THE SPEAKER: Hon. Members, yesterday Monday 15th October, at the invitation of H.E the President, the Speaker and several Members of Parliament travelled to the border post of Mpondwe in Kasese District to witness the return of UPDF troops from the Democratic Republic of Congo. These are troops of the 65th Battalion.

The Members of Parliament who, together with the Speaker, witnessed the event were hon. Maj. David Tinyefuza, hon. Maj. Gen. Elly Tumwine, hon. Lt. Col. Phenehas Katirima, hon. Lt.Col. Noble Mayombo, hon. Aggrey Awori, hon. Nobert Mao, hon. Simon Mayende, hon. Kule Muranga, hon. Ben Etonu, hon. Harry Kasigwa and hon. Banyenzaki Henry.

Others to witness the occasion were members of the UN Military Monitoring Team. The returning troops who were accompanied by their newly acquired Congolese wives and children and equipment, including tanks in good working condition, were very happy to be home again, having completed a three months trek, which they started on 12th July this year.

The jovial people of Kasese turned up in big numbers to welcome these sons and daughters of Uganda back home, and thanked them for restoring security in that part of the country.

Hon. Members, His Excellency the Presidents invitation to Parliament to be represented at this occasion, in my view, has a special significance namely, the involvement of Parliament by the Executive in addressing matters of national concern. This is a commendable gesture, which if translated into deliberate policy, would enhance a good working relationship between the Executive and the Legislature that we have all been yearning for. Of course, this will not prejudice the independence of each, but we have to collaborate. So, I thank you for listening.

Also, hon. Members, last week the House passed the Rules of Procedure relating to the conduct of election of members of the East Africa Legislative Assembly. In the Rules, a provision was made to the effect that each Member of Parliament can only nominate up to nine aspirants, and each aspirant is required to raise at least 50 signatures - but he can raise more - for the nomination to be valid, among other things. You are reminded to stick to nominating up to nine aspirants so as not to render the candidates nomination invalid at a later stage.

In case by oversight some of you have signed for more than 9 aspirants, those concerned are requested to rectify the anomaly by deleting their names and signatures from the nomination forms in excess of the required nine so that we provide for fair play for all the aspirants. I thank you.

MR. ERESU: Mr. Speaker, from the statement you have made to the House with respect to the return of the UPDF from the Democratic Republic of Congo, I am glad. I would like to be clarified as to whether the number that returned means that we no longer have troops still remaining in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

THE SPEAKER: Well, since we are privileged to have amongst us now the Minister of Defence, I think he is the best one to answer that question. But, what I can say is that the significance of this ceremony of yesterday was to witness troops trekking on foot, 700km from Kisangani to the border post of Mpondwe. There are others who have already returned, and I think many have returned, but I think this was significant. And also, what was significant was that we were able to see the tanks and the equipment that they were using. We were not sure whether the tanks would not have been left in the DRC, but we saw the tanks. But, I think the Minister of Defence will help me.

MR.AWORI: Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding my intention to supplement what you have said, I also have two other questions for your guidance. Let me start by thanking His Excellency the President, the Commander in Chief of the UPDF, through you and His Minister of Defence, for availing us opportunity to be present in receiving our soldiers back from Congo. That one, I commend.

As you are aware, I for one would have not been there to send them off. Definitely not! I can only go there, and I only went there, to receive them and that has been my prayer. And so, I can say that my prayer yesterday was partially answered. I would like to thank the Commander in Chief to continue that effort in retrieving our equipment, bringing back our people from abroad.

I would also like to say, as a critic of the Ministry of Defence on the matter of procurement, that indeed, as I was quoted on the scene, the equipment was functional. I would therefore like to thank the Minister of Defence for the good job in repairing what was previously junk, to now a good condition, a fighting condition and with capacity to come back home.

Now I come to my substantive questions. Mr. Speaker, related to the matter of -(Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: Is it related, because you see, there was a clarification sought by hon. Eresu, dont you think we should exhaust this, maybe before I move to another subject?

MR. AWORI: It is related to the matter of Defence.

THE SPEAKER: Okay!

MR. AWORI: Mr. Speaker, I am raising this matter as a matter of concern, through you again, to the Minister of Defence and the Attorney General. This morning I read with horror a statement by the Attorney General, saying among other things that our hon. colleague, Winnie Byanyima, should be investigated on a matter of sedition, because she allegedly said that the Government of this country is preparing for war with Rwanda. I would like to get clarification, confirmation, a declaration, or a statement from the two Ministers responsible. Number one, as the legal advisor to the Government, did the Attorney General make such a statement, threatening one of our colleagues on a matter that has never been clarified by this Government? Can he repeat such a statement?

Number two; can the Minister of Defence categorically make a statement in this House that we are not preparing for war with a neighbouring country? We want to know whether we are making such preparations or not.

Subsidiary to that, we have seen in the Press, and it has not been denied by those responsible, that the Chief of Staff has ordered all the women in Mbarara barracks out. They have been ordered to look for alternative accommodation, thereby, denying them the comfort of their husbands who are working for this country. We would like to know whether it is the official policy of this Government to deny soldiers the comfort of their wives or vice versa.

Lastly, the other day the Ministry of Defence advertised various positions in the UPDF. They were recruiting what they call cadets. A number of cadets were indeed interviewed, and a number were sent to various places for further training. To my horror, three of the cadets from my constituency were sent back with no specific reasons. To make matters worse, yesterday we got a statement from the Ministry of Defence that foreigners, specifically Rwandese, have infiltrated the recruitment exercise. We would like the hon. Minister of Defence to confirm or deny what has been alleged.

THE SPEAKER: Hon. Member, dont you think that some of these questions you are asking should be formal questions that would require the Minister to answer specifically? I only expected incidental matters arising from the communication. But hopefully, the questions have been noted. I do not know whether the Minister will be able to answer them now, but if he does not, maybe he may have to go back and come with an answer some time. Definitely these may require getting more information. The Minister may not have the answer now, but let me allow him to proceed.

MR. EKANYA: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I am a Member of the Committee on Presidential and Foreign Affairs. In fact, we intended to invite the Minister to give us the position on the Uganda/Rwanda relations. May the Minister inform the House what he meant by saying that the relations between Uganda and Rwanda are not very good but improving? This was quoted in the Press. Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: If any one of you has a question, please make it formally.

THE MINISTER OF DEFENCE (Mr. Amama Mbabazi): Mr. Speaker, I thank you very much. I thank Hon. Aggrey Awori for his words of commendation for the great work the UPDF has done on behalf of Uganda. I would like to confirm what he has just stated.

Yesterday, for the first time in the history of Uganda, we received our troops that had been sent out on a national mission, having accomplished that mission. We did not come with prisoners of war; we did not come with flags of defeated armies, because all along, our participation in the DRC was mainly to deal with our own security concerns, the banditry that emanated from the DRC. We were also there to try and stabilise the political situation in Congo so that in future, it is not ground for the destabilisation of Uganda. We, therefore, thank you for your full support in this endeavour.

We are very grateful that honourable Aggrey Awori has at long last seen the light -(Laughter)- and I am saying this in particular reference to the statements he has made previously about the state of our equipment. The military historians will tell us whether the UPDF equipment, especially the tanks that were used in Congo, have not broken records unknown in the past, in passing through areas which are tropical jungles, where there are no bridges, and where there are no roads. They have been moving by their own power, some of them for very long distances.

As you correctly stated, the tanks that were received yesterday had moved about 700 kilometers on their own from Kisangani back to Uganda, through a number of places. But I would like to inform you that actually, we have tanks that have moved on their own from the Uganda border to the Congo Brazzaville border, beyond Mbandaka and close to Kinshasa. That is more than 2000 kilometers. Some of them have come back. S have been flown back, but the fact that they have moved on their own for all that distance is unrecorded in history. We thank hon. Aggrey Awori for learning, through experience, the state of our equipment.

