The week was flooded by major city demolitions and thousands heaping praise on Jenniffer Musisi for inadvertently defying the odds to demolish centenary park gardens, Uganda’s biggest Hangout joint.
Was she lawful? YES! Did she consult with the aggrieved parties? YES! Did she issue them a notice for her actions? YES! Did they dispute her actions in a court of law? NO! Then it is in the veins of all Ugandans to agree that what Jeniffer Musisi is doing is right!
HOWEVER, the ‘delusional Ugandan teen mind’ shall not tag along these lines. Given the trickles of Law I have so far studied and the few law books I have encountered I have learned to appreciate the diversity of law. The law is made in such a way that anyone reading it for their own personal reasons will find no fault in what they do and for this same reason, people read it haphazardly and quickly rush to conclusions.
We shall start with the supreme law of the land upon which, all laws in conflict with, shall be struck down or subject to it.
A largely borrowed law from the English, who borrowed from the Romans who as well borrowed from the Greeks who in turn borrowed from the Vikings, an extinct race now, the constitution gives power to the people and in exercise of this power they shall not infringe on the rights of others.
Let us transplant this to the KCCA act, this act gives the ED power to implement ‘KCCA’ policies in consultation with the KCCA council which is the enshrine of the power of the people.
Broken down simply, KCCA council (political wing) is the people; KCCA technical wing headed by an executive appointee is the government. In administration of duties, the technical wing shall work in conjunction with the political wing which shall play an advisory role to the technical wing.
This in itself is a ground for striking down the KCCA act. How can one contend that an authority technical wing can implement a policy without much help from the political wing? For those that say the demolitions are legal can you substantively prove that the technical wing at the time of the signing of the contract acted independent of the political wing? Can you then further say that the political wing of KCCA is not party to the contract breached? And in that do you then mean that they are not entitled to a say in the matters pertaining the contract?
However that notwithstanding, the council went ahead to pass a resolution blocking the demolition of centenary park unless an assessment of properties and alternative strategy is provided by the technical wing.
This in law is a recognized move by the council which binds the executive director to only ‘listen’ to the advice and not act on it. Clearly this means the people in KCCA are only advisors and the executive’s appointee has a say in every business of the authority, which is repressive to the people, a scenario the constitution, the supreme law of the land disagrees with and as earlier stated any law whose enforcement differs with the constitution shall be null and void.
So for as long as Jennifer Musisi has acted contrary to the decisions of the KCCA council however stupid they maybe, she in turn violated article 1 of the constitution and majorly sub-section 2 of this clause which provides for people to be governed upon their will and consent and article 2 of the same constitution that guarantees the supremacy of the constitution.
For those that say her actions are legal, I will wait for your counter points as defined by law as to how legal her actions are.
However , this doesn’t as well mean I dually side with the politicians, I am simply defining the enshrines of law according to it’s provisions