Museveni’s Election Victory Challenged in the Supreme Court

by Valerian Kkonde

PEARL NEWS SERVICE

But will the Judiciary redeem itself or will it further sink with Museveni? How about Amama Mbabazi; will he emerge as an agent of change or as an agent preserving the status quo?

John Patrick Amama Mbabazi

In any case, on March 1, 2016 presidential candidate in the February 18, 2016 elections, John Patrick Amama Mbabazi, filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the victory of Yoweri Museveni.

Electoral Commission (EC) chairman, Engineer Badru Kiggundu, on March 20, 2016 announced Museveni winner with 60.8% of the votes cast. His main challenger Dr. Kizza Besigye got 35.65%. Besigye, who since then has been placed under house arrest, rejected the results claiming that they were a result of a fraudulent exercise. Mbabazi was given 1.39%.

International Elections Observers: the European Union and the Commonwealth reported that the elections were not free and fair. EC maintains that the results are correct but has failed and blatantly refused to provide the declaration sheets on which he based to announce the winner.

In his petition, Amama Mbabazi wants court to nullify Museveni’s victory on the grounds that the EC failed to comply with the law.

Although Mbabazi’s decision to go to court for redress has been applauded as  a sign of political maturity in settling the current impasse, it is important to understand the status of the courts supposed to administer justice to Ugandans.

For more than three years, the Uganda Human Rights Commission has   labeled the Judiciary as the second most corrupt institution in Uganda. On that note, justice is a preserve for the rich and the well connected in society.

Our caliber of judges consists of those who brag publicly about their being cadres of the ruling party, the National Resistance Movement. There are those who have reached the top with a poor performance record but some how managed to maneuver their way out. Others have been disappointed to the extent of deciding to quit because they refused to be arm -twisted and the perks that come with such. That is the Judiciary in Uganda.

Chief Justice Bart Katureebe Magunda

For three years, Uganda did not have a substantive Chief Justice (CJ) because the president did not approve of the choice made by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). The current CJ, Bart Katureebe Magunda finally assumed office and is held in high esteem both within the judicial circles and the society at large.

A number of judges in the Supreme Court, names withheld, are referred to as cadre judges: they are purposely there to serve the interests of the powers that be. The Deputy Chief Justice (DCJ) Stephen Kavuma is one of the Judges said to have been smuggled into that position. He heads the Court of Appeal. Unfortunately, on many occasions he has acted as a robot, serving the interests of the Executive, but claiming to be administering justice. When the government militia referred to as Black Mambas raided the High Court premises to thwart the Court’s judgment favouring the Opposition, the Judiciary was unanimous in condemning this savage act. It was only Stephen Kavuma who came out to support the savage raid on the temple of Justice!    

The bitter truth is that Uganda’s dictator, Yoweri Museveni, has destroyed all the institutions and replaced them with himself. Museveni thought that he would be a smart dictator by getting the institutions do his dirty work and get away with it. Not at all! His mask has been so shuttered that he has won himself the title of Hitler of the 21^st Century.

John Patrick Amama Mbabazi is an insider in the NRM. As former Prime Minister and Secretary General of the party he is definitely aware of the state of the Judiciary. He is definitely aware of how the Judiciary has been reduced to a shadow of itself. He is actually suspected to have played a key role in the destruction of the only institution named after virtue.

Kizza Besigye, a presidential candidate in the just concluded elections has been there twice and came to the conclusion that it is comedy to go to the courts. He swore never to go there again.

Among the many accusations brought against Amama Mbabazi by the NRM camp is that of creating parallel institutions while he was PM and SG. He is further accused of making underground moves to replace his boss Museveni. No one can say with certain what parallel institutions Mbabazi put in place or what plans he had in place to replace Museveni.

Mbabazi’s decision to go to court under the prevailing circumstances raises a lot of questions than answers. Legally, as a presidential candidate, he is suited to petition the Supreme Court. But the circumstances seem not to favour him; at a glance it only offers Museveni and Badru Kiggundu the badly needed approval of the fraudulent election that has been rejected by all the International Election Observers as well as some few Ugandan organisations.

Irregularities in the elections included outright vote-rigging, pre ticked ballots in favour of Museveni, intimidation of the Opposition supporters, ballot stuffing and disenfranchising voters by delivering voting materials, in areas known to be pro Besigye, past midday. Voting was supposed to start at 7.00 am and close at 4.00 pm.

As the country braved itself for the campaigns in November 2015, there was an attempt by the Opposition to field one presidential candidate. The actual contest was between Besigye and Mbabazi. Nobert Mao of the Democratic Party and Olara Otunnu of Uganda Peoples Congress had stepped aside to let the bulls sort themselves out. Former Vice President Gilbert Bukenya also stayed in the race but was considered a non-starter; he later returned to Museveni’s camp.

To date many people suspect Mbabazi of being a Museveni agent. It is the outcome of the petition that will clear all that doubt; that is when one will be able to tell, with certain that indeed Mbabazi is working for the much desired change or is striving to safeguard the status quo.

Government interference with the Judiciary has reached alarming levels in Uganda. The situation has moved from bad to worse, and the Executive demanding for judgments in its favour is now the norm.  This has come about as a result of appointing mediocre judges who find it their duty to reciprocate the favours.

One can confidently bet that the result from the panel will be 3-6 in favour of the Emperor. While an individual judge may enjoy the essential conditions of judicial independence, if the court or tribunal over which he or she presides is not independent, the tribunal cannot be said to be independent.

The courts in Uganda have lost the trust and confidence of the public. Many court users regard them as places where robbery and injustice breed and multiply. Courts have been turned into dens of thugs. It sounds rude but it is the reality. 

Ugandans are not waiting to see the court cancel out Museveni’s victory but rather see how it sinks further down the drain along with Museveni. It is up to the Justices to redeem their reputation and that of the institution supposed to be the watchdog of rights and liberties of the people, or take on the title of robed criminals.