Prime
Seven Questions for Medard Lubega Sseggona
Mr Sseggona at Parliament. Photo by Goeffrey Sseruyange
What you need to know:
Legal mind. The Inspector General of Government recently dropped charges against former Vice President Gilbert Bukenya of any charges of abuse of office in the botched Chogm 2007 car deal that resulted in the loss of billions of tax payers’ cash. Sheila Naturinda sought the opinion of Shadow Justice Minister Medard Lubega Sseggona. Excerpts.
1. The Inspectorate of Government falls under the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs. The current head of the Institution, Mr Raphael Baku, has been in the hot seat by way of how be conducts his operations. How should he operate?
We expect the IGG to be independent of any person or authority as required by the Constitution. Actions of the current IGG are not true to this. IGG Baku is a man of good personal reputation and has made tremendous achievements as a person.
However, he has limitations when it comes to independence because he is known to be NRM- which wouldn’t be bad, only if the NRM party stood for democratic principles. But because they are chaired by a despot, who also doubles as a repressive president wielding a gun even when he is at civil functions, that independence is compromised.
For that reason, the President recently on TV said the IGG is used to ferment political persecution. The only known cold war we all knew in the Executive was between Prof. Gilbert Bukenya and current Prime Minister Amama Mbabazi who, notwithstanding that cold war, was promoted as Bukenya fell from grace to grass and now when they meet, Bukenya gives way.
We must all, without exception, support and allow Baku to do his work and whoever interferes with his powers commits treason against the Constitution.
2.In your view, do you think there were ‘valid’ charges in the first place on former Vice President Gilbert Bukenya and the other three ministers now in court?
What happened is that there was an audit by the Auditor General which implicated the ministers. Parliament also had a report which implicated the same ministers. As to whether the actions in the reports amounted to criminal offences is a matter of evidence which was taken upon by the IGG.
The IGG conducted further investigations together with police and made recommendations. He was convinced that he had a case which he presented to court. Upon committal of Prof. Bukenya, Mr Baku said he had concluded his investigations and he had overwhelming evidence to prove the case beyond reasonable doubts.
But where did the evidence disappear to? It is either he didn’t have the evidence and was used politically to humiliate the former VP or he had the evidence but he was used politically to withdraw the case.
Actually the President wanted Bukenya charged but because of the pressure from Parliament and civil society, it led to the arraignment of the other three. President Museveni seeing the three in the dock was the most painful thing he could ever take in. For Sam Kutesa, their children have married. For John Nasasira, the network is bigger.
So he forced Baku to withdraw Bukenya charges and subsequently we are likely to see another withdrawal “it’s just a matter of time.”
3.Where should Ugandans go to blow the whistle on corruption cases now that the IGG seems ‘untrustable?’
Ugandans should continue taking cases to the IGG. Mr Baku is very effective in cases where government doesn’t have a strong interest. If anyone wants to report to Baku any matter where the NRM has a strong interest, then they should go slow.
4.Are the cases on Prof. Bukenya and the three ministers related in any way?
The cases are related; Prof. Bukenya and the three ministers are all implicated under similar circumstances and have similar evidence and their implications overlap.
5.How is the opposition faring in the on-going oil sector debate? There is information that some of them have already been ‘bribed’ by the same suspected ministers so that they tactfully withdraw and go silent on the resolutions follow-up.
The opposition is performing perfectly in their oversight role especially in the oil debates. The allegation of bribery among the opposition members can’t be easily verified neither can it be denied. Some could have succumbed to the temptation but whoever did that is evil and deserves no mercy from God and if we get such people we shall smoke them out.
The alternative could be that the allegation has been created by some elements of the NRM to discredit our members but if its true, the implicated ministers then should plead guilty because why bribe if innocent?
The oil matters are now more than the opposition but national matter where the current Parliament will be gauged because every Ugandan thinks these individuals have stolen enough and stealing must stop now.
6.The ad hoc committee now investigating the oil matters seems to lack many technical staffs especially tax experts- does this make you worried?
That might be true but they have expertise in other areas and the investigations aren’t only on taxes. They can, however, co-opt any member who can help them in such areas.
Apart from integrity issues of some of the members on the committee, there are some few credible ones and we expect a lot from them subject to the ministers stepping aside because the positions they hold are too strong to allow a transparent and independent inquiry.
7.A former junior minister in the Energy ministry now chairs the same committee [Michael Werikhe] - what does that mean?
I don’t want to talk about personalities, but he has the chance to attend and assist in his own burial or redeem himself. It could also be true that he needs to get back to Cabinet through the Prime Minister but the choice is his; to put himself on one side of scale and Uganda on the other side. If I were him, I would choose Uganda.
