Prime
Appeal court overturns Bamugemereire order
On November 30 last year, the head of the Land Division of the High Court, Justice Andrew Bashaija, ruled that the Justice Bamugemereire land probe should not interfere with court orders or decisions on land matters that have already been concluded through a court process. FILE PHOTO
What you need to know:
- The earlier decision by Justice Bashaija followed a successive law suit filed by Mr Daniel Walugembe, a land dealer. He was challenging the order issued by the land probe stopping the Uganda Land Commission from paying him about Shs2.5b in compensation.
Kampala. The Court of Appeal has upheld an earlier High Court decision that trimmed powers of the Justice Catherine Bamugemereire-led Commission of Inquiry into Land Matters.
On November 30 last year, the head of the Land Division of the High Court, Justice Andrew Bashaija, ruled that the Justice Bamugemereire land probe should not interfere with court orders or decisions on land matters that have already been concluded through a court process.
But being dissatisfied with the decision, the Attorney General, on behalf of the land probe team, appealed before the Court of Appeal. The land probe commission had reasoned that the High Court orders appeared to have intended to circumvent its work given to it by President Museveni.
However, Court of Appeal justices Kenneth Kakuru, Stephen Musota and Christopher Madrama, in a judgment delivered on April 17, held that judgments of the court cannot be stayed, reviewed or otherwise compromised by orders issued by the Executive.
The justices also observed that allowing the same would result in conflict between the Executive and the Judiciary.
“Accordingly, any executive order or directive that has the effect of staying, reversing or otherwise altering a decision of court is null and void. Allowing this application would revive the order of the Commission of Inquiry on Land Matters, which has the effect of staying a judgment of the High Court,” ruled the justices.
“We find that the orders sought to be stayed are not capable of being executed and we decline to grant them. We re-affirm the independence of the Judiciary by stating that orders issued by the Executive, however well-intended, cannot legally stay decisions of any court of law. We, therefore, find no merit in this application and we dismiss it with costs,” they added.
The justices instead said the Attorney General should have sought orders to set aside the consent decree in the High Court suit No. 550 of 2016 as an aggrieved party, which could have triggered a process in which a stay of the decree would be considered by the court itself.
Earlier law suit
The earlier decision by Justice Bashaija followed a successive law suit filed by Mr Daniel Walugembe, a land dealer. He was challenging the order issued by the land probe stopping the Uganda Land Commission from paying him about Shs2.5b in compensation.
The land probe had issued the orders when it was investigating the operations of the Land Fund early last year.
