What does the road ahead look like in censure motion?

“We have already put everything in place. The motion is in place. The evidence to be attached to the motion is in place. The signatures of MPs supporting the motion have overshot the required 177 by more than nine signatures,” Mr Ssekikubo told journalists on Friday at a media briefing held within the precincts of the House. 

The trio is seeking to throw out three NRM legislators: Mr Solomon Silwany, Ms Esther Afoyochan, and Ms Prossy Akampurira Mbabazi, plus Mr Mathias Mpuuga, a former LoP. The four backbench parliamentary commissioners stand accused of pocketing the Service Awards.

The House leadership has severally blocked any debate of the corruption allegations that have bedevilled Parliament since the start of the year. House Speaker Anita Among, who chaired the meeting that gave the Shs1.7 billion service award, has expressly shut down the debate. Reports that the topic was scheduled to be debated on July 30 collapsed when sittings were cancelled. 

Which lawmakers have or haven’t offered support to the motion?
Legislators leaning to all parties appended their signatures. Only one minister, Ms Persis Namuganza, signed the motion. Patriotic League Movement’s David Kabanda, and Micheal Mawanda, who is currently on remand for cases related to corruption, also supported the motion.

Those in the Opposition who didn’t sign include Joyce Bagala (NUP), Abed Bwanika (NUP), Micheal Kakembo (NUP), Twaha Kagabo (NUP), Bashir Kaziwe (NUP), Medard Ssegona (NUP), Brenda Nabukenya (NUP) and Juliet Nakabuye (NUP). 

Some FDC legislators, who did not append signatures include Anna Ebaju, Anthony Akol, Geoffrey Ekanya, Moses Kabusu, Florence Kabhugho, and Geofrey Katusabe. 

Two of the five youth legislators, Phionah Nyamutoro and Boniface Henry Okot, did not sign, while only one of the Workers’ lawmakers, Abdul Byakatonda, appended his signature.

What does the road ahead for motion look like?
Whereas it took him nearly three months in an open-ended pursuit to secure the required 177 signatures, Mr Ssekikubo will, starting Monday, have only 14 weekdays or less to convince half of the 529 lawmakers to vote in favour of his motion. This is after the motion is tabled and debated. 

Since the Lwemiyaga legislator embarked on the signature hunt in mid-May, a section of lawmakers, including Mr Nuwagaba refused to green-light the motion on account that the mover refused to share supporting evidence for the motion. In a series of reactions, Mr Ssekikubo insisted that this would be tabled on the floor once the debate got the all clear. 

Section 5(4) of the Administration to Parliament Act, stipulates that “a member of the commission, other than the Speaker and the Leader of Government business, may be removed from office by Parliament for inability to perform the functions of his or her office arising from infirmity of body or mind, misbehaviour, misconduct or incompetence.” 

The Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Uganda buttress the same reasons and define the process to inform the removal of the commissioner from the said position. Rule 110 of the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament requires Mr Ssekikubo to attach supporting evidence and requires a minimum number of signatures on the notification sent to the Clerk’s office seeking space on the order paper.

Once notification is captured in the clerk’s office, Parliament is expected to within 14 weekdays include the motion on the order paper. 

“A motion for the resolution under this rule shall be placed on the Order Paper, 14 days from the date on which notice to remove the commissioner shall have been communicated to the clerk,” rule 110 (5) reads in part. 

What happens after space is successfully sought on the order paper?
Once endorsed and put on the order paper, the mover of the motion—in this case Mr Ssekikubo—will then table implicating evidence against the four backbench commissioners he seeks to unseat. His colleagues in plenary will then premise on said evidence to debate and later vote either in support or against the mover’s prayer.  However, Rule 110 (6) conditions that “a commissioner shall be removed upon the vote of at least half of all Members of Parliament.”

What are civil society’s two cents on this matter?
Mr Julius Mukunda, the executive director of the Civil Society Budget Advocacy Group (CSBAG), credited Mr Ssekikubo for his unrelenting effort in the signature hunt and demanded that the House rules of procedure should be revised to not only relax the hurdles but also allow non-MPs participate in the said process.

“You can now see what it takes to discuss corruption in Parliament. If it is so difficult to discuss in Parliament, what happens in the rest of other government departments?” Mr Mukunda said and immediately suggested that “Parliament must revise its petition rules so that each and every citizen of Uganda can petition Parliament to discuss any matter that is of great concern.”

Motion opposers say
Wilfred Nuwagaba, the Shadow Attorney General, said: “Every commissioner should be treated independently. The issues surrounding [Mathias] Mpuuga happened when he was LoP, not a commissioner.”

Ojara Mapenduzi, the Bardege-Layibi lawmaker, said: “I have not been able to see the grounds that they have stated. I have not read the contents of the motion.”

Abdu Katuntu, Bugweri MP, opined: “I am the chairperson of the rules committee of Parliament which is charged with the responsibility of investigating any issue or allegations of misbehaviour. Given that role, I cannot participate in being an accuser because these are potentially matters that may come to my committee.” 

Kira Municipality lawmaker Ibrahim Ssemujju, simply said: “Mpuuga and I are friends.”