Among, Tayebwa accused of  bias as bill to elect LoP is tabled

A section of legislators have accused the Speaker of  Parliament Anita Among and her deputy, Thomas Tayebwa, of being biased in the selection of matters handled by Parliament.

Concerns arose following the tabling of the Administration of Parliament Amendment Bill, 2024, by Mityana South Legislator, Mr David Lumu. The Bill seeks to have the Leader of the Opposition in parliament elected by all opposition parties, as opposed to being nominated by the party with the biggest number of MPs.

Mr Lumu sought leave of the House to introduce the Bill during the regional sittings in Gulu on August 31, and on October 1 tabled the Bill for first reading.

This urgent consideration did not sit well with legislators who have been seeking a similar opportunity to table other amendments and matters since last year.

“I gave the notice to amend the administration of the Parliament Act, which was received on August 29, 2024. To date, I have not received feedback as to whether my rights which are guaranteed by the laws of Uganda can be adhered to by this Parliament. Another private member has been provided with whatever is needed and brought this bill, and I am wondering do we have the same privileges in this House?" Mr Denis Oguzu Lee, Maracha County wondered.

Mr Alioni Yorke Odria, Aringa South County said: "I raised a Bill for the Amendment of the Parliament Act in relation to the voting of Parliamentary commissioners. I gave notice to the Office of the Speaker last year on October 17. Since last year to date, the speaker has not responded to me. This is a sign of dealing with matters selectively. What is so special with this amendment of Lumu which was generated in Gulu within a month and it is now on the order paper/ are you fairly ruling this Parliament? I think the Speaker, Ms Among is taking the Law into her hands”

Jonathan Odur, Erute  South MP and shadow minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs said “Our concern is about the impartiality of the presiding officer, who have owned top to that position that they decided to give some other members preferential treatment when they seek to move amendments by way of private members Nill. What is surprising is that before the proposal by Lumu, there were more than 19 members who sought leave and wanted to move motions. Others have their Bills ready, but for reasons I cannot state have been sitting on those rights of private members.

“what criteria is available to members of Parliament to table Bills? Do they want members to come and wash plates in their homes? Do they want them to clean their compounds, are they sitting in that office to trample on the rights of members? We want to see that justice is done,”

Mr Theodore Ssekikubo, Lwemiyaga County legislator, and lead proponent of the motion that sought to impeach Commissioners of Parliament who partook in a service award to the tune of shs1.7b said he was disappointed at the manner in which his motion was thrown out.

“We sought your indulgence to debate a matter but when it was not forthcoming, we went through the rules, and they provided us with a way out. A-third of your members here  supported a matter…but before we know it some member in under a month raises a motion, he is given the privilege to have it but for the third of the members of this House are  denied,” Ssekikubo said 

More than 180 MPs supported the debate on matters of corruption and maladministration that rocked the House in the first half of the year but were denied audience after a court ruling vindicated the commissioners of any illegality. more appeals yesterday fell on deaf ears.

“Our petition( for the impeachment of the Commissioners)  has never appeared on the order paper. Never been raised, never debated. So you made a ruling on someone's statement, not our petition. So we are requesting you to put our motion and petition on the order paper,” Allison said, to which Tayebwa responded: “the motion did not qualify to be on the order paper and that matter has been closed,”

Tayebwa said the concerns of Mr Oguzu and Alioni would be considered, adding that he could not answer how swiftly Lumu’s Bill was processed and gazetted.

Inside the Bill

The draft amendment seen by this publication seeks to provide for the election of the Leader of the Opposition by members of the opposition in Parliament, from among the members of the party in opposition to having the greatest numerical strength in Parliament; to provide additional grounds upon which the Leader of the Opposition may cease to hold office; to require the shadow cabinet to be approved by members of the opposition parties in Parliament; to require the Leader of the Opposition to consult opposition political parties represented in Parliament when appointing

chairpersons and deputy chairpersons of Standing Committees of Parliament.

According to Lumu, the manner of election of the LoP as provided in section 8 of the Act simply imposed on the members of the opposition in Parliament without their will and consent. There are five opposition parties in Parliament, with the NUP, to which Mr Joel  Ssenyonyi, the current office holder is a member. The others are FDC, DP, UP,  and Jeema.

Lumu accuses Ssenyonyi of suppressing the views of other parties.

“The current manner of election of Leader of the Opposition in Parliament has not only led to the suppression of the views of other opposition political parties in Parliament but also made it impossible for the members in opposition in Parliament to hold the Leader of the Opposition accountable,” the Bill notes.

The draft bill also proposes that the process of removal of office of the Leader of Opposition be prescribed in Parliament rules of procedure, on grounds of infirmity, incompetence or misbehavior.

Article 82 A of the Constitution established the office of the leader of Opposition under the multi-organisations or multiparty form of democracy.

Kiira Municipality MP, Ibrahim Ssemujju Nganda says the law depriving the biggest party of choosing the leader of the opposition sets a bad precedent, saying disagreements or removal of leaders of the opposition should not be motivation enough to change the law. 

Mr Francis  Katabazi, Kalungu East MP says this will weaken the opposition, and its core mandate of keeping the ruling government in check, saying the Bill is motivated by emotions rather than logic and principle.

[email protected]