Age limit Appeal: Mbale Court promoted overthrow of democratic governance- Mabirizi

Lawyer Male Mabirizi has faulted the Constitutional Court that sat in Mbale for promoting the over throw of democratic governance when it okayed amendment of the age limit from the constitution.

Delivering his submission during the age limit appeal before the Supreme Court on Tuesday,Mabirizi said it was wrong for court to rule that it was ok for a president to rule the country even after attaining 75 years of age.

“The framers of the 1995 constitution didn’t not want an old president to lead the county and insisted that if one reaches 75 years of age, they leave office. It was therefore wrong for the court to rule otherwise,”Mabirizi told court on Tuesday.

He said that the judges of the Constitutional Court that sat in Mbale ought to have put into consideration the political turmoil that Uganda was plunged into due to violation of the constitution before deciding the age limit petition last year.

“The justices ought to have known the peculiar situations that this country has gone through where we have lost many lives due to wars caused by violation of the constitution.”

He said that before the 1995 constitution, Uganda had had three constitutions and all were violated leading to chaos and anarchy, adding that framers of the latest constitution wanted to avoid any future violence.

Violence

Mabirizi also faulted the constitutional court for turning a blind eye to the acts of violence against members of Parliament by the UPDF when it invaded parliament at the height of the age limit debate.

The lawyer said it was wrong for the army to invade the August House despite being called by police to assist them in policing duties.

“The UPDF is only supposed to guard territorial boundaries of the country and can only come in to assist police in emergency situations but should not be carrying out policing duties .In this case, there was no riot that could warrant them(military) coming in and it was also abdication of her duties for the speaker to allow the UPDF invade parliament,”Mabirizi said.

Biased

The lawyer said the constitutional court that sat in Mbale was biased towards him and other petitioners when it refused him to do rejoinders to his submissions and failure to summon the speaker of parliament to explain her role in the age limit fracas.

He equated the entire process in Mbale to a football match in which the judges were referees who were hell bent on seeing one side takes the day and did everything possible to fulfill their mission.

“If the Mbale session was a football match,it was clear that referees(judges)were supporting my opposite team and on realizing that I was destined to win, , the head referees(Deputy Chief Justice) turned into my opponent's second goalkeeper and while in the goal box, he cancelled any goal i scored before issuing  me with a yellow card for protesting actions. That cannot be termed as a fair match because fairness was not done,”he said.

He asked the Supreme Court to overturn the decision of the Constitutional court so as to save the country from any future problems.

Hearing of the appeal is still ongoing.

A group of three parties including the Uganda Law Society, lawyer Male Mabirizi and 11 MPs led by Winnie Kiiza are challenging the judgment by the Constitutional Court that okayed the removal of presidential age limit from the Constitution.

A panel of 7 judges including the Chief Justice Bart Katureebe,Paul Mugamba,Stella Amoko Arach, Ruby Apio Aweri, Jotham Tumwesigye, Eldad Mwanguhya and Lillian Tibatemwa Ekirikubinza will hear the petition for two days before delivering a judgment on the matter.