In a dramatic parliamentary session on Wednesday, Leader of Opposition Joel Ssenyonyi openly confronted Speaker Anita Among over her role in the ongoing debate on the controversial Coffee Bill, accusing her of harbouring an undisclosed personal interest.
This tense altercation comes amid heightened scrutiny of the Coffee Bill, which has sparked sharp divides across the political spectrum, particularly concerning the implications for coffee farmers in Uganda’s central region.
The Nakawa West lawmaker accused the Speaker of harbouring a conflict of interest and displaying tribal bias.
It all began when Ssenyonyi took the floor to express his reservations about Speaker Among’s impartiality, citing Rule 94 of the parliamentary rules, which mandates any “member” with a personal stake in a matter to declare it before participating in debates or voting. He argued that, although the Speaker technically does not vote, Among’s recent comments and interactions pointed to an undue interest in the outcome of the Coffee Bill.
“Right Honorable Speaker, Rule 94 is clear on the necessity for any member with a personal interest in a matter before this House to declare it,” he asserted. “Given the nature of your recent remarks on this bill and exchanges with government officials, I am compelled to believe you may have a personal stake in its outcome. Such conduct, in my view, calls for a declaration or even recusal from presiding over this issue.”
Ssenyonyi highlighted an exchange witnessed on national television, where Speaker Among questioned the government chief whip about the numbers needed to pass the bill. “This, Right Honorable Speaker, appeared to show an unusual level of concern and engagement,” he said. “If you indeed have a position on this matter, then it would be proper under Rule 94 to acknowledge it.”
Expanding his criticism, Ssenyonyi raised an issue of tribal sensitivity. He accused Speaker Among of making remarks that appeared to discriminate against the Baganda community, a group heavily involved in coffee farming.
Ssenyonyi alleged that Among’s comments suggesting the government should avoid granting certain concessions to the central region sent a worrying message about potential tribal bias in policy decisions.
“This House represents all Ugandans, and this Coffee Bill affects farmers from multiple regions, not just one ethnic group,” he argued. “When the Speaker, the embodiment of impartiality, makes comments that appear biased against a particular group, it risks alienating Ugandans and undermining trust in our democratic institutions.”
In response, Speaker Among categorically dismissed the accusations, defending her conduct and her role as a non-partisan presiding officer. She argued that Rule 94, cited by Ssenyonyi, specifically applies to “members” and does not extend to the Speaker, who, by definition, remains neutral in parliamentary debates.
“To clarify, Rule 94 pertains to ‘members’ with vested interests, and the Speaker, as per Rule 2, is independently defined and thus does not fall under this stipulation,” she explained. “Moreover, Rule 77 makes it explicit that the Speaker shall not participate in debates or vote on any issue before the House. This is designed precisely to ensure that the Speaker remains above any partiality.”
Among added that her role as Speaker inherently protects her from allegations of conflict of interest since she neither debates nor votes. She stressed that any decision to address conflicts within the chamber lies within her discretion as Speaker, according to parliamentary rules.
“Under Rule 94(4), I am empowered to determine if a conflict exists, and I assure this House that I am not conflicted in any way regarding the Coffee Bill. My sole objective is to facilitate debate and ensure that all voices are heard fairly. The procedural guidelines prevent the Speaker from influencing votes, and any assumptions of personal involvement are unfounded,” she said.
The Speaker also addressed the alleged tribal sentiments. She firmly rejected Ssenyonyi’s accusations of prejudice, reiterating her commitment to representing all regions fairly. “As Speaker, I am charged with upholding a fair and balanced parliamentary environment. My remarks were taken out of context; the bill in question is for the benefit of all Ugandans,” she added.
The exchange between Among and Ssenyonyi amplified tensions in Parliament, especially over sensitive issues like ethnic equity and resource allocation. Coffee farming holds significant economic and cultural value, particularly for Baganda farmers who have long voiced concerns over policies perceived as marginalizing their interests.
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at editorial@watchdoguganda.com