Hon. Eresu asked whether the return of the battalion marks the end of the presence of UPDF in the Congo. The answer is no. It does not. We still have some forces, and we made a statement to that effect. We still have forces in a number of places in the DRC. Some time ago, I believe it was in June, the Uganda Government announced the decision to withdraw completely from Congo. At that time, as you may recollect, I was leading a Ugandan delegation in which the 6th Parliament participated. The chairman of the then Presidential and Foreign Affairs Committee, and the chairman of the Economic Affairs Committee were part of the delegation that I led. We appeared before the United Nations Security Council.

When Government announced a total withdrawal from the DRC, many of our friends, especially our development partners, and specifically the Secretary General of the United Nations, Mr. Kofi Annan, requested that Uganda does not pull out completely. The fear was that if we did so, this might affect the implementation of the Cease-fire Agreement on Congo, which was signed in Lusaka in 1999. This was followed by a formal request written by the Secretary-General, addressed to the President to that effect.

In response to that, the Government decided to keep a battalion in Buta and another in Bunia and enough forces in the western fringes of the Rwenzori Mountains until the settlement of the Congolese matter has been reached. Therefore the answer to hon. Eresu is, Yes; this marks the end of the pullout of the forces that we intended to pull out. The rest of the presence of UPDF in Congo will be in accordance with the Lusaka Accord, and they will withdraw in accordance with the withdrawal schedule of foreign forces under the Lusaka Agreement.

Hon. Aggrey Awori raised a question about a statement by the Attorney General which he said he was quoted with (Interruption)

MRS.MUGERWA: Mr. Speaker, I have heard you reading the names of the people who were invited from this House to escort you to go and witness the return of the sons of Uganda. Unfortunately, this was a stag delegation; no woman was among the delegates! Does this mean that women are not concerned with the issue of their sons being in the Congo? Is it really good for even the Woman Representative from Kasese not to be part of your delegation? I would like to be clarified on this. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR.SEBULIBA: Further clarification Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: No, no! I think let me explain. I received the invitation on Sunday, and the ceremony was to take place the following day. Actually, the invitation was to me and the Members of the Committee on Defence and Internal Affairs. I regret to note that no woman Member of Parliament volunteered to sit on this particular Committee. I definitely expected the Member representing Kasese to be there in her own right but unfortunately, I could not get in touch (Interjections)- No, I could not get in touch -(Mrs Bwambale rose_)

MRS.BWAMBALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was equally concerned that I was not able to witness the return of those soldiers from Congo. This is because in 1999 I made a public statement that those soldiers should withdraw from Congo in accordance with the Lusaka Peace Accord, and I had a political harassment of having imagined that our soldiers would come from Congo. So it would have been my pleasure to witness their return. However, I heard about it on Friday. I inquired about the composition and I was told I was not among the people to proceed there, and that if I were interested in my constituency work, I had to drive there while others were flying. So I opted not to drive because I would not have made it. Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Okay, but as far as Parliament is concerned, that is the position. I got the invitation on Sunday and I had to get in touch with this and the other. That is what happened. But maybe we should appeal to our honourable woman Members of Parliament also to get interested in the Sessional Committee on Defence and Internal Affairs. If that were the case, maybe she would have gone. But we definitely recognise the important role our sisters are playing in the interest they display in national matters.

AN HON. MEMBER: Clarification.

THE SPEAKER: No! Really, this was a Communication from the Chair. Normally it does not attract so many clarifications, but as I said, if you have a question on Defence, you are entitled to raise it and it will be answered.

MR.AMAMA MBABAZI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to confirm that the Minister of Defence is ready to answer any question if you put it across formally. We will even answer it in writing.

The hon. Aggrey Awori asked about a statement that appeared in todays newspaper and attributed it to the Attorney General saying that the security services should investigate the statements of hon. Winnie Byanyima. Well, I am glad that the Attorney General is here. Maybe he will answer that question.

Can the Ministry of Defence make a categorical statement whether Uganda is or is not preparing for war with Rwanda? I would like to do so, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Defence is there precisely to prepare for war. My job is to do nothing but to prepare for war; that is what I do; that is what I am employed to do.

Is it against Rwanda or not? It is not against Rwanda, definitely. We are not preparing for war against Rwanda, far from it. It is true we have deployed I do not remember making a statement to that effect here but I made a public statement to that effect. We have deployed forces in South Western Uganda. This was prompted by reports we received of categorical statements of declaration of war from Kigali by Lt. Col. Kyakabale and Lt. Col. Samson Mande, and reports we had received that indeed there were activities aimed at destabilising Uganda from that region. We made precautionary deployments in the area but before we did so, we actually contacted the Government of Rwanda and informed them about our intention to do so, so that there was no possibility of them reading this as a hostile deployment because it was not a hostile deployment. It was simply a precautionary deployment, just in case the statements were converted from words into action.

Secondly, since then we have had very close contacts. Our Presidents have met at the border in Katuna, they met in Durban, and they met somewhere else. They have had telephone contacts. The Minister of Foreign Affairs only recently returned from Kigali. We have had a meeting and we are having very close interaction on this matter and other matters. Therefore, I would like to assure this House that we are not preparing for war against Rwanda, neither do we expect to engage in a war with Rwanda. We are simply preparing for war against anyone who threatens our stability; who threatens our Constitution.

Now, the question of the Chief of Staff ordering wives out of barracks is one on which I do not have information. But I undertake, Mr. Speaker, to get information on it, and give a formal response in this Parliament.

Now, the recruitment of cadets: I have heard people talk about it, even outside this august House, raising queries. May I take this opportunity to inform this Parliament that this recruitment is a routine recruitment? I wonder why no one asked about the recruitment of cadets last year, who were passed out a few months ago, I think in August. No one asked! Every year there is recruitment, and what we are doing now is essentially recruiting leaders of the Military. We have not had general recruitment, as we would be expected to do if we were preparing for war. We are simply recruiting cadets who will replace those that will be retiring. Soon we will be announcing the retirement of a sizeable number of members of our force, and what we are doing in recruitment is simply to prepare other people to take their positions. There is nothing to it more than that.

As far as hon. Ekanyas point is concerned, we will be ready to receive your invitation, and ready to appear before you in order to explain any questions that you may have about our policy for our actions. Thank you.

MR. AWORI: Mr. Speaker, could you guide this House on the matter we raised in a form of a resolution pertaining to the intended sale of UCB? Mr. Speaker, we passed a resolution with five main items, which have never been answered satisfactorily by the Minister responsible. This morning I saw in the papers that UCB has been sold. The issues we raised pertaining to modalities, especially transparency, seem not to have been met at all.

Mr. Speaker, we also questioned the issue of Bank of Uganda handling the sale and we see in the Press that indeed, Bank of Uganda is selling the Bank - (Interruption).

THE SPEAKER: Now, what do you want?

MR. AWORI: Mr. Speaker, I am seeking a firm statement from the line Minister to tell this House whether the Bank has been sold, and if so, under what terms? And why have they defied the resolution of this House?

THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR FINANCE (GENERAL DUTIES) (Mr. Mwesigwa Rukutana): Mr. Speaker and hon. Members, what is contained in the Press is substantially true. Mark my words, substantially true but the Ministry is preparing a comprehensive document, which we undertake to deliver before this House tomorrow.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Mr. Ayume): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek your indulgence to be reminded over a question which was asked, and which I have just been informed that I am required to respond to, concerning a statement which appeared in todays newspaper. It is the desire of the House, and I am prepared to say something about that.

THE SPEAKER: Well yes.

