Age limit case ruling shows Museveni still has tight grip on power

The petitioners in the age limit case failed to convince court on the lifting of the presidential age because they overcrowded their evidence said veteran constitutional lawyer, Peter Walubiri.

Walubiri said the received judgement in the consolidated petition was expected from the outset.

It was a nervous 13 hours as justices of the Constitutional Court delivered the much anticipated ruling that upheld the scrapping of the presidential age limit from the Constitution but dismissed the extension of a Parliamentary tenure from 5 to 7 years.

Walubiri a constitutional lawyer, told The Nile Post that the outcome of the ruling was expected due to ruling NRM party’s influence on the country’s politics.

"NRM but specifically President Museveni still have a lot of influence on a number of institutions including the judiciary. It is therefore not surprising that the justices ruled the way they did," Walubiri said.

The consolidated petition ruling absolved the Speaker of Parliament Rebecca Kadaga over the expulsion of several legislators in the heat of debating the controversial constitutional amendments.

But Walubiri also argues that the petitioners presented over crowded facts in their evidence leaving out other key issues.

He believes that the court could have probably had second thoughts had petitioners well-articulated their cause.

Walubiri who has previous handled various constitutional interpretation matters says it was difficult for the Deputy Attorney General Mwesigwa Rukutana - who led the government team to defend the unpopular extension of legislators’ term of office.

One of the petitioners, Male Mabirizi has already contested the ruling and filed an application in the Supreme court.

[embed]https://nilepost.co.ug/2018/07/27/lawyer-male-mabirizi-challenges-age-limit-judgment-in-supreme-court/[/embed]

It remains to be seen whether other petitioners will follow suit.