Prime
AG overrules departed Asians properties board
Attorney General Kiryowa Kiwanuka. PHOTO/FILE
What you need to know:
- This was after numerous law suits had arisen against government with a potential of losing huge sums of money in compensation.
The Custodian Board Divestiture Committee does not have powers to repossess, manage or allocate any property that has been dealt with by the Finance minister, the Attorney General has stated in latest legal opinion to President Museveni regarding management of the properties of the departed Asians.
Likewise, the government chief legal adviser has said it is legally untenable to implement the recommendations of Parliament’s Commissions, Statutory Authorities and State Enterprises (Cosase) that included initiation of cancellation of repossession titles of the departed Asian properties.
Mr Kiryowa’s legal opinion dated March 22, 2022, followed a debate in the recent past both within government and other entities, regarding the manner in which the properties of the departed Asians has been managed by the custodian board, resulting into numerous court cases.
“Although the Cosase sub-committee investigations elicited findings similar to those of the Auditor General’s report, the recommendations of the Cosase sub-committee that the Departed Asians Board initiates the process for cancellation of certain repossession certificates and any substitute titles, is legally untenable,” Mr Kiryowa stated in his legal opinion.
He continued: “Once the certificate of repossession has been issued, the Departed Asians Property Custodian Board (DAPCB), has no mandate whatsoever to deal with such property. The Custodian Board Divestiture Committee does not have powers to repossess, manage or allocate any property that has been dealt with by the minister.”
This, he says, is in light of Section 9 (1) d of the Expropriated Properties Act and case law, warning that if carried forward, such action would only increase the number of law suits that are likely to cause substantial financial loss to government.
He further says the aforementioned provision gives the minister powers to repossess, sell or dispose of the property for failure by the former owner to return to Uganda within 120 days.
“However, once the minister has issued a certificate of repossession, he has no power to cancel it,” the AG further states in his legal opinion.
He adds: “Once the minister of Finance has dealt with an expropriated property by issuing a repossession certificate, a certificate of purchase or a certificate of receipt, he or she has no powers under the Act to cancel the certificate issued. Even if there was an error on the part of government.”
He further clarifies that the power to cancel such a repossession certificate lies in the hands of the High Court.
The Attorney General also said any person aggrieved by the decision made by the minister may, within 30 days from the date of communication of the decision to him or her, appeal to the High Court for determination.
In August 2016, the Auditor General, in exercise of his statutory mandate, conducted two special audits on the operations of the Departed Asians Property Custodian Board, which were later handed to Parliament and debated by Cosase.
This was after numerous law suits had arisen against government with a potential of losing huge sums of money in compensation.
Background
The Asians, after their expulsion by then president Idi Amin in the 1970s, left behind properties, which included businesses, stock and real estate.
Some of them later repossessed their properties yet government had fully compensated them.