MR. AYUME: Mr. Speaker, it is quite true that in response to a question asked by one of the journalists, I did say something, or I did make a comment about an earlier statement that had appeared in one of the newspapers namely; The Monitor. And my statement was in response to a question by the journalists as to what I thought about that statement. And my answer was really in two parts:

The first one was that if the statement was true, then it seriously affects our relations with our neighbour Rwanda, because I did say (Mr. Okupa rose_)

THE SPEAKER: But you see, he has just started. What clarification is it really?

MR. OKUPA: We want to be clarified on the statement the Attorney General is referring to.

THE SPEAKER: Let him develop his statement. It is only then that you can really seek clarification.

MR. AYUME: Well, I thought this was a matter that was raised earlier on?

THE SPEAKER: Well it was. Proceed.

MR. AYUME: And I am trying to respond on the basis of the information I have just received. I was saying that my statement was really in two parts:

The first one is in relation to how that statement, if true, affects our relationship with Rwanda. And I did also say that, that statement made by the hon. Winnie Byanyima was in effect no different from an earlier one she made while she was out of this country, in Nairobi, which attracted an investigation by the CID.

I also did say - the second part of this - that similarly, the CID is likely to get involved in the matter and investigate. And I said that a possible offence - because that question again was put to me - that could have been committed is that of sedition. And I thought that was to the satisfaction of the inquirer, the journalists. I personally do not see anything from that.

THE SPEAKER: Now the Bill stands committed to the appropriate Committee, namely the Presidential and Foreign Affairs Sessional Committee, for consideration and report.

MOTION FOR PRESENTATION, CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE SESSIONAL COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS ON THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2001/2002

MR. JACOB OULANYAH (Omoro County, Gulu): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. This report was supposed to have been presented last week when the Chairman was present. It was adjourned two times, to conveniently allow the Chairman to leave and to coerce me into making a presentation today, in the absence of the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman. So, if there are any mistakes to be made, you know exactly who is responsible; it is this House - (Laughter). I present the report of the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee before the House.

The Committee on Legal and Parliamentary Affairs carried out its activities as mandated by Articles 90(1) and 155(4) of the Constitution, and Rules 118(1)(e) and 143 of the Rules of Procedure of Parliament.

The Committee examined Policy Statements of:

1. The Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs.
2. The Judicial Service Commission.
3. The Uganda Law Reform Commission.
4. The Electoral Commission.
5. The Judiciary.
6. The Uganda Human Rights Commission.
7. The Inspectorate of Government.
8. The Parliamentary Commission.

Discussions were held with the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, the Minister of Finance, Planning and Economic Development, and the heads of the relevant autonomous institutions. The Committees report on the 2000/2001 budget estimates was also reviewed.

The Committee is very grateful to all the stakeholders who participated in the discussions and who enabled this report to be compiled. The technical staff and heads of these institutions, who were present, were very helpful in making the Committee come out with useful recommendations.

The report indicates a review of the estimates of the above institutions during the Financial Year 2000/2001. The Committee made a number of observations, and proposes recommendations to this Parliament. I start with the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, contained on page 2 of the main report.

The Ministry is monitoring the implementation of the Case Backlog Project. It is expected that the backlog of these cases should be cleared through a deliberate effort because it is a problem that has been with us for a very long time. The Ministry of Justice has designed a strategy to clear this backlog. It has embarked on a number of reforms under the Justice, Law and Order Sector Wide Reform Programme.

A number of activities under the Ministry are immeasurably, inadequately funded. The most affected being the Constitutional Review Commission. If you look at page 15 of our report, the recommendation is very clear. The mere fact that Government proceeded to constitute this Commission without the contribution and consultation of key stakeholders like Parliament meant that Government saw this as a serious and urgent situation. We are suggesting that it should also be reflected in the amounts of money allocated to the Commission.

Currently, of the budget presented, that is about shs.4.6 billion, only shs.600,000,000 has been approved. We thought that was a show of lack of seriousness on this matter. We asked for a review of this particular issue, so that the Constitutional Commission is properly funded, to enable it carry out functions within the period given to them.

The other aspect is domestic arrears. If you look at page 4 of the main report, you will see the domestic arrears, particularly in the Ministry of Justice. And here, we are talking about obligations to international organizations. We owe international organizations over shs.1.4 billion. We owe the citizens of this country, through court awards, over shs.50 billion in domestic arrears. It is contained on page 4 of the main report.

Another item is settlements out of court. We owe the people of this country a lot of money, but the most amazing thing is that Ministry of Finance only provided two billion shillings to settle off the arrears. I am talking about arrears of over shs.50 billion. We think this treatment to this situation is not proper. And more seriously, they should focus on this particular issue so that the domestic arrears can be cleared, and the citizens get what is due to them from wrongs that have been meted on them by the state.

We also reviewed the Judicial Service Commission. If you look at Page 15 of the main report, we note that there is inadequate staffing there. The support staff is under the Public Service Commission. This affects the Commissions control over the staff. If you look at page 16, we are proposing de-linking staff who work with the Commission from the Public Service Commission, so that the Judicial Service Commission can have control over these staff. Right now, they do not even control where they are posted. The Commission does not pay most of their salaries. So, there is a problem there. We are proposing that these staff should be de-linked, and they should report to and be controlled directly by the Judicial Service Commission.

We reviewed the proposals of the Uganda Law Reform Commission. The Commission has drafted a number of bills, currently under consideration by Cabinet. You can look at page 17 of the main report. The Law Revision Center is to open soon under European Union support. I should also report that the Law Revision Commission has already, under the Law Reform Commission, made a draft of the revised laws of Uganda, which is supposed to be published by the end of this year. That will be tremendous progress in terms of revamping the way our laws are presented in this country. They were last revised in 1964. All this will now come in a block of laws by the end of the year. That is a major success, which we upheld and applauded the Uganda Law Reform Commission for.

We also reviewed the Electoral Commission. Following the creation of new districts, local council posts in the new districts have to be filled. The Commission consequently needs to recruit district registrars and their deputies, plus other staff. These is also need for complementary facilities.

During the proceedings of the Committee, we discovered that the Commission had problems recruiting staff in the new districts that were created. They had to get the mandate from the Public Service Commission and all related Ministries, and this presented a problem to them. By the time they are going to create districts, they should know that there is a consequential need to create positions, which should be filled immediately to enable the Electoral Commission proceed with its activities properly.

The Local Governments Act, as amended, requires that voting should be by secret ballot at all levels. We are talking about LC.1, LC.2, LC.3 and all the councillors. No funds were provided at the time that we called the Electoral Commission to discuss this. We urge the Ministry of Finance and the Electoral Commission to put up this case strongly. Finance promised to review this situation and come up with a provision of money that will enable the Electoral Commission carry out the local council elections, and subsequent elections coming early next year.

Mr. Speaker and hon. Members, we reviewed the proposals from the Judiciary; you look at page 20 of the main Report. The Judiciary has proposed a number of reforms for the effective administration of justice. Its major problem is under funding and under staffing. There is also inadequate provision, especially for the chief magistrates who are required to serve more than one district.

If you look at recommendation 2 contained on page 21 of the main report, we are proposing a review or an amendment relating to the jurisdiction of chief magistrates, and the magistrates below them for the following reasons: one; at the moment, a chief magistrate can only hear a case where the pecuniary value is 5 million shillings. So, if you are talking about a small car, a Toyota corona, that is already out of the jurisdiction of a Chief Magistrate. It does not make a lot of sense. That is why there are so many cases flooding in the High Court.

If you look at the other magistrates like magistrates Grade II, who sit on family and children courts, they have unlimited jurisdiction. A magistrate Grade II awards 50 million shillings to people, and it is paid, and a Chief Magistrate is tied down to 5 million shillings.

