By Ssemujju Ibrahim Nganda
August 31, 2003
|
Lawyers who have been debating controversial public issues are now under instructions to keep away from radio shows and newspapers columns
FM radio stations and newspapers might now turn to politicians and amateurs for legal opinion and comments on topical issues in the country. The experts in the field - lawyers - who have been assisting are now under fresh instructions to keep quiet, whenever approached by the media. Participating in public dialogue and hosted by radio stations is now a taboo for lawyers. At least this is what the Law Council decreed in a newspaper statement issued on August 22. The highly respected Law Development Center Director Mr Elijah Wante issued the statement. Wante is the acting chairperson of the law council and chairperson of the disciplinary committee of the law council. Is Wante reinventing the law? No. He is simply reminding lawyers of their professional obligations as outlined in the Advocates Act 1970 (As Amended by Act 27 of 2002). The regulations, under this Act, among other things, bar practicing lawyers from publicizing themselves and their law firms. Regulation 22, under the Act, more specifically bars lawyers from unlimited interaction with the media. It says thus: "subject to the provisions of sub regulation 2 and 3, an advocate shall not knowingly allow articles (including photographs) to be published in the news media concerning himself, nor shall he give any press conference or any press statement." The following two sub regulations says that a lawyer may answer questions or write articles in the newspapers as long as he doesn't disclose his name. If he wants his name disclosed, then he should seek permission from the law council. Lawyers are however allowed to contribute articles to professional journals and publications. For that matter therefore, Wante committed no crime in reminding lawyers of their rules. What makes his move highly suspicious is the timing, and the people he seems to be targeting. Wante issues the statement at a time when government is under legal siege, to put it in the words of some lawyers How it started A seasoned Kampala lawyer, Mr Erias Lukwago, turned up for Radio One's Spectrum show on August 13, to give his own interpretation of the Constitutional Court judgement of a case that involved Democratic Party (DP) President Paul Ssemogerere, and other opposition leaders, against government. Ssemogerere and Co. challenged the constitutionality of two sections of the parties' law. The Constitutional Court ruled in their favour, in a judgement delivered on March 21. It among other things nullified sections 18 and 19 of the Political Parties and Organisations Act. It also declared organs of the Movement system, organs of a political party and therefore unconstitutional. The judgement affected the Movement grossly. When the term of various Movement leaders expired on July 11, the authorities chose to extend it by a new law. But Ssemogerere and MPs Isa Kikungwe (Kyadondo South) and Winnie Byanyima (Mbarara Municipality) went back to court. Guess what? It is Lukwago and Mr Joseph Balikkudembe who are representing them once more. On August 13, a team of Movement leaders appeared before the parliamentary committee on legal affairs. They included; National Political Commissar Dr Crispus Kiyonga, Justice and Constitutional Affairs Minister Janat Mukwaya, Acting Attorney General Sam Bitangaro, Minister of Parliamentary Affairs Hope Mwesigye and Minister of State in Office of the Vice President Adolf Mwesige. The Acting Solicitor General Lucien Tibaruha was also around. Mwenge South MP Dora Byamukama chairs the committee. MPs; Ben Wacha (Oyam North), Abdu Katuntu (Bugweri), Wagonda Muguli (Buikwe North) and Capt. Charles Byaruhanga battled the government legal team. The biggest disagreement between the two parties hinged on interpretation of the judgement. The Movement side argued that the judgement did not outlaw their organs. But the MPs maintained that it did. Politics arose and the government side blasted the judiciary for not respecting Parliament. Lawyers were also accused of being overzealous. Lukwago was in the committee room. Minister Mwesige said he respects Lukwago but urged lawyers to stop filing cases in haste - because it could affect management of the country. In the evening Lukwago appeared on the talk show. Law Society issues warning During the course of discussion, Mr Andrew Kasirye, the chairman of the Uganda Law Society Disciplinary Committee rang into the radio show and accused Lukwago of advertising himself. Mind you, Lukwago was on the programme with Mr Abdu Katuntu who also is a lawyer and legislator. Kasirye buttressed his accusation with a letter on August 14. The letter was titled "Undue Publicity Generated by Yourself Over the Media". In the letter, Kasirye told Lukwago to refrain from further offending actions, such as press commentaries. He also told Lukwago that a complaint against his appearance on the talk show had been received. Kasirye's warning raises questions. First of all, Kasirye represents lawyers on the Law Council, which means that he would ordinarily participate in disciplinary proceedings against Lukwago. By calling into the radio show, Kasirye reduced himself to a complainant. Secondly, it is difficult to believe that such a complaint really exists. The hasty manner in which Kasirye received the complaint and immediately wrote to Lukwago has set itself a record. He must be a very efficient man if indeed the complaint did not originate from him. Finally Kasirye is reported to be operating a website which is an international form of advertising. He has, like so many lawyers in Kampala, authored articles. Some of them have been published in The Monitor. Kasirye is known for his close association with the ruling party. Yes, the Constitutional Court said the Movement is a party. He even represented President Yoweri Museveni in the election petition of 2001, when Col. Kizza Besigye dragged the big man to court. It is therefore not surprising that Lukwago's lawyers; Kwesigabo, Bamwine and Walubiri Advocates told him off in an August 15 letter.
