stuff http://chompdigital.com/wp-admin/maint/repair.php geneva;”>The court started a few minutes off 10am in presence of two of the applicants; Theodore Ssekikuubo and Frank Niwagaba.
approved http://clinico.cl/wp-includes/feed.php geneva;”>
Their lead counsel, retired Supreme Court Judge, George Wilson Kanyeihamba introduced his colleagues however, unlike in the Constitutional Court, he excused himself from presenting the applications.
“My Lords, because of my recent association with this court, I disqualify myself from addressing this court though I am the lead counsel,” he said.
John Mary Mugisha, the lead counsel for the respondents requested court to allow him to file his affidavits in court later “because due to unavoidable circumstances, I hadn’t done (filed) them 24 hours before the court sat as required by law”.
“My Lord, I have no objection with that because I too, I am under the same situation. I intend to amend an application we made before,” said Caleb Alaka, one of the counsels of the applicants.
He said that considering Friday’s ruling; in which a mandatory injunction restraining the applicants from entering the premises of Parliament, they were to put another appeal before court.
“We have an application ready with ruling attached and we would like to file them before court.”
The court, made up of seven justices; Benjamin Odoki, Galdino Moro Okello, Bart Magunda Katureebe, Esther Mayambala Kisakye, Christine Kitunga, Jotham Tumwesigye and Ssekoko John decided to adjourn the hearing to Wednesday so that both sides are fully prepared for the hearing.
However this didn’t go down well with Alaka saying, the Constitutional Court had ruled that the “applicants be restrained from entering the premises of Parliament however, my concern is that by Wednesday, the order may have been implemented”.
The applicants; Theodore Ssekikuubo (Lwemiyaga), Wilfred Niwagaba (Ndorwa East), Mohammed Nsereko (Kampala Central) and Barnabas Tinkasiimire (Buyaga) applied for the suspension of the Constitutional Court ruling that temporarily bars them from accessing the premises of parliament.
The ruling is in connection with the petition in which NRM is challenging the ruling by the Speaker of Parliament Rebecca Kadaga that the legislators retain their seats in Parliament.
The MPs argue in their appeal to the Supreme Court that the orders made by the majority judges of the Constitutional Court are not provided for in law.
The NRM and two of its party members sued the Attorney General and Parliament challenging the May 2 ruling by the Speaker allowing the four MPs to retain their seats in the House yet they had been dismissed from the party upon which they had been elected.
Kadaga refused to expel the MPs from the House on account that their dismissal from the party cannot constitutionally translate into expulsion.
However, prior to Friday’s ruling, the MPs who lost the applications to challenge the quorum of three judges sitting as a Constitutional Court, had two weeks ago asked the Supreme Court to stay the hearing of the petitions challenging Ms Kadaga’s ruling to have them retain their seats.