Bobi Wine and Moses Kibalama at the launch of NUP party.
For months disgruntled members of the National Unity Platform (NUP) have been anxious about the fate of the constitution that the party said had been gazetted.
Mr Mathias Mpuuga, the former Leader of the Opposition in Parliament (LoP), who has since fallen out with the NUP top brass over a Shs500m ‘‘service award,’’ pointed out that the party could be in a constitutional crisis since it hasn’t unveiled its amended constitution.
NUP had moved to amend the constitution it had inherited from the National Unity, Reconciliation and Development Party (NURP) under the leadership of Moses Kibalama, but the move was met with resistance. Kibalama remains a stone in NUP’s shoe, and in 2022 he headquartered a parallel party in Kabowa, Kampala. This after he accused the Robert Kyagulanyi, alias Bobi Wine-led faction, of not being transparent.
“As per the delegates conference of NUP held on May 27, 2022, it was resolved that the party find new headquarters from Kamwokya. In fulfilment of the decision of the delegates, the Central Executive Committee of the party hereby unveils the new party headquarters on June 21. The decision to change the party headquarters was as result of the resolution to end the relationship between the People Power Movement and the NUP leadership,” Mr Kibalama said in 2022.
He also claimed that NURP had a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the People Power Movement that morphed into NUP. This was to be reviewed after one year, but when this time elapsed, Kyagulanyi’s faction failed to honour the agreement.
“We agreed and thought they were a legitimate group, but we found out People Power was not registered. We went into partnership, but found out it was a kiwani (fake) as they sang,” Mr Kibalama said.
Court rules
In 2020, Kibalama’s group went to the Civil Division of the High Court. It contested the change of the party’s name by the Electoral Commission (EC) from NURP to NUP as published under General Notice number 838 of 2019 in the Uganda Gazette dated August 12, 2019. The aggrieved party claimed that NUP was illegal, null and void since the requisite resolutions under the NURP constitution did not support it.
Kibalama’s faction, who told the court that Mr Kyagulanyi never made good on his promise to pay it promised $5,000,000 (Shs19 billion) to take over the party, asked that the musician-turned-politician be barred from carrying the NURP flag during the 2021 presidential election. This was on grounds that a delegates conference had not been organised as the party’s constitution mandates.
There was a sense of relief from Kyagulanyi’s supporters when the head of the Civil Division of the High Court, Justice Musa Ssekaana, dismissed the case.
“The applicant, in this case, ought to have applied for review within the three months after the change of the name of the party from NURP to NUP i.e. by June 6, 2019, but instead the applicants filed this application on August 24, 2020, after over one year. This application was made with a view of making some money during the election season and the applicants have no genuine grievance but rather want to be relevant and make some quick cash,” Justice Ssekaana ruled.
He added: “The court is empowered to refuse relief and deny access to the judicial review reliefs on the grounds of laches because of several considerations e.g. it is not desirable to allow stale claims to be canvassed before the court; there should be finality to ligation.”
The judge held thus: “It cannot be argued that the constitution intended to disregard all procedural rules concerning access to justice or grant of reliefs and allow applications filed after inordinate delay. Constitutional provisions are not intended to supersede the available modes of obtaining relief before a civil court or deny the defences legitimately open in such action.”
Second bite at cherry
Four years after Justice Ssekaana dismissed their case, Kibalama’s group is back at the Civil Division’s High Court. This time it’s challenging not only the amendments but also the constitution that’s being amended, saying it was forged by Mr Kyagulanyi’s group.
The court papers seen by Saturday Monitor indicate that Kibalama’s group claims in the alleged falsified constitution, Kyagulanyi’s faction imported several provisions. These include Article 6.3 that created the positions of the four deputy presidents and dropped the position of vice president as leader and chairman of the party.
Mr Kibalama also claimed Kyagulanyi’s group created in Article 7.1 (a), in which the president is portrayed as the leader and chief principal officer of the party; Article 7.1 (b), the president is empowered to convene and chair the delegates conference, the national executive committee and the executive board; Article 7.1 (c), the president is said to be the chief spokesperson of the party and in 7.1 (e), the president is given powers to supervise all office bearers ... and may suspend any member pending investigations.
Mr Kibalama together his co-plaintiffs Paul Kagombe Ssimbwa, Moses Luyinda, Delwibert Omony and Emmanuel Joseph Kasirye, assert that they got to know about the alleged falsification and uttering of the false party constitution by Mr Kyaguanyi; Mr David Lewis Rubongoya, NUP’s secretary general; LoP Joel Ssenyonyi; Fred Nyanzi Ssentamu, NUP’s mobilisation chief; and Benjamin Katana, NUP’s treasurer in August 2020.
The Kibalama faction says it immediately sought certified copies from the EC and the Uganda Registration Services Bureau (URSB) as the former regulator of political parties.
“Upon the 7th defendant [EC] availing the plaintiffs with the certified copies of the NUP Party Constitution and minutes of Congress Delegates Conference held on July 14, 2020, the plaintiffs discovered that the particulars of falsification of the party constitution had occurred whereby the original constitution had been swapped and replaced with a copy believed to have been falsified by the 2nd-6th defendants in collusion with the 7th defendant,” they say.
Drama
In the original party constitution, under Article 5, Kibalama’s faction says the party president was the party flag bearer and not the Leader of the Party, as the Executive Authority was vested in the vice president as the party leader and chairman, and not any other person/officer.
“Upon admission of the 2nd-6th defendants [Kyagulanyi, Rubongoya, Ssenyonyi, Nyanzi, and Katana] into the party membership, a meeting was held on July 14, 2020, and only seven positions, including party president (flag bearer) were filled in accordance with the original party constitution of 2004 and the rest of the positions were to be elected at the next meeting of the national congress as is reflected in the minutes of July 14, 2020 under minute 6 (iii), (iv), (v) (i)-(viii) that was submitted to the Electoral Commission on July 21, 2020 as the regulating body,” Kibalama’s group says in court papers, adding that since then no congress meeting has ever been convened and filled the positions that were left vacant.
The group adds that NUP’s list containing 34 members of the National Executive Committee (NEC) purported to have also been elected in the meeting held on July 14, 2020 and also presented to the EC on July 21, 2020 as is reflected in a letter by the EC addressed to NUP and Kyagulanyi dated June 21, 2022 is as well a suspect document associated to Kyagulanyi’s faction.
Kibalama’s group also says Kyagulanyi’s faction “purportedly convened” a delegate’s conference of the party last April in which a “falsified constitution” was amended.
“ ...and the defendants attempted to present the same to the Electoral Commission for sanctioning of a further illegality,” Kibalama’s group says.
On its part, Kyagulanyi’s faction has dismissed this latest claim as ridiculous and also questioned the lawyers representing Kibalama’s group.
“To further prove the three men are fraudsters, we presented to the Commission a letter by the Uganda Law Council confirming that the law firm which purportedly complained on their behalf is fake and non-existent. Gideon Tugume, who signed the complaint has never been an advocate of the courts of judicature, as he holds out to be,” NUP said in a statement
