Hon. Otto Odonga Letter to Hon. Rebecca Kadaga: “Re: Withdrawal from your Cases Cum Demand Note” (29.09.2017)

Uganda: Speaker Rebecca Kadaga on the Chronic Absenteeism dragging Parliamentary Work Behind (Audio)

Letter – RK/GEN/1072/2016: “Re: Publication by the Uganda Radio Network” (12.10.2016)


Uganda: Preliminary Response on Parliament’s Statement about the Media (15.09.2016)


Opinion: Kadaga’s sudden anger towards the media; the Honourable has lost touch with Commoners and the Common Sense!


Parliamentary Speak Rebecca Kadaga in Parliament: “Let us sue these media houses, take them to court so they lose money”.

Well, honourable Rebecca Kadaga of the noble house of Uganda Parliamentary. There might be misquotes from the Media, even comments and stories that are wrong. But the credit for this is the ruin of the public display and also the tradition of the aghast-house.

If you wonder why the stories come it is because the Members of Parliament loves to be in the spotlight and tell their stories. The media continue to pound on the use of monies while the state borrows more monies and adds debt. This happens as the revenue is kept in the shadow and of the public.

Hon. Rebecca Kadaga said this also today: “I caution the press, the next time such reports are made, editors will be asked to apologize”.

And you shouldn’t wonder about our scepticism to your accountability and just behaviour as the MPs are following a long road of doling out when it is needed for the Executive. The Media will only say what the shadow looks like and not just get the media begging.

There isn’t weird that the media and opposition reacts to the funding of cars up-to 200m UGX and all the benefits of being in Parliament. Together with the weekly fees and other housing fees; also the one point of trying to avoid income-tax on their salaries like ordinary folks.

So the MPs greed will be discussed and with the knowledge of certain MPs todays show the disrespect of the National Resistance Movement MPs.

Hon. Julius Abua Acom said: “We should keep the money for burial a secret, UGX68 Million shouldn’t be in the public eye, for people will curse us”.

Minister Chris Baryomunsi said: “Media should respect Parliament in their reporting. Parliamentary commission needs to come up with guidelines”.


Hon. Jalia Lukumu N. Abwooli Bintu said: “Government needs to come out and give us UGx500 Million for a brand new cars, we dont need to shy away, it is our right”.

When you are having MPs who flaunt their wealth and want to use taxpayers monies like kids wants to eat candy then you know the system is rigged and maladministration. The Parliament cannot be healthy when Hon. Jalia Bintu of Masindi who has already asked in 2015 for the locals to consult with her; this happen in September 2015 when she needed the locals of Masindi’s goodwill. Now that she is back in the seat of Parliament she can eat the loads of monies instead of actually delivering services to the schools or roads. She got the guts of asking 500 millions shillings for 430 MPs in the 10th Parliament. That is not a small forfeit or bargain that is a substantial fee to the upkeep of the fellow parliamentarians. As much as the 200 Millions of shillings to the 430 MPs that is supposed to go there.

That other fellow MPs want to keep the upkeep and the expenses of the Parliament secret says more about the MP and his party than he likes to admit. But a man wouldn’t come with ideas of those means the Lira District and Okute County MP Acom has rigid ideas of accountability and who they represent in the Northern Uganda. As the man who represents the Okute County thinks the government shouldn’t tell how the Government spends their monies; which is insulting to the people who elected the Independent Candidate or accepted that he became their representative. He shows how disgraceful the men and woman can be in the Aghast-house.

So when you have ministers of this kind and by all means what is said in the house of Parliament will be let out the light. That light that shines on the papers and transcripts, the audio that leaks from the house and the ideas of the people running the house will either shade of glory, content and disarray. As the actions of the Parliament will set the precedence of how the nation can act and behave. How the systems will be built and by what sanctions that are to follow. The light will either be hopeful, graceful, merciful or disgusted.

