MPs on Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee  Protest New Proposals in Parliament Amendment Bill 2024

The heated exchange occurred on Wednesday during Lumu’s formal presentation of the Bill, which seeks to provide for the election of the Leader of the Opposition in Parliament before the committee. The spark came as Lumu’s attempt to include new amendments—calling for the creation of two additional positions for Parliamentary Commissioners—was met with resistance from committee members, who described his actions as an “ambush.”

Bosco Okiror, a committee member, accused Lumu of introducing the new changes without prior consultation, stating, “This is trial by ambush. Lumu, you know the rules of court, that you avail an opportunity to your colleague to interrogate and appreciate, now you are ambushing us, stampeding us.” Okiror emphasized that the Bill had already received a certificate of financial implication, which did not account for these additional amendments, thus rendering them outside the committee’s purview.

Soroti District Women Member of Parliament Anna Adeke further highlighted that any additional proposals to the Bill would require a new certificate of financial implication, given the financial burden they would impose. “Those new amendments have a charge on the consolidated fund because having two Commissioners will have a charge on our vote as Parliament,” she remarked.

Despite the criticisms, John Teira, MP for Bugabula North, urged his colleagues not to argue over Lumu’s methods. “You can’t stop Lumu from being shabby, that is his right,” he stated. Teira also questioned the underlying assumptions behind the proposal, asking, “What makes you assert that the only way we can strengthen this office [Leader of Opposition] is to have the leader chosen by opposition members?”

Concerns over the rushed handling of the Bill were also raised. Several committee members questioned why Lumu’s Bill was being fast-tracked, while other crucial Bills, such as constitutional amendments for the rationalization of government agencies, had been left pending.

Jonathan Odur, MP for Erute South, called out the committee leadership, saying, “I was concerned at how quickly this particular amendment has found its way, ahead of the many other Bills that we have in this Committee. Wouldn’t it have been proper that we deal with the constitutional amendment… rather than fast-tracking the Administration of Parliament Act?”

Odur also criticized the manner in which the committee’s schedule for handling the Bill had been set, pointing out that the MPs on the Legal Committee had not been consulted in creating the program. “It has been a practice before a program like this is drawn, an in-house meeting is called before MPs would have their input. And I was surprised that in this Committee, there is a full program that has been issued out without taking into consideration the input of the members,” he added.

The lawmakers’ discontent highlights ongoing tensions regarding the direction and pace of legislative reforms within Parliament, with many calling for greater transparency and deliberation in the legislative process.

Meanwhile, Lumu’s proposed legislation seeks to ensure that all opposition Members of Parliament have a direct role in electing the Minority Leader, rather than the position being determined solely by the opposition party with the largest number of seats.

While tabling it before the House on Tuesday, Lumu urged that the legislation aims to give all opposition parties represented in Parliament a more inclusive role in selecting the Leader of the Opposition, as well as the approval of the shadow cabinet by the opposition parties. But the majority of his members of the opposition view Lumu’s bill as a weapon used by the Parliament’s invisible hand intended to dethrone the current holder of the office of Leader of Opposition.