Uganda’s Court Allegedly Issues Timeline In Mao-NRM Deal Case
The Constitutional Court has issued timelines for a case involving six Democratic Party members, spearheaded by Member of Parliament Richard Lumu Kizito. They challenge an agreement made by Norbert Mao and President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni. The other legislators in the case are Michael Phillip Lulume Bayigga, John Paul Lukwago Mpalanyi, Fortunate Rode Nantongo, Richard Sebamala, and Fred Kayondo.
This legal battle involves various legal procedures, with the Deputy Registrar directing eight law firms to prepare for conferencing. The court orders the submission of a joint written scheduling memo, highlighting key facts for each party. The petitioners must file submissions by March 18th, 2024, followed by respondents on March 29th, 2024. Any rejoinder is expected by April 15th, 2024, and a conferencing interparty is scheduled for April 18th, 2024.
The crux of the petitioners’ argument is that Mao, without proper authority, consultation, or consent from the party’s organs, signed a cooperation agreement with the ruling National Resistance Movement. This agreement outlines DP’s support for the NRM government in Parliament. It includes provisions such as supporting Parliamentary Votes and procedural motions, and Mao’s appointment as Justice and Constitutional Affairs Minister.
The petitioners contend that Mao’s actions undermine democratic principles, leading them to seek a declaration of the agreement as null and void. They also request a permanent injunction restraining DP organs from ratifying the agreement. However, there is internal controversy within DP, as the Legal Advisor argues for the case’s dismissal, asserting it was misconceived and wrongly filed against the party.
During the conferencing, the court will address this party in-house matter, adding complexity to the legal proceedings. Additionally, lawyer Male Mabirizi filed criminal charges against Mao and Siranda in 2022, accusing them of common nuisance, disobedience of statutory duty, and conspiracy to defraud. Mabirizi alleges that they signed a memorandum of understanding with Museveni without legal authorization, causing annoyance to the public. These charges further emphasize the intricate legal landscape surrounding this case.