That Rebecca Kadaga doesn’t understand the excessive actions of her Parliament doesn’t get praise or the glory she thinks it deserves. That is because what does the massive spending of government funds and taxations of common folks. The Commoners are paying more tax and the donor’s aid is being used to secure helicopter and private planes to the President. The MPs want their share under the shade of the man with the hat. As they are gotten used to the men and woman who enter the halls are finally eating. Therefore they want to get there because that is biggest business-venture they can get into in the nation.

So with this in mind; if Hon. Kadaga really wanted the press and media-houses to write stories and articles about them and the kinds of men who haste inside the chambers for titles, deeds and revenues. That is why they desist from the duty and becomes their own men of fortune by squandering tax-money to themselves instead of development projects and salaries to fellow civil servants.

So please Hon. Kadaga get your ducks in the row. Get the common-sense if your sense is still common. Because you act like spoil brat who doesn’t like that the beans are spilled because of you wearing the most expensive jacket to class. Than the other classmates will discuss and feel out of bound; in the same way the ordinary Ugandan will feel about doling out expenses for cars, travels, medical trips to India and so on the bill of all the taxpayers.

Time to silence and bow your grace. Your sense is not common and the articles will pile up when you don’t respect the people and their toll of work for your own courtesy. Rebecca Kadaga times to silence your threats and your acts of silencing the media. Now you can think more about to deliver the public some public good and not the MPs more wealth. Peace.

Uganda: Leadership Code Amendment of 2016; what are the important changes in the law?


The original Leadership Code of Uganda where commencement 26th June 1992 in the early years of the National Resistance Movement; so the Government of Uganda need more to revised and amended as the Minister for Ethics Reverend Simon Lodoko has ideas to make the Leaders and Civil servants more ethical inspired. This done with amending a new law and making it stricter and giving the Ministry a strong Authority with a legal power as the law propose to change a very subtle committee who discuss proposed leadership breaches with Parliament and Minister; the Tribunal are having more ability to actually following the breaching and unethical behavior from leaders and their snitching ways. That is why the Tribunal gets revised from a measly Committee towards a powerful Tribunal!

Take a look at important issues that are wished revised and changed to make the 1992 law better and more control from the Central Government!

In the original – 

Section 10:

(1): “A leader shall not put himself or herself in a position in which his or her personal interest conflicts with his or her duties and responsibilities”

In the new Amendment:

(1)“A gift or donation to a leader at any public or governmental occasion shall be treated as a gift or donation to the Government or the institution represented by the leader and shall be declared so to the Inspector General; but the Government or the institution shall keep an inventory of the gift”.

There is a giant different between putting himself in a conflict and getting a gift. The Conflict is by approaching an offer that might substantially discredit the decisions alters the judgement done by the leader of government or in any government institutions. That is different from becoming somebody who get gift and has to give it to the government and institution who the leader works for. The gifts system is normal in many states as the leader and civil servants represent the states and cannot take bribes of gifts and such therefore these laws exist to make sure gifts and donations doesn’t become an issue to secure the vote/regulation/license or use the government institution to gain more than the competitor that doesn’t give or donate to the government leader.

Therefore the rule change is healthy, but will it just be lawful text and followed up the current leadership and only done as PR stunt as the NRM Regime hasn’t really been showing talent for accountability and transparency other than stern warnings and when donor aid has been cut. Then the government has swallowed a few bloody court cases and showing grand-corruption to prove their ability to honest budgeting; while going back to office when the court are gone and the questions from donors are silent. Therefore I have doubt that this law has affect as the Auditor General and Inspector General of Government (IGG) doesn’t even dig deep into the current corruption; so this seem like beautiful words, but will they acted upon?

Create a Tribunal:

Other key ones are adding a Tribunal that the leaders and representatives for government institutions report to and follow the ethics of their actions. They will have a chairperson that is elected by the Parliament and the ones in Parliament cannot appoint a chairperson, unless they can appoint a High Judge of the High Court. Which is part of the new 19 Section in 19A and 19B; this Tribunal will be elected by the President and Public Service Commission; with approval of the Parliament (19C).

