MPS SHOULD NOT DOUBLE AS MINISTERS

 By Michael Aboneka Jr

The Ugandan legal framework provides for an MP to double as a Minister at the appointment of the President. There has ensued debates on the constitutionality of such provisions considering the principles of separation of powers and public interest. The Constitutional Court on March 18th 2021 delivered a landmark judgement in the Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2016 in which the Court emphasized that a Judicial officer who has not resigned their judicial position/office cannot at the same time work in a public office following the appointment by the Executive as this breaches the principle of separation of powers among others. It is now clear that a Judicial officer cannot serve with one leg in the Executive and the other in the Judiciary as this offends Judicial Independence. It is now time to look into steering clear of the fusion between the Executive and the legislature as a number of MPs are appointed as Ministers by the Executive which in my opinion also offends the separation of powers and we hope that this confusion can now be settled by the landmark petition depending on the school of thought one subscribes to. We still have MPS doubling as Ministers an issue we need to put to rest as it breaches the principle of separation of powers and delegated citizens power through the periodic social contracts.


First, having MPs double as Ministers violates the principle of separation of powers. The executive is fused with the legislature by the appointment of an MP to the Executive. The Minister is supposed to be bound by the Collective responsibility principle even if it affects his people to whom he represents. What happens in scenarios where the Cabinet decisions are not in favour of the Constituents? The voters lose their delegate power to an MP who later becomes Minister and much as voters vouch for the appointment of their MPs as Ministers, this they do in ignorance because it takes away their power. This fusion of the Executive and Legislature needs to be broken for there to be a clear separation of powers. The Constitutional Court has on various occasions dealt with the principle of separation of powers especially where the Executive appointments fuse with other arms of government such as the Judiciary-the jury is already out on this in the recent Court Judgement. I do hope that as the new Government sets in, they consider breaking the fusion and confusion and leave MPs to serve their purpose and appoint Ministers from elsewhere to avoid another constitutional conundrum. If this advice falls on deaf ears, perhaps we shall invite the Court to look into this matter again for we need to guard our democracy and constitutionalism.

Secondly, how do we guard against double payments? Do MPs who are ministers reject the privileges and allowances for an MP-mileage allowances, cars among others? When a minister who is an MP visits their constituency, do they use their car as an MP (from which car they were paid 100m for) or the one under their ministry? Do they use the fuel as per the MP mileage allowance or that of the ministry? How do we draw the lines especially on these costs! Could it be that MPs who double as ministers are getting double allowances? We need to dig deep into this issue otherwise we might be losing billions on these expenditures.

Thirdly, there is a representation gap. Does an MP who doubles as minister have time to represent their constituents effectively in the house? How often do they attend plenary in the house as opposed to travels abroad and the frequent state assignments? How do we guard against conflict of interest in as far as balancing between ministerial collective responsibility and the interests and views of the voters? For instance, how do you expect the Minister of Lands to articulate grievances of their voters in opposition of a government bill on land? How will they present both views? If they are bound by the collective responsibility principle, then who represents the dissenting views of their constituency? This means that their voters are left out completely with no representation on this issue.  When we vote for our MP, the terms of reference are clear…to represent us! When they are appointed as Minsters and they hardly have time to respond to our needs and represent us effectively, isn’t this a ground to terminate the social contract? 

The MPs doubling as ministers has been a norm for a long time, but a norm, practice over time does not make it right and constitutional. If we need to have our three arms of government function (by way of checks and balances-as there exists frameworks for this); we need to safeguard the principle of separation of powers to the latter for it is the cornerstone of a functioning democratic state in real terms. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why we should worry about the growing inequality in Uganda

by Michael Aboneka   Uganda continues to grapple with worrying inequalities and regional imbalances.  According to World Bank (2022), half of the population was moderately food insecure and the poorest households were unable to buy food products in the desired amounts. This means that half of our population is a hungry one which can do anything for survival.  In 2021 the Ministry of Finance reported that 28% of Ugandans were poor increasing from 18% prior to COVID-19 era with about two thirds of Uganda losing income and the economy and business still staggers while the gap between the poor and rich widens further because the poor and less privileged are affected adversely proving that  Uganda’s growth is not inclusive. Recently; I saw a number of colleagues expressing their disappointment after some young men stole side mirrors of their cars in broad day light in Kampala and they were left helpless; they couldn’t even run after the thieves. The same state of hopelessness is true to maj
Read more

The US Africa-summit: What is in it for Uganda?

  By Michael Aboneka The US Africa summit, the first of its kind for eight years, following the end of the era of Donald Trump and his America first policy, just concluded. With US President, Joe Biden, deliberately playing a different tune from his predecessor Donald Trump. His was indeed a courting ode, with a promise that the US is "All in on Africa's future”. Even more endearing was the declaration that “Africa belongs at the table in every room — in every room where global challenges are being discussed and in every institution where discussions are taking place” that accompanied the promise that US will support African Union joining the G20 group of large economies as a permanent member.  Biden announced $2 billion in humanitarian aid for Africa to address acute food insecurity, with emphasis that Africa has potential to feed itself and the world and a joke that he, like a poor relative, will visit Africa and spend a long time there. The cheery tone and overt support fro
Read more

The Computer Misuse (Amendment) Bill 2022 cures no mischief

  By Michael Aboneka Jr Hon. Muhammad Nsereko sought leave of Parliament to table an amendment bill to the Computer Misuse Act in February 2022 and has now tabled the bill on the floor of Parliament. In my view, there is nothing new that the new law is seeking to cure and I am waiting to read the Regulatory impact assessment and the justifications thereof beyond public debates.  From the proposed long title of the bill, objectives and the clause on defects in existing law, it is not clear and specific enough of what mischief the bill intends to cure. The amendment seeks to largely protect the right to privacy, prohibition of unlawful access to data and spreading of false information which are already protected by existing legal frameworks such as the Constitution, Children Act, the Human Rights Enforcement Act 2019, Penal Code Act, Data protection and privacy Act 2019 among others. All these provide layers of protection that the bill seeks to do and by large, the amendment will only du
Read more