"As an individual you may be pained that your beloved Movement was properly adjudged and described as a one party state/organization, but should your personal bias be the cause to refuse to recognise this judgement? What is wrong with a citizen of this country correcting the record through the media to inform the public truthfully about the interpretation of the Courts?" Lukwago's lawyers wrote on August 14. Law Council jumps queue Word is doing the rounds that LDC's Wante was influenced to issue the statement - warning lawyers against appearing in newspapers and on radio. Wante's statement is even being dismissed as illegal. The Advocates (Amendment) Act 2002 says clearly that the chairperson of the law council shall be a judge of the courts of judicature - of which Wante is not. Actually, the chairperson of the Council is Justice Solome Balungi Bbosa who is away. So Wante, who is not a judge, can not act as a chairperson. It should be understood that the Law Council is a regulatory body of the legal profession while the Law Council is an association of lawyers. Both bodies are established by acts of Parliament. Law Society therefore is under Law Council.
Most law firms operate websites, but Law Council and Kasirye's Law Society have remained silent. Take for example Katende, Ssempebwa and Co. Advocates. On top of the website, which is www.kats.co.ug the firm has a brochure in which partners are showered with praises. "In his career, Mr Katende has seen and done any and everything that has been done with regard to law in Uganda. Ask any judge or legal practitioner in Uganda and, as one, they concur that without doubt Katende is one of the finest in the history of Uganda," reads the brochure in part. It is placed in a paper file that contains detailed information about the firm. Lawyers up in arms At least by August 26 a total of 22 lawyers had signed a petition calling for an urgent sitting of the Law Society to register their dissatisfaction with The lawyers put the Law Society on notice to convene a meeting within 14 days or else they would do it themselves. Their concern is that the controversial regulation is interpreted in a discriminatory manner. The Uganda Law Society Act, section 18, allows 15 members to petition for a general meeting. What do other lawyers say? Makerere University Faculty of Law Prof. Fredrick Juuko says regulation 22 under which Lukwago is being charged is, "glaringly unconstitutional". He said that it is shocking that the Law Council is invoking it at this time. "That won't do and lawyers have the competency to protect their rights," he said in a telephone interview, August 28. He said the regulation should be ignored in the meantime and changed in the long run. Abdu Katuntu is another lawyer and MP. He says that the regulation doesn't apply to him because he is an MP with a constitutional mandate and public duty. "There is no way the Law Council can stop me," Katuntu said in an interview on August 27. He feared that if the matter is not handled properly it might end up in court. He is also the acting Attorney General. He believes that the regulation (22) that sets those stringent standards is unfair and that lawyers have a duty not only to the Council but to the public too.
At least this is what sources said on August 28. That the council had convened on August 27 and discussed in the lines of suspending the regulation, which some members think is difficult to enforce. All in all this controversy was brewed by government functionaries, according to sources. Such functionaries think that errant lawyers must be dealt with. |
© 2003 The Monitor Publications
Protect your PC - Click here for McAfee.com VirusScan Online -------------------------------------------- This service is hosted on the Infocom network http://www.infocom.co.ug
