Ssewanyana, Ssegirinya Parliament seats safe

The President accused some judicial officials of being corrupt and allowing people unwanted in communities to walk scot-free, leading to reprisal attacks and rise in mob justice.

He made the remarks on September 22 during the commemoration of the killing of former Chief Justice Benedict Kiwanuka.

About the same time, unexplained killings by machete-wielding gangs rocked the greater Masaka region.

Then, police summoned and arrested Mr Ssewanyana and Mr Sseigirinya,  who were charged with multiple murder and attempted murder offences. The duo has since been on remand.

Their long pre-trial stay has ignited two debates; whether they should vacate their seats in line with Section 96 of Parliamentary Rules of Procedure, and whether Judiciary in declining to grant the MPs bail has caved in to Executive pressure.

Mr Museveni has been a vocal opponent of granting bail to capital offenders, who he said should be kept out of society during investigations so that they don’t interfere with the probe.

He has also on various occasions threatened to ask Parliament to amend the Constitution to deny bail to such offenders for six months,  a period he thinks is sufficient to complete investigations.

Over the past six months, the accused legislators have applied for bail twice, a request that has been denied. Today marks 225 days since they were arrested.

Court first granted the duo bail in September last year but were rearrested on exit from the court premises by gun wielding security forces.

They have since then been denied subsequent bails, after the state objected to their constitutional right to bail.

At Parliament, the two had missed a total of 58 parliamentary sessions by the end of March this year, raising fears that they could be expelled from the House.

Article 83 of the Constitution clause on paragraph (d) states that a Member of Parliament shall vacate his or her seat in tenure of Parliament if that person is absent from 15 sittings of Parliament without permission in writing of the Speaker during any period when Parliament is continuously meeting and is unable to offer a satisfactory explanation to the relevant Parliamentary Committee for his or her absence.

While they are safe for now, the situation could change if they are found guilty.  Paragraph (e) of Article 83 states that if that person is found guilty by the appropriate tribunal of violation of the Leadership Code of Conduct and the punishment imposed is or includes the vacation of the office of an MP.

ALSO READ: WATCH: State to amend charges in Ssegirinya, Ssewanyana case

Mr John Baptist Nambeshe, the Opposition Chief Whip told this newspaper that while the parliamentary Rules of Procedure demand that any legislator who misses 15 consecutive sittings be removed, the situation for Mr Ssewanyana and Mr Ssegirinya is different.

He said the two did not miss the sittings on their own accord, but were subjected to confinement by the state, and therefore cannot be accused of absconding from duty.

Mr Nambeshe, however, said his office notified the Speaker about their absence.

“The members are in no breach of any law because expulsion by the Speaker is on clear understanding that notification has not been made, but in this case, the Speaker has been notified, so who is the complainant?” Mr Nambeshe questioned.

“Even if someone was so callous, the person would know that these people have even been denied their constitutional right to bail, and they are being detained illegally,” he added.

Mr Erias Lukwago, the lead counsel for both MPs told this newspaper that both the Constitution and rules of procedure cannot apply against the suspects in this case.

“That is not applicable because Parliament is aware that they were confined. They are not away on their own volition but were compelled to be out of Parliament by the fact that they are incarcerated so that provision is not applicable,” Mr Lukwago said.

While government has not stated its stance on the two, Parliament last week confirmed that the legislators are still safe because they have never been convicted of any crime.

Mr Chris Obore, the director of communications at Parliament, said the institution received a notification of absence of the duo from the Opposition Chief Whip.

“The Speaker is aware of their absence from the House and the reasons why (they are absent). So their seats are safe until otherwise,” he said.

Past experiences

On February 19, 2014, former Bubulo West MP Tony Nsubuga Kipoi lost his seat after Parliament adopted recommendations by its Rules committee that he had missed 15 sittings of the House, without clear reasons explaining his absence. A report by the Rules, Privileges and Discipline Committee ruled that MP Kipoi had defaulted on the voters in Bubulo West, who elected him.

“That Kipoi be ruled to have ceased to be MP under Article 81(3) of the Constitution and rule 101 of Parliament. The process for his replacement be initiated in accordance with Article (81) 2 of the Constitution,” the committee report stated.

Former army MP David Sejusa had a year earlier been ejected on similar grounds. Sejusa had caused stir when he said groups working on the Muhoozi project planned to eliminate him and those opposed to it and asked the relevant bodies to investigate the claim. He then fled to UK, absconding from Parliament for extended period of time. 

DON'T MISS: State still gathering evidence to pin Ssegirinya, Ssewanyana, court defers case

However, for Mr Kipoi’s case, Opposition legislators accused the House of selectively applying the rules, saying First Lady Janet Museveni, who was the MP Ruhaama at the time, had also missed similar sittings.