We also looked at the situation of the land tribunals they are creating. In the hierarchy of the judiciary, those would be Grade I Magistrates, but now they are going to deal with properties worth billions in terms of land and buildings. There is therefore this rather strange situation that a Chief Magistrate should be given this very low jurisdiction to try cases.

We were also informed that this has been a matter that has been outstanding. It was reviewed by the 6th Parliament, same recommendations were made like that I am making now, but nothing has happened.

We urge the Ministry of Justice to move on and make this proposal, bring it to the House for the approval of Parliament, so that these magistrates jurisdictions are enhanced and cases that are over burdening the High Courts are brought back to the chief magistrate, and life goes on, at least well enough.

We also reviewed the proposals from the Human Rights Commission. The Commission is under funded and so has to rely heavily on donors. The donors have particular areas of interest to some activities, so some activities have to suffer. Mr. Speaker and Members, the donors have interests; some may have interest in only one aspect and they are prepared to spend millions of shillings on it, but no other. We are saying, for the proper functioning of the entire mandate of the Uganda Human Rights Commission, they have to be properly funded.

The Commission also has a staffing problem, partly caused by what we now call interference from the Public Service Commission. That word was used deliberately by the Commission, and we transferred it here verbatim, as they had wanted it to be. They called it interference.

The Constitution mandates the Human Rights Commission, and gives it certain autonomous powers. We are not very unfamiliar of some of those powers being very eloquently defended on the Floor of this House. Similar powers are also given to the Human Rights Commission, which now they seek to rely on to control the recruitment and staff development of their people without interference from the Public Service Commission.

We reviewed the proposals from the Inspectorate of Government. The Inspectorate has seven regional offices, and plans to open two more during this financial year. If you look at page 24, the staff turnover is high due to low remuneration. There is need for salaries reviews to enable staff retention. It was a general problem, but we were told that there is now a saying that goes among the public servants that if you pretend to pay me, I also pretend to work. So, they pretend to work until an opportunity occurs, then they go. So, that has been a problem of staff retention, and it can be stopped or halted by proper remuneration.

The Inspectorates work is partly limited by weak laws that need to be reviewed. We look at the recommendation on page 25. We are talking about the Leadership Code, which they are complaining they cannot reinforce because it is weak; they are complaining about the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1970, which gives the mandate and control of prosecution under this law to the Director of Public Prosecution. And the Inspectorate says, and we agree with them, that this has to be changed to give the powers to the IGG, which is mandated by the Constitution to handle all cases relating to corruption. We think this mandate should be directly given, and that requires an amendment of The Prevention of Corruption Act of 1970.

We reviewed the proposals of the Parliamentary Commission, which is a matter of concern to all Members present and absent. The Parliamentary Commissions recurrent budget increased due to the following factors - there have been eyebrows raised whenever they look at the increase in terms of the budgetary proposals from the Parliamentary Commission, but the following reasons contributed to that increase:

(1) Increase in the number of Members of Parliament. An increase from 278 to 306 that inevitably provides an increase in the total amount of money to be spent on the Members of Parliament.

(2) Increase in the number of staff of Parliament itself and;

(3) The new medical insurance policy which has not yet been implemented, and it awaits these approvals which are before the House.

Hon. Members, we made general observations and recommendations as follows: Most of the departments under 1.2, which is on page 1, suffer under staffing. For some, the staffing levels are as low as below 50 percent of the approved structure. The most pathetic case is the case of the department of the Administrator General.

Out of 22 lawyers, they only have nine, and you expect nine people to perform the tasks of 22 people with the kind of pay they receive? So, there is a general problem of under staffing, and a deliberate effort has to be made to fill these vacancies so that service delivery can be more proper.

The Committee observed that this has led to the delay in delivery of services. For some departments, operational funds have been diverted to pay temporary staff, and this affected the funding of planned activities. A case in point is the Judiciary, where they have to pay for their drivers from monies they now source from wherever because they do not have provision for most of these drivers. Judges are recruited without drivers, and yet they are given cars. We do not expect these Judges to drive themselves to court and out of court and to their homes. That would be disastrous.

It was recommended that since the ban on recruitment has been lifted, the approved posts should be filled immediately. The Ministry of Finance undertook to cater for the new staff in the various departments on evidence of recruitment. But the problem with this is that, you have to provide that you have this space, then that has to be approved by the Public Service Commission, then the budgetary proposals will have to be made to the Ministry of Finance, which is in the good habit or bad habit of just slicing and cutting these budgets. So, it has to be made as a concerted effort.

It is a need that this country should see and the Parliament should see that these vacancies have to be filled, if service delivery is going to make sense to the people who expect services from the state.

Other departments have a staff retention problem due to low pay offered. The Staff are easily taken by the private sector where they can be paid more. It was recommended that the review of the remuneration policy should be done to bring it nearer to what the private sector pays to reduce the tough turnover. The government should provide good training ground for people and the department of drafting is the greatest causality.

The First Parliamentary Counsel: you recruit, you train, you send people to Barbados, when they come back they hit the trail hunting for new jobs because it just cannot make sense sitting in the First Parliamentary Counsels office where there is no money. They say it is the driest place in the Ministry of Justice. So, these have to be improved upon to enable people enjoy their work and stay there.

Transport was another general problem in many of the departments. This delays the delivery of service. In other departments where fieldwork has to be carried out, there are no suitable vehicles. It was recommended that the transport problem should be considered to ensure efficiency and effectiveness in various departments, a case in point is the Uganda Law Reform Commission. They have one van that is supposed to be the field car. That van is 13 years old. Actually, by our standards it should have been written off six years ago. But it is still limping around, carrying staff and not doing any fieldwork. We are saying such departments have to be empowered with transportation so that they deliver services. Their work is field based, they have to go, gather information, compile it into proposals for reform, but they cannot do that without transport.

We had also funding. Almost all departments expressed the problem of under-funding. Ministry of Finance sets a ceiling within which the departments are asked to budget. The ceilings are in most cases unrealistic and dont take into consideration the changes that take place. I am glad to report that when these points were being made, the hon. Minister of Finance was there, so it is not being reported to him. He heard from the horses mouth; so he can answer for that.

It is important that officials who set ceilings understand the activities in the various departments. What happens is that they just make a provision to say this is the ceiling! You can budget below the requirements but the needs of the particular department might over shoot the ceiling, and for those cases like the Judiciary which tried, they just went and cut it down and said well, you have misbehaved, go back and do it properly. They do not even look at it. So these ceilings have to be done in a way that protects the functional capacities of these departments.

The other problem sometimes is that money approved is either released late or at the end of the financial year, and only part of it is released. We dont know whether this in the Ministry of Finance is called saving, but it would be a very crude way of accumulating savings for the Ministry because proposals are made and approved but funds are not released.

A case in point is the Judicial Service Commission, where 40 million shillings was held back, it was never given to them, and yet it was provided for in the budget. So, the activities for that year were halted and Finance called that saving. It didnt make sense to those people and neither did it make sense to us. The Committee recommended that the Ministry of Finance should be timely in its releases of funds to enable the departments carry out their activities as scheduled.

The other aspect was rent. It was observed that rent takes a big portion of the approved funds of many departments. The Committee recommended that the option of acquiring permanent homes for various departments should be explored.

Mr. Speaker and hon. Members, figures were brought to us, they were showing houses in Nakasero on sale, big houses that can accommodate departments, and the money we are spending in a year in renting those places doubles the cost of the building itself. So, we were proposing that a scheme has to be developed to enable these departments acquire homes of their own so that we permanently cut off this question of rent for these departments. It would make a lot of economic sense to do that.

The problem which they pointed out is that these monies are released monthly, and sometimes may be quarterly. So they know where you can acquire a building. But we are saying, arrangements can be made between the Ministry of Finance, the department and the property owners that we are going to buy it in this way, and it can be agreed that it can be finished in a year. And all the money that is budgeted for rent can actually buy two buildings instead of a floor in one building.

