The State Minister for Lands, Housing, and Urban Development, Ms Persis Namuganza, has lost her bid in which she had sought High Court orders to quash the report of the Parliamentary Ad-hoc Committee on the Naguru-Nakawa land allocations.
While dismissing the law suit on Monday, presiding judge Musa Ssekaana held that Ms Namuganza failed to prove that she was not given a fair hearing when she appeared before the committee.
The committee was probing the manner in which some companies and individuals acquired the Naguru-Nakawa land.
Ms Namuganza had been faulted for falsifying a presidential directive that saw Uganda Land Commission allocate land to certain entities.
“The applicant did not set out any evidence to prove that she was not given a fair hearing apart from merely alleging every limb of what amounts to a fair hearing and contending in submissions that they were not observed,” ruled Justice Ssekaana.
Ms Namuganza had argued that the proceedings on the land allocations were biased and their adoption into the Parliament report were illegal, irregular, and unfair.
She had claimed that although the committee was exercising its mandate, it lacked impartiality, which is a fundamental ingredient of a fair hearing.
“The applicant was not allowed to ably explain her involvement as the then Minister of State for Lands, hence making her interactions with the committee a mere event to which she was invited,” Ms Namuganza said in her affidavit.
But Justice Ssekaana said she did not take an extra step to explain what she meant by not being given enough time to explain herself before the committee.
“The applicant seems to confuse the right to just and fair treatment in administrative decisions under Article 42 with the right to a fair hearing under Article 28 of the Constitution,” held Justice Ssekaana.
“The two rights are quite different and distinct since the latter is only applicable before an independent and impartial court or tribunal established by law. Therefore, parliamentary proceedings or investigations cannot be treated as court proceedings in order to require fair hearing as envisaged under Article 28 of the Constitution,” he added.
Justice Ssekaana also dismissed the Shs1b in damages that Ms Namuganza had asked from the Attorney General, the sole respondent in the matter.
“I do not know how she arrived at such a huge figure. What would be the basis for such a claim for an ‘obscene’ amount as general damages?” the judge wondered.
“Such claims are intended to scandalise the court and paint a picture that litigation is a mode of making free money in Ugandan courts. This should be seriously loathed and discouraged,” Justice Ssekaana added. He ordered that each party bears their own legal costs.
“This court has not found any abuse of authority or power by Parliament, the applicant is not entitled to any damages. This application fails on all the orders sought and the same stands dismissed,” ruled Justice Ssekaana.
Background
On May 18, the Ad-hoc committee report on the land was presented before Parliament. Court documents state that the minister questioned the authenticity of the report but her attempts were futile as the Parliament proceeded to debate and adopt it.
“The Hon. Speaker of Parliament proceeded to have a debate on the impugned report contrary to law despite the applicant’s opposition to the same for want of authenticity,” Ms Namuganza had stated in her affidavit.
“That she was condemned unheard and declared to have committed the offence of abuse of office yet the report is short of proper assessment and inconsistent with findings and conclusions therein hence biased and unreasonable,” the minister added.