Legal minds have expressed concern over Speaker Anita Among’s directive forbidding boycotting Opposition members of Parliament from sitting in committees or engaging in any Parliamentary activity.
These say the Speaker’s decision lacks locus in the law and its spirit is likely to cost the taxpayer colossal sums of money.
Frustrated by the opposition boycott of plenary that has been raging for weeks, Speaker of Parliament, Anita Among yesterday turned the big guns on the stubborn MPs.
With the ruling NRM now reduced to conducting near-monologues in Parliament, legal minds have weighed in on the directive. Lawyer Nicholas Opio says the directive is not lawful.
At the Law school in Makerere, Dr Daniel Ruhweza, also calls into doubt the legality of the decision
Previously, the Speaker of Parliament had threatened to evoke the Rules of Procedure to resolve the impasse, citing Rule 112 (6).
Rule 112(6) states that once an MP misses 15 consecutive plenary sittings, a member loses his seat as the Speaker announces it vacant and due for re-election.
With the future of a dialogue between the Opposition and NRM in parliament hangs in balance, legal minds believe that such actions have consequences
In Parliament, the battle lines are drawn, with the Opposition vowing to continue with their boycott in spite of pressure, while the NRM legislators pursue house business unfazed.