We had a general problem from departments on legislation. It was observed that some of the laws to which departments refer are inadequate. I have already covered this on the question of the Leadership Code, Prevention of Corruption Act and other laws that need review to re-strengthen these departments. The Committee recommends that such laws should be reviewed.

The Committee also recommended that government should consider a Witness Protection Scheme for informers. This issue arose, particularly in respect of the Inspectorate of Government. The kinds of witnesses they have are exposed, and the kinds of witnesses they have sometimes are going to testify against big people in this country. And with all the powers they wield, sometimes they are threatened and intimidated into not telling or saying anything at all in any court or even making a statement. So, if there was a witness protection scheme, it would help in strengthening the investigations and presentation of cases in courts, which would succeed, rather than have people give statements and they go to courts, disown them and cases collapse like that.

The Committee recommends for the approval of the budget for the financial year 2001/2002 as follows - and here, I invite you to look at a supplementary list that was made and it is a loose page. I dont know whether Members have it. Figures for the budgetary provisions in the report of Legal and Parliamentary Affairs on the 2001/2002 budgetary estimates, and on that, I am asking you to know that the first word is revised because I am advised it doesnt make sense when you put in this.

Maybe before I read the figures, I should point out that the departments, as I said before, sat in a joint meeting with the Ministry of Finance where there was very frank talk and proposals flying back and forth to the Ministry and from the Ministry, and certain confessions were made, which made the situation look very improved. Aspects that were not catered for included the taxes and other very urgent things, which require the attention of the Ministry of Finance. I therefore present to you the following budgetary estimates for the year 2001/2002 for approval:

Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs:

Recurrent Budget - Shs.8,996,072,000.
Development Budget - Shs. 10,233,040,000.

The Directorate of Public Prosecutions:

Recurrent Budget - Shs.3,102,000.
Development budget - Shs.283,000,000 (Interjection).

That is why I was saying we should be looking at the loose page. Whatever you see that does not rhyme with your figure, it means there was an alteration in the final figure that was presented by the Ministry of Finance. Most of them are increases, which were to the benefit of the Departments.

Judicial Service Commission:

Recurrent Expenditure - Shs.747 million
Development Expenditure - Shs.46 million, an improvement from the original Shs.40 million.

Uganda Law Reform Commission:

Recurrent Expenditure Shs.883,503,000.
Development Expenditure Shs.197 million.

Uganda Human Rights Commission:

Recurrent Expenditure Shs.2,560,008,460.
Development Expenditure Shs.60 million.

Electoral Commission:

Recurrent Shs.33,041,000,000
Development Shs.5,083,524,000

The Judiciary:

Recurrent Shs.14,132,000,000
Development Shs.2,815,000,000

Inspectorate of Government:

Recurrent Shs.4,240,378,000
Development Shs.207,000,000

Parliamentary Commission:

Development Expenditure Shs.5,502,979,000
Recurrent Expenditure Shs.25,524,255,570

Mr. Speaker, hon. Members, I beg to move.

THE SPEAKER: Thank you.

MS.KIRASO: Mr. Speaker, the way the figures of different Ministries and Departments are being presented and passed by this House as presented by the various Committees has become a matter of concern, especially to the Budget Committee and to the different Chairpersons of the various Committees. We have noted that after Committees present their reports here and Parliament pronounces itself on the different figures, even after we have pronounced ourselves, then the Ministry of Finance comes up with this corrigenda or what he calls a revision. Then at the time of debating the Appropriation Bill, we pronounce ourselves on a different figure from the one we had already pronounced ourselves on.

For the sake of making our work more tidy, would it not be procedurally correct for Committees to present their reports and we adopt them without pronouncing ourselves on the figures until such a time when various corrigenda have been put together and incorporated into the final Recurrent and Development estimates under the Appropriation Bill, other than pronouncing ourselves twice on different figures? I am seeking clarification, Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Well, corrigenda is a correction, and therefore even if we adopt the report without mentioning the figures, by adopting the report you adopt the figures mentioned in the report. But finally when we are dealing with the final document, namely, the Appropriation Bill, and there is a mistake detected, there is nothing to prevent us from correcting the figures and that will be correcting the mistake. Otherwise, what would happen if the Ministry of Finance notes that there was a mistake unintended? Definitely they should correct it and we do so finally when we are dealing with the Appropriation Bill. By either mentioning or not mentioning, once you have adopted a report, we know what we have adopted includes the silent figure you have not mentioned.

DR.OKULO EPAK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think we are being taken for a ride with this terminology corrigenda. What we have been receiving is far beyond what would normally be called corrigenda. There is fear to bring addenda or amendments to some votes. There is substantial shifting of money from some Votes to other Votes. There is substantial inclusion of additional items in some Votes, arising from recent Cabinet decisions.

While I appreciate the point you have made based on the matter of the normal corrigenda, the information we are receiving is beyond the normal corrigenda. I think they are just being called corrigenda but they are actually amendments or they could have been addenda to the budgetary proposals or reports of the various sector Ministries. Or, alternatively, they could have waited and brought them in as supplementaries.

All Chairmen of Committees have been in a meeting with the Budget Committee. We looked at this and maybe you could benefit from the fact that in our view they are not just corrigenda.

THE SPEAKER: I think what you are saying is that there would be proof reading before the figures are presented. But for us if you say corrigenda, we take it as corrigenda. Your concern may be where the figure presented is reduced and it is not explained where the money went. Otherwise if it is increased, what do you suffer? First of all, you have no power to increase the figure. Most times we come here to lament the inadequacies of funds. So, if the funds have increased, you say thank you very much. It is only when they are reduced, and it is not explained that it should cause concern. What might happen is that they change the figure so that a certain figure goes somewhere but the original figure remains the same.

Anyway, the point raised by hon. Kiraso was that we do not mention the figure, and I said it does not make a difference whether you mention it or not.

MR.MWANDHA: Mr. Speaker, the matter raised by my two Colleagues is quite significant. As hon. Okulo Epak has mentioned, some figures are shifted, and these are substantial figures. And this is after the Sessional Committees have discussed the ministerial policies, appreciated the activities to be carried out, and the amounts are allocated. Now, in-between, there are corrigenda, which are really not corrigenda in the real sense of the word. This is shifting big sums of money from one sector to another sector because of change of policies of Government mid-way.

This information does not get to the Committee in time for them to take it into account. Whereas they approve that activity and support it, and they know the money is there, mid-way the money has been shifted from that particular sector to a totally different one. So, there is a big problem. We may pass budgets here, but at the end of the day, you will find that the sectors for which money was budgeted for suffer just because of these so-called corrigenda. Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Beginning from maybe next year, when you are fully functional, you will be participating in the allocation. So maybe that will not arise. But should you feel that you disagree with the changes, maybe you can bring it up when you are dealing with the Appropriation Bill. I hope that once the Budget Committee is fully functional and it involves itself at an early stage, the problem that he was referring to will not arise. You will really make input in the allocation of these funds.

MR. LUKYAMUZI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My impression is that the endless outflow of corrigenda has proven to be an obstacle in economic development. Some of us who have been working with the Committees know that you get an organised ministerial team with their technocrats. They come, give you a good explanation and you sanction everything, only to see several corrigenda coming to disrupt what you have already approved. The Minister of Finance, who is present here, should give us an explanation as to why, among all financial years, this one has been exceptionally messed up with an endless flow of corrigenda.

THE SPEAKER: I think the point has been taken. You are complaining that there are endless corrigenda, which should stop. Next time when they are presenting the budget, they should take care.

MR. NSHIMYE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to propose a correction of an error that appears on page 4 of the report, dealing with domestic arrears. The figure is supposed to read 50 billion and not 50 million.