This Tribunal will follow the case if non-else party is available to fetch evidence and collect affidavits as long as they believe it is “subject cause”. They can even interrogate needed persons even “abroad”. New in 19R (5): “The Tribunal may make an order in to costs against any party, and the order shall be enforceable in the same manner as an order of the High Court”. So the Tribunal will get the same value as a Court Order to follow the cases and follow the alleged breaches of the Leadership Code.

The strictest clear rules on the Tribunal is in the 19Z:

“A Person who –

  • Insults a member in, or in relations to, the exercise of his or her powers or functions as a member of the tribunal;
  • Interrupts the proceedings of the Tribunal;
  • Creates a disturbances, or takes part in creating a disturbance in or near a place where the Tribunal is sitting; or
  • Does any other act or thing that would, if the Tribunal were a court of record, constitute contempt of court, commits an offence and is liable, on conviction, to a fine not exceeding twenty-five currency points or imprisonment not exceeding six months or both”

Another change is the total replacement of this part of the law:

“20. Report of the committee.

Upon the completion of an inquiry conducted by the committee or upon receipt of a report of findings submitted by the Inspector General of Government or the Inspector General of Police or the Auditor General under section 19, the committee shall make a report to the authorised person; and in a case where the committee or the Inspector General of Government or the Inspector General of Police or the Auditor General has found that the leader whose conduct was inquired into is in breach of this Code, the committee shall make such recommendations as it considers appropriate as to action to be taken against the leader.

The committee’s report under subsection (1) shall be made public and shall state whether the leader is or is not in breach of this Code in respect of the specific matters inquired into by the committee and, in the case of a breach, shall set out—

 the nature of the breach which the leader has been found to have committed;

the circumstances of the breach;

a brief summary of the evidence received during the inquiry into the breach; and

its findings and recommendations.”

This with the amendment changes to this:

“(1) The Registrar of the Tribunal shall inform the authorised person in writing, of the decision of the Tribunal, within thirty days after the date of the decision.

(2) The authorised person shall upon receipt of the decision under subsection(1) take actions within thirty days.

(3) The authorised person shall report to the Tribunal in writing within fourteen days after the explaination of the thirty days referred to in subsection (2) of the action taken by him or her”.

Here the Tribunal doesn’t need to go public as they needed before, because this section is changed and amended with the new Leadership Code of 2016, this proves the writing happens between authorised person and the Tribunal and not to commit it public. It means within 30 days actions against a person will happen, but not publicly. So the Tribunal compared to the Committee of old can work in silence and act against somebody without common knowledge.

As the Section 23 original law says this:

“23. Procedure of the committee.

Subject to this Code, the committee may, after consultation with the Minister, make rules regulating its procedure under this Code”.

The newly amendment says this:

“Procuring information and attendance of witnesses.

Subject to this Act, the inspectorate may –

  • Summon any person who, in the opinion of the Inspectorate, is able to give information relating to any matter relevant, to the investigation being conducted by it, to appear before inspectorate and to furnish such information and produce any documents, papers or thing that may be in possession or under the control of that person; and
  • By order in writing, summon the person to attend before the inspectorate at a specified time and place and to be examined on oath”.

With this substantial change together with the others, the powers of the Tribunal is to inspect and get witness report or an affidavit as the summons of a person who might have information has to answer to the Inspectorate for the Tribunal under oath. The relevancy of this is the powers that the law might give the Tribunal as they can investigate and summon. Not only consult with minister after the code has been followed by the Committee. So the powers of following breaches of the set the law gets more ability to sanctions citizens. While the Tribunal get more power than a Committee that ask the Parliament for ability to act like the Leadership Code of 1992 does. Peace.

%d bloggers like this: