The Independent Uganda: You get the Truth we Pay the Price
Kampala, Uganda | THE INDEPENDENT | Presidential aspirant retired Lt General Henry Tumukunde has petitioned the High Court asking it to forward the file in which he is challenging the summons issued by the Criminal Investigations Department of police to the constitutional court for interpretation.
Last month, Tumukunde through his lawyers led by Anthony Wameli sued the Attorney General and CID director Grace Akullo challenging her August 17, 2020, summons which required him to appear at Kibuli to record a statement.
“The CID is investigating allegations to the effect that on several occasions, at your office and residence both in Kololo and other locations within the country, you have held meetings with army veterans discussing issues related to politics,” the summons read.
However, Tumukunde challenged the summons arguing that the summons in contention tantamount to a violation of his constitutional right to liberty and freedom of expression. Tumukunde also noted that there is a looming arrest based on the said summons which he argued did not specify whether he is to appear as a suspect or witness.
He thus asked the court to quash the said summons citing that they violate his constitutional right to liberty.
During the hearing of the case, Tumukunde through his lawyer Wameli asked the trial Judge Musa Ssekaana to drop the Attorney General from the list of the respondents. Tumukunde wanted to remain with Akullo alone on the case. Wameli also asked the court to summon Akullo to justify why she was being represented by the government lawyers yet she had been sued in her individual capacity.
But Justice Ssekaana declined to grant all the prayers by Tumukunde and asked parties to put in written submissions in the case so that he can deliver his judgement on October 23, 2020.
However, being aggrieved with Justice Ssekaana’s decision, Tumukunde has now petitioned the High Court Civil division. Tumukunde wants High Court to halt the proceedings in the pending case before Ssekaana and instead forward the file to the constitutional court to interpret five constitutional questions that arose from his case.
According to his petition, Tumukunde wants the Constitutional Court to interpret whether the functions of the Attorney General under Article 119 clause four of the constitution can extend to representing individual civil/public servants who have been personally accused of human rights violations in light of article 50(1) of the Constitution and section 10 clause one of the Human Rights Enforcement Act, 2019.
The said law under the Human Rights Enforcement Act provides that any public officer who individually or associates with others to violate one’s rights has to be personally liable for his or her offences. It also adds that in case court orders for compensation to the victim of that public officer’s actions, the officer is supposed to pay a portion of the award ordered by the court.
Tumukunde also wants the constitutional court to interpret whether while seeking to enforce his rights under article 50 clause one can be forced to sue or maintaining a suit or against the Attorney General or any other person.
“Whether the act of criminalizing the discussion of politics with veterans by Akullo was discriminatory and amounts to an infringement on the right of the applicant and the said veterans have freedom of association contrary to article 29.1.1 of the constitution,” reads the petition in part.
Tumukunde’s lawyer Wameli has told URN that his client now wants the High Court to halt the proceedings in the case challenging the summons until the constitutional court pronounces itself on his questions.
******
URN