MR. ERESU: Mr. Speaker, almost all Sessional Committees have been going through Policy Statements of different Ministries. This means that not all of us had the chance, except for the Committees to which we belong, to give our views to the Committees where we are not members. For that reason, we find that our input has been curtailed. I am aware that time is against us, but at the same time, we feel that when a report like this has been presented, we want to make input so that Government realizes the position that we hold. This is because we did not have the opportunity to give our positions at the Committee level.

Last time, a Member moved in this House, and you agreed, that we limit the contribution of Members in the Plenary to two. We feel this is fairly inadequate because some of the matters that are presented by the Committee need to be highlighted further for Government to take them into account, when we pass the budget of that line Ministry. For that reason, I am seeking a procedural position, such that we relax on the question of fixing it to just two Members to make a contribution (Interruption).

THE SPEAKER: Hon. Member, what you are saying is that you are overwhelmed by the work that you have. When the Ministries present Policy Statements, copies are given to each Member of Parliament. Maybe you do not have time to read through, because if you do, and you have a point to follow up, you are entitled to go to any Committee that deals with that particular report to present your case. But maybe you are still overwhelmed.

If you suggest that during the consideration of these reports we should have 50 or 10 people debating, at one point in time there may be reports of certain Committees that will never be presented, even for one minute. I think it is fair that these reports are presented in the way we agreed here. But it does not mean that after passing the budget, you cannot follow up any policy matter that you think should be followed.

As you see, I have not received many reports, although one Chairperson has written to me that the one on Energy is now ready. We have not dealt with Foreign Affairs, we have not dealt with the Presidents office, we have not dealt with the Prime Ministers office, and we have not dealt with many others. If we have to take the entire day dealing with this one because you were not able to go to the Committee, what would happen? The rules even permit me to say that you read a single figure and we pass the budget. I think it is fair to allocate some time, so that at least each Committee is able to present its report.

In any case, this matter was debated in the Business and Welfare Committee, and that is what was agreed on. Last week hon. Aggrey Awori brought up the same matter here, and we all agreed that this is how we should handle the matter. But I advise you to follow up any policy matter after we pass the Budget.

MR. ANTHONY YIGA (Kalungu West, Masaka): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank this Committee for a job well done. Committees that presented earlier were just lamenting about the inadequate funding for their respective sectoral Ministries, but this Committee managed to negotiate with the Ministry of Finance for more funding for the various departments under it. So, I thank them indeed.

Maybe the Minister of Finance who is present could assist me because some of us who are new Members of Parliament have not been adequately guided. We have been given the impression that you cannot increase the budget from what was given in the various Policy Statements of the Ministries. But now we are seeing an option here, where you can have a Committee negotiate with the Ministry of Finance to have the budget increased substantially, in billions of shillings. So, I would like to know whether the other Committees can also go back and have these officials increase their budgets - (Interruption).

THE SPEAKER: Hon. Member, the position is constitutional; constitutional in the sense that anything dealing with money, maybe say for Members emoluments, but anything dealing with money, the motion has to be moved by the Executive. You cannot increase, but you can only reduce. But when you lament, somebody may hear you. And hon. Rukutana or the Minister of Finance can say there you adjust, then he can adjust the figure up-wards. But no Committee has any power to increase the figure upwards.

And it is not true that the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee has not been lamenting because I have heard certain Commissions are getting inadequate funding and should be so, that is the lamentation. That is the position. You cannot increase but the Minister of Finance or any other Minister can bring here a motion to increase the figure.

MR. WAGONDA MUGULI (Buikwe County North, Mukono): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, I would like, for the correctness of our records, to inform our colleagues that I have seen in the report the use of the word re-locate. The technical word is re-allocation. I can vouch to that as a former accounting officer.

Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I would like to seek clarification on one issue of compensation. In recent weeks we have read about people from Luweero Triangle camping at the office of the President. At one time, it was said that compensation for Luweero Triangle was payable by the Minister in charge of Luweero Triangle. It has also been said that the Ministry of Justice was the one actually handling the matter of payment of compensation to the people of Luweero Triangle. I would like to know from either the Minister of Finance or the Minister of Justice as to who is responsible for paying the people of Luweero Triangle, so that these people can channel their grievances to the appropriate authority rather than camping at the wrong gate.

May I also know whether the people of Luweero Triangle will actually be paid from this sum of 2 billion shillings? We have heard, Mr. Speaker, committee after committee lamenting about the Ministry of Finance being unfair in the allocation of funds, mainly that they are not sufficient. I wonder whether the Ministry of Finance has considered divesting itself from this function through creation of an independent body that would be impartial?

For example, Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada has set up a Budget Commission. A Commission which is independent, and to which all Ministries, including the Ministry of Finance, go and place their bids for financing. I thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MS. BETTY AMONGI (Woman Representative, Apac): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also want to commend the Committee for the good work done. My concern is on page 17 of the report as one of the achievements of the Uganda Law Reform Commission. The second achievement is that it formulated a draft Bill on Domestic Relations, which is before the Cabinet.

This particular Bill affects the vast majority of the women of this country. We have been lobbying, we have been begging for this Bill to come to Parliament for approval, because this Domestic Relations Bill handles the socio-economic relations, the gender socio-economic relations in society, and it is very, very important for the question of advancing womens equality in this country.

So, I want to know from the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, what financial implications the Bill has for coming from Cabinet to Parliament. Does it have any financial implication if it is already before the Cabinet? I want to know because it affects the majority of the women and men of this country. And when is it coming before us?

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I also want to know from the Minister why the Equal Opportunities Commission can never appear in the policy statement? Really, it is a constitutional matter. The 1995 Constitution established to provide for the Equal Opportunities Commission, but how many years after the 1995 Constitution have passed? Why the Equal Opportunities Commission, when the rest of the commissions have been set? What is wrong with this particular commission? Mr. Speaker, I want to know that.

Lastly, the question of the Magistrates: There is always one Magistrate, especially in my district. We have one Magistrate for over half a million of the total population. And I do not know whether we expect people to have access to this. And because of limited access to the Magistrate, people have resorted to settling their disputes with the local councils.

Now, I want to know, Mr. Speaker, if the Ministry of Justice is trying to think about training these local councils on simple dispute resolution, because that is now what people have resorted to due to limited access to Magistrates. Mr. Speaker, those are the clarifications I want. Thank you very much.

MR. SITENDA-SEBALU (Kyadondo County East, Wakiso): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, for availing me this chance. I would also like to commend the Committee for the good work done. Mr. speaker, I would like to seek clarification from the Minister of Justice, why the law on adultery has not been amended? This is a bad law, which encourages immorality, and home breaking countrywide. Once a man is caught in such an act with another mans wife, after the first offence, the woman is cautioned and made to pay a meagre fine whereas the man on the other hand is made to pay only a fine of Shs. 600. This is outrageous, it could not be happening in this era of modernisation and ethics! Since the Uganda Law Commission falls under the Ministry of Justice, I would like to seek clarification from the Minister, when are they pushing for this amendment? Thank you very much.

MR. ROGERS MAATE (Ntoroko, County, Bundibugyo): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let me take this opportunity to thank the Committee for having produced a good report. My major concern is on the Electoral Commission, which appears on page 18 and 19. It is about the observations made by the Committee, as far as conducting elections in new districts is concerned. Here, the Committee did not look at new counties.

We have a new county in Bundibugyo district called Bughendera, and by our Constitution and the Parliamentary Elections Act, that is a constituency which must have a Member of Parliament. But up to now, elections have not been held and yet in other constituencies where there are vacant places, elections have been held. I need clarification on this, Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Hon. Member, I think that is a purely constitutional matter. The Electoral Commission conducts election to Parliament. It conducts general elections and by-elections. So, if this constituency was created after the general elections, there is no by-election and so you have to wait for a general election, unless the law is changed.

