the Humanist view

“We need to defeat people like Frank Kanduho. My brother is unable to stand up for the judicial property of the Bar. My brother thinks there is nothing we can do about invoking a provision of the Constitution that gives power to an agency (Judicial Service Commission). He has no solution, at least none given here. He has no opinion, at least none given here. I will address and root out issues of constitutional desservice, historical blunder, ideological backwardness, and the conceptual confusion of applying only half the solution when you have double the problem. Colleagues, if you are looking for resilience, this (him) is where it is. Vote the lawyers’ lawyer. Olimujjawa omusajja asinga nze (where will you find a man better than I)” Elison Karuhanga.

Ija, things are heating up, Ajakait chimes in all excited. She goes on:

This, the quote above, is an amalgamation of things Karuhanga said when, as a candidate, he submitted during the first debate of the candidates seeking to be elected by their peers of the Uganda Law Society (ULS) to represent ULS on the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).

Ijoba, Ija, even me I tuned in and watched the historic debate, the first of its kind, live online. Karuhanga did not hold back. His body language matched his words. His eyes mmmmm … Okay, back on track.

Counsel Elison Karuhanga during first debate of candidates vying to be elected representatives of ULS on JSC.

Karuhanga was the man of the hour. He named names, and solarized – aloikin ojok cut, ya yanise mune kabisa, okwe!

Ajakait, what are you rumbling on about? Breathe! She catches her breath and bounces back to kind of rebuke me:

Ija, I am updating you on the battle to return rule of law to Uganda. For you, you are just there. Besides, today’s WordPress daily writing prompt is the question:

“If you had a million dollars to give away, who would you give it to?”

Ija, without a doubt, at the moment, for me, Ajakait, if I had a million dollars, I would give it to men and women who are doctrinally perpendicular, such as Karuhanga, who are overtly putting themselves out there to fight for constitutionalism and normalization back to the rule of law in Uganda.

I would give it to the Radical New Bar, the current administration of the ULS, and the majority of ULS members who voted in the Radical New Bar leadership. Without them, business would have gone on as usual, as it was with previous ULS administrations.

A glimpse of such business as usual, by the way, Ija, also made it into the debate. Amolo eviscerated her fellow candidates, one by one, pointing out their inaction or transgressions. She likened their characters to the characteristics of a water melon (green on the outside and red on the inside).

What you see is not what you get kind of warning. Amolo’s submission particularly hit a nerve with the former ULS President, Wall. Ija, if the moderator had not stopped the debate on time, there is every indication that those two learned female lawyers were going to degenerate into a cat fight.

Ija, I have digressed. Let me get back to the point. Against all odds, the leadership of the Radical New Bar have remained steadfast to the spirit of the law. They are standing up and standing tall for the “judicial property of the bar.”

Theirs is the first ULS administration to insist that members representing ULS on the JSC must be elected by ULS members. Kudos to the seemingly now persecuted and exiled ULS President, Isaac Ssemakadde, and his entire Council.

Senior Counsel Isaac Ssemakadde President Uganda Law Society and Counsel Asiimwe Anthony, Vice President Uganda Law Society.

By the way, Ija, the current Vice President of ULS, Asiimwe Anthony, is in a league of his own. Another time, I will tell you about his prowess as an example good leader. He is a looker with dreamy eyes and is soft spoken, but firm in support of his fellow Radical New Bar leaders and their vision 2060.

Ija, let me first finish explaining to you the implications of the greater good that the Radical New Bar led ULS is bequeathing us all momentarily.

Konye, Ajakait, you are not a ULS voter, how does this relate to you being an undecided voter?

Ija, that is what I was about to explain to you. And, moreover, using the words of Counsel Karuhanga.

Okay, you go ahead, I notice impatience in Ajakait’s voice. She obviously thinks it is so obvious and is dumbfounded that she has to explain it to me. She goes:

Ija, have you been following the NUP (National Unity Platform) – IPOD (Inter-Party Organisation for Dialogue) saga?

No, tell me more, Ajakait.

Less than two weeks have passed and NUP has caved. Reportedly, it has now decided to join IPOD, which it said that in principle it would not. And the backlash from its followers and praise singers has come fast and furious. But for me, Ija, that is not the focus.

My focus is on my new learning, knowledge, that NUP, the party with the largest number of ‘opposition members of parliament (MPs)’ in the 11th Parliament, did not formally engage and resist the new IPOD rules while the rules were being debated on the floor of the house.

Apparently, none of the NUP MPs, not even the Leader of the Opposition, appended their signature in support of the relevant parliamentary minority report. But, right after the law was amended, NUP joined in the gallery purposeless lamentation; and, thereafter, filed a case in Court.

Ija, really, isn’t this what Karuhanga described as people who “think there is nothing we can do about invoking a provision of the Constitution that gives power to an agency?” In this case, Parliament, specifically the power of the Minority Report and the Hansard, for posterity.

Does this not fit in what Karuhanga described as “conceptual confusion of applying only half the solution when you have double the problem?”

As in, what was the wisdom of NUP MPs not using a multi-faceted approach – vehemently resist in Parliament; use the record of resistance in Parliament as supporting evidence in Court; and in the interim join IPOD on the onset with guns blazing and with demands?

I see your point Ajakait, I say, but she does not allow me to continue. Ajakait interjects:

Ija, I am not yet finished making my point. If NUP is asking for my vote, how can it convince me it is going to do better when its MPs current, to use the words of Karuhanga, seem operating in “historical blunder, ideological backwardness and constitutional deservice?”

How can I then trust that NUP is capable of taking on the role of “Chain Breaker,” as Paul Mukiibi is branding himself in his campaign to be elected a ULS representative on the JSC?”

Counsel Paul Mukiibi, the Chain Breaker.

Yes, Ija, Mukiibi is among those whom I categorize as doctrinally perpendicular and who is effectively fighting for restoration of rule of law in Uganda via there being competent judicial officers.

If I was to make the decision based on the first debate of candidates for election as ULS representatives to the JSC, to be voted to represent ULS on the JSC and jointly receive a million dollars to facilitate their work at the JSC, I would choose Karuhanga and Mukiibi.

Ajakait, before you hung up, quick question: “Aren’t you worried that you are coming off as a NUP critic or even detractor?”

Konye, Ija, the ruling party is a known entity, why should I focus my energies on that? I have already blogged about it for decades.

For the other parties with a presidential candidate in the race, Ija, there are some I will not even bother to fact-check and that says a lot, in itself.

Ideally, Ija, since NUP has the largest number of MPs current, it would have followed logic that the other opposition parties would not focus on reversing that gain. Instead they are all competing tooth and nail to further splinter the opposition; and which will likely strengthen the incumbent.

Similarly, NUP, in some constituencies where other opposition political parties have strong candidates for MP, NUP has also fielded a candidate. Now, don’t you think the incumbent will increase its numbers instead? I am not saying they shouldn’t, this is politics. But I long for a less skewed parliament.

And, ija, do you know what is crazy? The strong man not in the race and on the ballot, is revered as though he is in the race. His letters from prison to the judge, begs us to reflect on if we did not loose the opportunity. Where will we ever get another fiery opposition leader of substance such as he, some are asking, Ija.

As for me, Ija, if it would be allowed, I would also give myself some of the a million dollars, to clear eyebrow raising exorbitant costs, that I believe corruptly awarded. A story for another day. But which exemplifies the judicial tyranny and corruption, I am persuaded JSC Chain Breaker Mukiibi would end.

Ija, bye for now

Aso, okay, I say and Ajakait rings off.