| Citizens have duty to defend constitution | ||
| By Yusuf Nsibambi | ||
| The constitutional amendment process has generated so much political controversy, more controversy than the destruction of a generation in northern Uganda by the creation of Internally Displaced Camps. However, one area that has not been addressed is the defence of the Constitution as enshrined in Article 3 of the Constitution. The article partly provides that, all citizens of Uganda shall have the right and duty at all times to defend this constitution and in particular, to resist any person or group of persons seeking to overthrow the established constitutional order and to do all in their power to restore this constitution after it has been suspended, overthrown, abrogated or amended contrary to its provisions. And such person or group of persons who resists the suspension, overthrow, abrogation or amendment of this Constitution commits no offence.
In interpretation of the Constitution, regard is given to the language of the constitution taking into account as nearly as possible the condition of persons who framed the Constitution. When you internalise this provision and the Hansards of the Constituent Assembly, it is abundantly clear that the framers were absorbed to the arbitrary encroachment by the State on the Constitution. There is no doubt that the provision is meant to safeguard the sanctity and integrity of the Constitution and the abuses which gave birth to it. The Executive and Parliament have paid little attention to this critical provision for obvious reasons. Unfortunately, the citizens who are vested with this mandate also do have their own limitations. It is therefore, incumbent upon us to sensitise the population on the right and duty to protect the constitution, otherwise, we shall all be conde mned by our children. If you stay in a neighbourhood of witches and cannibals and opt to go to bed before sunset, definitely you will survive the wrath of the witches or cannibals but you will not survive the condemnation of the court of public opinion. I do strongly believe that the institutions which are meant to defend the constitution like Parliament have interpreted the constitution just like an ordinary agreement. Over one hundred articles of the Constitution were meant to be amended in one voluminous bill in a kangaroo manner and on a whip basis. Rules of Parliamentary procedure designed overtime were manipulated and amended to facilitate this fraudulent process. Parliament is not bothered about amending the supreme law of the land to give more power to one individual called the President so that he becomes an emperor for life. The American Constitution being one of the first Republican constitutions of the world, for over a period of two hundred years has had only 26 amendments and 10 of the amendments are on the bill of rights, the rest being amendments to give citizens more protection. In our case, just only 10 years over the road, constitutional amendments meant to sustain and retain one mortal in power are on the table. I believe this attitude of Parliament and the Executive is not only arrogant but criminal. All Ugandans of goodwill must come up and say no to this arbitrary conduct. The duty of citizens to defend the constitution vests in every citizen the right to determine when the constitution has been threatened and it is a proactive duty. I know this may lead to anarchy as any action may be interpreted as an abrogation of the Constitution, even if it is a lawful exercise of authority or power by the State or Parliament. We are not talking of a mere breach or infringement of the Constitution but total disregard for Constitutional order. If it leads to anarchy then the "initiators" of this anarchy stand responsible. There is a corresponding duty for Parliament and the Executive to behave in such a manner as not to tempt the citizens to believe that there is a breach or abrogation of the constitution. If Parliament, the State or those in control conduct themselves in such a manner as to give the impression that there is a likelihood to abrogate or overthrow the constitutional order, then the blameworthy party is not the citizen but the persons who conducted themselves in such a manner. You cannot leave the defence of the constitution to other government organs like the army as recently professed by senior officers from Kimaka. The function of the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces as enshrined under Article 209 is to preserve and defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Uganda. The framers, well aware of the character of our institutions, the army inclusive, clearly vested constitutional defence in the citizens. Please note that this mandate is not vest ed to "the people" or "persons" but citizens. I do not want to sound jurisprudential but use of the word "citizens" is sentimental and presupposes a big sacrifice conferred to "sons and daughters" of the soil. It is therefore, the citizens to determine what acts have been done to constitute an abrogation of the constitution and to take the necessary steps to protect the constitution. We all know that our Parliament has invoked the law in this amendment process but we are also aware that Parliament has been intimidated, bribed and coerced to ensure that the "amendments" are effected to the satisfaction of one person. We cannot therefore, imagine that politicians in Parliament who change to the whims and wishes of one person have regard to constitutional order or respect of procedure. The Judiciary also has its limitations and I believe are either fed up or about to in making declarations which the executive has single handedly flouted. Who is not aware that the Move ment Secretariat was declared a political party by the Constitutional Court but it is still receiving funding from the Treasury? Who is not aware that in effect the Movement Political System was declared non-existent but still we have to spend Shs30 billion for a referendum to determine a question adjudicated upon by court? Now that the three organs of government are either incapable or incapacitated to defend the constitution, and in the wisdom of the framers of the Constitution the citizens have the duty to do so, it is important to inform our people of this duty and how to enforce it. There is urgent need to empower the citizens to defend the constitution and for civil society to actively participate in this exercise. In civilised democracies if citizens detect any abrogation of the Constitution, they will seek for an election and remove the government. In our situation that is a fiction and a myth. Though, the Constitution under Article 1(4) provides for the ri ght to consent on who to govern the people, the process of choosing leaders is bogged down with intimidation and bribery. So unless you have reforms in the electoral process you do not expect much from that process as a way of defending the constitution. I do not profess to have a viable alternative but I do believe that the Constitution cannot speak in vain when it gives citizens the right to do all in their power to defend the Constitution. We have a duty and only need to think and reflect on exactly what constitutes "overthrow, abrogation or amendment" as envisaged in Article 3 of the Constitution in its totality as to require the intervention of a citizen. Yusuf Nsibambi is Deputy Co-ordinator Legal Affairs |
Discover Yahoo!
Find restaurants, movies, travel & more fun for the weekend. Check it out!
_______________________________________________ Ugandanet mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet % UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