For instance, there were districts that were created by the last Parliament after a general election. There was no way a by-election would be conducted because you conduct a by-election when an election had taken place in that particular constituency. Apparently in that particular county, there was an election and a Member of Parliament is here. So it has to wait for another general election, unless the law is somehow changed as we did with the Women Representatives. I think that clears the problem.

MS.JESSICA ERIYO (Woman Representative, Adjumani): Thank you Mr. Speaker. I thank the Committee for a well-prepared report presented before us today. I do not seem to understand a sentence on page 4 very well. I would like the chairperson to clarify the recommendation That Government should undertake as a priority to pay off domestic arrears that are not more than 50 million, or make a part payment of 50 million where more is required. I do not understand the last part of that statement.

Secondly, I would like to thank the Committee very much for recommendation number 2 on page 7, for a resident State Attorney to be recruited in each district. Many districts have been faced with a lot of legal problems, and because they are not well versed with the law, they have suffered a lot of losses.

For example recently, Adjumani district was trying to battle it out with some individuals from Gulu district who had alleged that Adjumani district should compensate for someone who was killed - (Interruptions) - Mr. Speaker, may I be protected from those who are making noise, especially from the Front Bench -(Laughter).

THE SPEAKER: Surely, you are protected. Please, Front Bench, do not -(Laughter)

MS.ERIYO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for that protection. I was saying that in Adjumani district, we are currently facing a problem between some individuals from Gulu district who claimed that some person was killed by -(Interruption)- No! That it is the LDUs. LDUs killed some people and they claimed that the district should actually compensate for the people killed. We think that is not really a matter that the district should take up.

I am just giving this as an example because the LDUs are not really employees of the district. The district is not responsible for them. I think the Ministry of Defence could take that up. The district is now wasting a lot of money moving up and down from Adjumani to Gulu to handle such cases. I think if we had State Attorneys in the districts, they would help to solve such matters and to give advice to the districts rather than making the district employ lawyers and waste a lot of resources. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR.JOHN AACHILLA (Jie County, Kotido): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have two issues to comment on from this report. The first one is a point of emphasis on page 8. This is on the Administrator General. It is pointed out very clearly that the role of this Department is divided into four. I want to emphasise on the section on land.

Land is a very important property. Without land, you seem not to exist and everything must rely on land. I would like to emphasise that the Ministry should ensure that this Department of Land is well facilitated and is helped to operate in all the regions and in all the districts of this country. For example, constituencies like mine, we have Kotido Town Council.

The issues of land have become so difficult that if Government does not empower the Land Officers, the registrars of land in these places, there is no way that we can change the lifestyle of people like the Karimojong. I would like to emphasise that this point must be taken seriously. The priority should first be given to facilitate the Land Officers in their districts to mobilise the people to look at the value of land as an important aspect of enriching and helping their social economic lifestyle.

Secondly, I would like to seek clarification from the Committee. On page 27, it is stated that one of the objectives of the Parliamentary Commission is to improve the quality of debate and legislation. I commend them for that good job. But when you look at point three, To improve the responsiveness of Members of Parliament to legitimate concerns of their constituencies, I would like to get clarification here.

Does this objective imply that the objective of the Commission is sooner or later going to enable Members of Parliament to establish their offices for political assistants in their constituencies? Can I go with the wish that the Committee is planning to have these people paid on their individual merit like the way we came to Parliament on our individual merit? Will Parliament facilitate our political assistants so that they are paid and our work to legislate and to perform legitimately is carried on? I would like to be clarified on this point. Thank you very much.

MR.EZATI WADRI (Terego County, Arua): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have two observations to make, and at the end I will seek some clarification. The first one is concerning the Constitutional Review Commission.

There is a lot of public outcry that the Constitutional Review Commission is there only to legitimise a decision that has already been taken. This is shown to the people by the fact that the Commission has not even moved outside Kampala, and yet it has already had six months of its term of office. How sure are we that they will be able to reach Adjumani, Koboko or Terego?

I think the Constitutional Review Commission has a very important task, which calls for the input of every person because it affects all of us. At this pace, I am afraid it may not be able to reach each and every part of this country. I do not know whether the Minister responsible has got programmes in place to allay the fears of the people. Out there, people are saying that this is something that is already predetermined; whether they come to consult us or not, they have already written a real Constitution. It is very important for Government to come out and allay the fears of the people, by coming up with a clear yardstick (Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: Hon. Member, a new Constitution is not written by the Commission, it is this Parliament that deals with amending or writing a new Constitution. So, I think this information is not well placed. The Constitution is normally amended by Parliament. This Commission is just gathering views, which may be the basis of certain amendments to the Constitution.

MR. WADRI: Mr. Speaker, I do agree that the Constitution making process is finally determined by the House, but the views of the people are the ones that the Parliament comes to debate. If people are not consulted, what are we going to debate? I think that is a cardinal issue, which is being raised by the public. There is a need to reach them.

Secondly, I would like to thank the Committee for the observation they made on page 20 of their report. This deals with the continuous updating of the photographic voters registers. Five years from now, this will be of interest to all of us. Right now we may say, well, whether the Electoral Commission does it or not, it may not immediately affect us.

I think that somehow, one has to appreciate that the type of equipment that was imported was not really suitable for our environment. These are cameras that have to be charged from time to time, and there are many parts of this country where electricity services are not there. Actually, when I went home over the Independence festivity, I found out that many of my people in Terego had not even registered - (Interruption).

MR. ERESU: Mr. Speaker, may I inform the House that in Kaberamaido, we do not have electricity and when the batteries of the photographic cameras went down, the photographer had to go to Soroti to recharge the batteries. When he went to Soroti, the electricity had also been off for three days. By the time he went back to Kaberamaido, the deadline had already arrived. So, many people missed being registered.

MR. WADRI: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I think my friend, hon. Eresu has just given an addendum to what I was putting forward. If that has also happened in Kaberamaido, which is not so far away from Soroti, then you can appreciate the sentiment that I am expressing.

There are many people out there who have not had their registrations updated. It is very important that the Electoral Commission, through the relevant Ministry, takes this very seriously. They should be able to reactivate the process every time. Even in some places where these batteries were placed, some of us were asked to put the batteries in our vehicles so that they could be charged. This is just to show how bad the situation is on the ground.

I would like, therefore, to thank the Committee for having made that recommendation. Indeed, there is need to have a continuous up-dating process so that in 2006, nobody comes here to complain that these voters were not registered. Thank you.

MR. TOM BAGALANA (Bunya South, Mayuge): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just have a little clarification about the Constitutional Review Commission. I thought it was one of the legal departments in Government, which should have been indicated in this report, but I do not see it in the budget summary.

The Constitution was made by a popular mandate. They consulted the people, everybody had a say, but now, access to the Constitutional Review Commission Committee is not availed to the populace. Most of the views that are going to the Constitutional Review Commission are elite views and not the views of the common man. So, I do not know whether it will be a national view or it will be an elite view. I want Government to reconsider this. Even if they choose to spend a day in a constituency or in a sub-county so that people may appear before the Constitutional Review Commission, the amendments which may eventually be moved, will be valid with a popular mandate - (Interruption).

MRS.MUKWAYA: Thank you, my colleague, for giving way. I want to come in at this point because the issue of the constitutional review is coming up again and again on the Floor. What you must know is that Vote-on-Account is a Constitutional matter. That is why the Chairman said that the Commission was put in place midway the Budget, and we could not get more money because it was not catered for in the Ministry budget.

Secondly, the Constitutional Review Commission is not a substantive department because it is an activity-oriented commission. In Vote-on-Account, we are handling institutions within Kampala. After the end of this month, when you give us the money, there is a programme to go to the sub-county level. So, rest assured that the Commission will be there. And if Government discovers that many people have not been reached, in its wisdom it will tell you the way forward.

