Newly sworn-in State Minister for Lands, Kayunga District Woman MP Aidah Nantaba, may not enjoy the jubilant mood for long as there are many forces aimed at bringing her down.
Nantaba who was sworn-in yesterday at State House Entebbe along with other ministers almost did not make it after a concerned citizen petitioned court on the matter of her approval.
However, the move to block Nantaba from swearing in as Lands State Minister flopped when the court refused to hear an application by Peter Kibirango.
Kibirango, a lawyer by profession, through Bwambale, Musede & Company Advocates, had sought to stop Nantaba from swearing in as State Minister, pending the hearing and final determination of his constitutional petition seeking to nullify her approval.
In his petition, he challenged the procedure applied to approve Nantaba claiming it was improper and that it also breached provisions of the Constitution.
“The procedure fell below the required standard and out rightly flouted the cardinal constitutional principles,” Kibirango said in his affidavit. He criticized the Parliamentary vetting committee for acting as judge in its own cause and flouted the constitutional provisions and the Parliament Rules of procedure.
Kibirango also accused the Vetting Committee for allegedly abdicating its function and responsibility of protecting and promoting the democratic governance of Uganda under the Constitution.
The Court of Appeal/ Constitutional Court’s Registrar Elias Omar Kisawuzi told the lawyers representing Kibirango that the court could not hear their application because it had been filed late.
“The court is not ready to adjudicate the matter at such short notice. We needed ample time to prepare ourselves for such a matter of that magnitude. Moreover, it would be an academic exercise to entertain the application seeking to stop the swearing in of a person at the very time when the occasion is in progress at State House,” Kisawuzi told the petitioner’s lawyers.
Kisawuzi further told the petitioner and his lawyers that the interest of justice would demand that the petitioner and the Attorney General should be heard together.
However, Kisawuzi assured the petitioner and his lawyers that the court would fix the date for hearing the petition and decide it on its merits when other parties would present their legal arguments.