UGANDA’s Deputy Head of Mission in Qatar Mohammed Baswari Kezaala has welcomed the Civil Division ruling issued by Justice Dr Douglas Karekona Singiza (PhD) in favour of Hon Matthias Mpuuga Nsamba the MP Nyendo-Mukungwe in Masaka who had for months suffered a barrage of media assaults over the controversial Service Award.
The former Jinja Mayor says in spite of the ruling which affirms the legality of the award, all orders given in conclusion are in favour of Daniel Bwette( the applicant),which means Ugandans have won.
Kezaala with his undisputable knowledge on public and governance issues having been a decorated politician for decades, says the judge agrees with the applicant much as service awards were approved by Parliament but in disguise under ex gratia.
“…the judge raises three red lines, namely the phrase ‘service award’ falls outside the usual framework for honoring persons for exemplary performance, service award is for profit-making organizations and not public institutions…”he says.
Ambassador Kezaala also praised the judge for pointing out that salaries and allowances of MPs to discharge their duties and that they are even far above money earned by many essential service providers, hence not proper to award themselves prizes.
He says ‘service award’ is usually given to people who have served five years and is disturbed to note that the parliamentary commissioners serve for only two-and-a-half years, which he terms ‘strange’.
The judge notes that whatever a statute vests a public body with discretionary power to perform an act, like parliament has powers to appropriate national funds, it is not a blank cheque to fill in, and meaning utmost care should be exercised.
Justice Dr Douglas Karekona Singiza ruled that whereas the service award was approved by parliament and formed part of the budget tabled by the executive, it was improper.
Hon Mpuuga and other parliamentary commissioners who have for months had a very fractious relationship with a section of NUP leaders and Ugandans had been in the centre of public spat over the 1.7bn/=cash bonanza which was vaguely labeled as Service Awards for the ‘wonderful’ services they rendered to the 11th parliament.
The other beneficiaries who got 400M/= each include NRM’s Prossy Akampulira (Rubanda District Woman MP),Solomon Silwanyi (Bukooli County MP in Bugiri) and Esther Afoyochan(Zombo District Woman MP).
The court verdict arose from a petition filed in May 2024 by one Daniel Bwette who calls himself a Concerned Citizen against the Parliamentary Commission.
Daniel Bwette, in his Miscellaneous Cause No 85 of 2024 had argued that the Commissioners of Parliament, who are also Members of Parliament (MPs) for different constituencies, sat and approved a payment described as a “service award” on May 6th 2022 in the Speaker Annette Anita Among’s Boardroom at Parliament.
In his application, Bwette had asked court to declare the 500M to Mpuuga, and 400M each to three other Commissioners under the guise of this being a so-called service award, illegal, oppressive, arbitrary, biased, high-handed, irrational, unfair, and therefore null and void.
He also sought a declaration that the decision to create and award payment under the name of a service award is ‘an abuse of power and in contravention of [the principle that a political leader should not make a decision when he or she has a pecuniary interest’.
While Mpuuga and group have apparently emerged victorious, the judge faulted the Clerk to Parliament for negligence of duty and directed the Permanent Secretary to institute disciplinary actions against Adolf Mwesige.
Justice Dr Singiza has ruled that the Clerk to Parliament as the Accounting Officer has a special role in the budgeting process and should have detected mistakes in the budget since the service award is unknown in the payment system of parliament and therefore improper.
As a consequence, Justice Dr Singiza has directed that the supposedly very experienced lawyer cum-politician now serving as Clerk to Parliament Adolf Mwesige who has served as MP and Minister in the past, was negligent.
He says under the law, Parliament cannot increase its emoluments even if it’s disguised as a ‘service award’ without a motion by the Executive head or his representative, and therefore since it was done without the executive, it was improper.
The judge in his ruling observed that the service award was in the budget sent to parliament by the executive of government (cabinet) and that it was the speaker (Annette Anita Among) who requested the president to include it.
According to the ruling, the ‘service award’ was approved by parliament but it was hidden (smuggled) under a wrong-yet-genuine vote for retirement benefits for speakers and deputy speakers.
The judge further said retirement benefits are an entitlement, not ex gratia and that it was improper to put retirement benefits for speakers and deputy speakers under the ex gratia vote followed by service awards under the same vote.
“…it is in this regard that a proposal is made to the Attorney General to urgently consider a Salary and Emoluments Review Board Bill, whose object would be to review and harmonize emoluments and allowances of government and political leaders…”he directed.
Such a board, the judge said, would reduce the temptation of leaders adopting rather ad hoc ways of enhancing their emoluments under the cover of prize money, these being matters which the Board (suggested above) should in fact report directly to the president.
As can be recalled, newspaper articles and social media posts in this country are awash with reports of allegations of government agencies and politicians awarding themselves prizes in the form of money.
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at Submit an Article
