of their term and that of local governments from five to seven
years.
Pointedly, the President signed off the stinging short missive as the Ssabalwanyi - euphemism for master fighter.
‘In the end, however, the judges are not the ones in-charge of the country’, he wrote.
Our
position is that the President has a right, as would any citizen, to
disagree with the ‘age limit’ case verdict. We, however, argue that his
public vitriol against the judges was and is unnecessary.
It undermines the principle of the separation of powers as well as reciprocal cordiality among the three key arms of government.
This
constitutionally-enshrined and protected dictum is to enable the
exercise of checks and balance between arms of government. It undergirds
constitutionalism and the rule of law - both essential ingredients for a
democratic society.
The President has on each of the
six occasions of taking the oath of office since 1986 committed to
protect, promote and defend the Constitution. It is a cardinal duty of
the Constitutional Court, and on appeal the Supreme Court, to interpret
and determine whether an action by an individual or the government is
consistent or in breach of the supreme law.
This is the
context in which the Coram of five justices, led by the Deputy Chief
Justice Owiny-Dollo, heard and decided on the consolidated petition
challenging the constitutionality of the Constitution Amendment (No.2)
Act, 2017, that Parliament enacted last December.
The
justices were unanimous in their July 26, 2018 decisions on nine out of
14 issues, including nullifying MPs’ unilateral extension of their
tenure by two years.
Justice Kenneth Kakuru in his
dissenting judgment further declared lifting of the presidential age
limit and entire amendment unconstitutional.
These
decisions constitute the basis of the President’s notable disquiet and
disapproval. He categorised the verdict as “nonsense” and said
constitutional reforms can still happen, with or without the judges, as
long as lawmakers elected on the ruling NRM party closely work with him.
As head of State and Fountain of Honour, the President is held in high
esteem. His words count. He sets example and citizens pick cue from him.
This is why we note the aggressions deeply concerning.
The
President could have tapped the counsel of the Attorney General to
shape his rejoinder to the Constitutional Court verdict. The
Constitution he swore to protect provides appeals to the highest court
as constitutional pathways to resolve impugned court decisions. We ask
the President to respect separation of powers for Uganda’s good.
No comments:
Post a Comment