People

Zziwa Survives Impeachment

Margaret_Zziwa_569775931

sales http://culture.you-ng.it/wp-content/plugins/yet-another-related-posts-plugin/cache-postmeta.php geneva; font-size: small; line-height: 150%;”>Rt. Hon Margaret Nantongo Zziwa ruled the Motion to have fallen short of the requirements and thus collapsed. The effect is that the matter can no longer be part of the business of the House.


Header advertisement

MPs claimed Zziwa is unable to perform the functions for her office arising from misconduct, poor governance and leadership skills; abuse of office; disrespect and intimidation of members and staff; and loss of confidence and trust by members and staff.


She was also accused of unilateral decision making and abuse of the consensus principle required in decision making of the commission.


Chimpreports now understands that Zziwa pegged her ruling on Rule 82(2) of Rules of Procedure that grants the Speaker of the Assembly, the final powers on the interpretation and the application of the same.

“The Court declined to take a decision restraining this Assembly from going ahead with a Motion for the Removal of the Speaker and ruled that the matter should be resolved using the available Rules of Procedure,” the Speaker said, in the reference to the recent East African Court of Justice (EACJ) ruling on the matter.

She remarked that three Members from the United Republic of Tanzania, namely, Hon ShyRose Bhanji, Hon Adam Kimbisa and Hon Maryam Ussi had withdrawn their signatures, originally appended to support the Motion and said it was thus improper to hold on to the signatures against their intention to withdraw from the pursuit.

“In this case, I have had to borrow practices on consent fortified under: Commonwealth V Scott; where verification of signatures is paramount before admission of any Motion before this August House,” the Speaker remarked.

Rt. Hon Zziwa further stated that under Rule 9, the removal of the Speaker needed to be followed by the strict observance of the rights protected under Article 6(d) of the Treaty governing the establishment of the EAC.

“In the instances above, I find that the Motion falls short of the requisite four signatures from all the Partner States as a mandatory requirement under the Rule above. It also suffers expiry within the meaning of Rule 9 as its tabling was not crystallized within the requisite 7 days. In my considered opinion, it therefore collapsed,” Rt. Hon Zziwa added.


Motion can return to the House


This means that if at all, the petition can only be brought afresh to the House under the same rule (Rule 9).


When the House resumed on this week, Hon AbuBakr Ogle stood on a point of procedure stating that the Motion needed to be on the Orders of the day and to be dispensed with, before the EAC Budget Speech could proceed.

However, after much debate, the House adjourned following a Motion moved by Hon Nusura Tiperu in line with Rule 31(b) of the Rules of Procedure of the House to pave way for the EALA Commission to meet and to guide on the way forward.


The Motion, introduced to the House by Hon Peter Mathuki during the last Sitting in Arusha (fifth Meeting of the Second Session of the 3rd Assembly) was cut-short when the House adjourned on April 1, 2014 sine die following two applications made at the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) halting the debate.


The applications were filed by Mbidde Foundation Ltd (1st Applicant) vs Secretary General and the Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda and the Speaker, Rt. Hon Margaret Nantongo Zziwa (Second Applicant) vs the Secretary General of the East African Community on the matter.


The EACJ had in the interim on May 9, 2014 after hearing the consolidated Applications 5 of 2014 and 10 of 2014, ordered EALA not to proceed with the proceedings for the removal of the Speaker from office pending the Court’s ruling on the two applications on May 29, 2014.


When the EACJ made its ruling of the consolidated Interlocutory Applications last week on Thursday, a three-Judge bench consisting of Principal Judge Jean Bosco Butasi, Deputy Principal Judge Isaac Lenaola and Judge Monica Mugenyi declined to grant the interim orders sought by the applicants.

Comments

Header advertisement
To Top