MR.BAGALANA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was especially advocating for your constituency, the ladies. You may get a proportion of 0.1 percent of the ladies who have accessed this Constitutional Review Commission.

The other clarification I want from the Chairperson is on the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs. It seems to be one of the smallest Ministries in operation, but when you look at its development budget, it is Shs.10 billion. And it is not itemised in the report for us to see how it will be utilised. When you look through the whole summary of the estimates of expenditure, the development budget takes a lot, and yet this is one of the least operational departments in the Government. So, I want clarification on this.

LT. MUJUZI PIUS (Kyotera County, Rakai): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I am a Member of the Legal and Parliamentary Committee, but I request you to allow me to make a small statement of clarification on some matter pertaining to what took place in the Committee, and which appeared in the Press.

There are some reports that appeared in the local media on Saturday that quoted me as having contributed in one of the meetings of the Committee on Thursday, that I suggested that the year of consent for young girls should be reduced to fourteen.

I want to take this opportunity to categorically deny and vehemently protest that I do not intend, either now or in the future, to support the reduction of the year of consent for girls to fourteen years. I thank you for allowing me to make this clarification (Interruption)- I am yet to be through, Mr. Speaker.

There is a reason why I had to make this statement. I was in the Constituency this weekend; I found that many parents of young girls were concerned about what appeared in the local media. So, I request my brothers up there in the gallery, in the same way to report that I have categorically denied (Laughter)- and I dont intend to support the reduction of these years to fourteen years. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. JOHN KAWANGA (Masaka Municipality, Masaka): Thank you, Mr. speaker. I only wish to comment on the Electoral Commission, and the way it is handling the registration exercise. Immediately after the photographic registration, there was an announcement made with regard to the registration for the Local Councils, and the people were given two weeks.

Two: there was no logistics provided to the people who are supposed to do the registration. As a result, people are using exercise books to do the registration. Besides that, the Chairmen themselves who are going to stand in the coming elections are the ones responsible for the registration of the people who shall be voting for them.

Three: people are not even clear as to who should be registered, because they think the announcement said that this concerns non-Ugandans, who had no opportunity to register under the photographic process who are now supposed to be registered. And the people say, but, why this difference? People didnt understand this! So, the Electoral Commission should have an organised way of handling registration. It is so vital for democracy; it should not be handled in such a shoddy way.

The question of the Administrator Generals department, I happen to have worked in the Ministry of Justice in the 70s. The Administrator Generals department remains the sick person of that Ministry. Either it is overwhelmed or there is something technically wrong with it. It is absolutely necessary that government find a solution to the problem in the Administrator Generals department. It should be decentralised.

Secondly, the Act itself should be amended to cater for the changed circumstances. Things have changed so much.

Thirdly, the jurisdiction of the courts that handle these affairs should be raised. It is ridiculous to think that a Chief Magistrate should be handling matters of one hundred thousand shillings. That is what presently is the law. So, surely something has to be done about this department.

Finally, I think the Administrator Generals department passed over its functions to the local administrations without giving them the capacity to handle this matter locally. So, really, the Local administrators are handling this matter in a very unfortunate way, and it is going to cause a lot of litigation between people under the local administration and the Administrations General department. I pray that the appropriate Ministry address this matter. Thank you.

MR. BRUNO PAJOBO (Workers Representative): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wanted also to comment about the Administrator General/Public Trustee. I think it is not fit to call it the public trustee. It is where people are suffering although they talk of success and achievements. Nobody knows when these cases were reported, and how long they take to be resolved. Surely, if you go in that department, you find people coming from Kabale. They even go to the extent of selling their properties to get what their beloved ones left behind. If you go there, it is a matter of tears!

I went there myself, I have been claiming. My brother died in 1989, but up to now, we have been chasing the money and payment is a problem. Now, if I am defeated, what about the ordinary person who doesnt know Kampala? That is the department which makes people suffer. I would like to recommend that let the department be decentralised with immediate effect. If not, something should be done because people are suffering. It is in a place where you can even see tears. That is a difficult thing. That is my observation. Thank you.

MR. SIMON MAYENDE (Samia Bugwe South, Busia): Mr. Speaker, mine is a very small but critical observation. Can we know, either from the Chairman or the one presenting this report or the line Ministry, why the staff of the Uganda Human Rights Commission should be de-linked from the Public Service or is it the civil service they meant to say? I am aware that there are some civil servants in the Human Rights Commission. Did they mean civil servants or public servants?

Secondly, the question of the Electoral Commission has been addressed. I only wish to add my voice to it. Can the continuous registration be enforced? Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

MR. DEUSDEDIT BIKWASIZEHI (Buhweju County, Bushenyi): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mine does not differ very much from the hon. colleague from Apac. In those days, and I understand in some areas, they used to deploy Magistrates of lower cadres to sub-counties and at the county level. This enabled people to access justice at the nearest point. But as I talk now, if I can talk for Buhweju, we have no Magistrate at the sub-counties or at the county. So, people must travel a distance of more than fifty miles to look for justice. And as they say, justice delayed is justice denied. I dont know whether in that perspective the Buhweju people are not denied the justice they need.

So, may I be clarified as to what criteria is used to determine the deployment of these Magistrates, because the whole area is really lacking Magistrates, and I am afraid that this is also partly why we have some mob justice taking place. Because, it is too costly for people to travel longer distances to look for justice. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MRS.BABA DIRI (Representative of Persons with Disabilities): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would like also to thank the Committee for the elaborate report. I would like just some clarification from the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs.

We have some out dated laws that actually urgently need review. One is the Mental Health Act, 1948. That Act considers a mentally ill person a criminal because he or she is first taken to the Police before the person is taken for any treatment. And definitely, they are treated like criminals. Really, we would like this law to be reformed so that people with disabilities, those who are mentally ill can be considered as human beings rather than criminals.

Then the next one is the Uganda Foundation of the Blind Act, 1962. This organization has an Act, which actually is outdated in that, in that Act there is a need for Government, especially the Ministry for Gender, Labour and Social Development to recruit, to appoint a Board of Trustees. Since then, that Board of Trustees has never been appointed, and now the Uganda Foundation for the Blind is no longer existing.

As a result, the people who are supposed to benefit from this service, especially the blind persons, are not benefiting. Currently, the Director who has never been paid for many years has actually taken Uganda Foundation for the Blind to Court, and is threatening to sell this very important institution. May I know if the Minister knows about this, and what are they doing to rectify the situation? Thank you very much.

MR. KEN LUKYAMUZI (Lubaga South, Kampala): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have a few questions which I would like the hon. Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs to articulate before I can approve the money for her Ministry.

One, yours is the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs. This is a supposition that there is a department in charge of constitutional affairs, as well as research associated with constitutional development. How do you link that department with the newly launched Commission of Inquiry into Constitutional Affairs?

On behalf of the people of Kampala, I would like to make noise about the bad impression the Electoral Commission has given to Kampalas population over this renewal of registration. Much as the exercise started so many days ago, in Kampala it is insignificantly going on. Nobody knows exactly whether what we do is what we are supposed to do! Is it deliberately done to ensure that the Kampala population does not respond to these elections? There is something wrong in Kampala, and I am an advocate of the Kampala population, being a Member of Parliament for Lubaga South.

The other question is, if the appointment of the Commissioners for the Constitutional Review Commission was done in good faith, how come that the officers appointed were never subjected to scrutiny by the Appointments Committee of Parliament? This is a very important matter. The taxpayer is going to pay for these people, and in fact he/she has already started paying. But why does the Government not accept that we also scrutinize these appointed officers, if what they are going to do is deemed to serve the population in good faith?

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I am not very, very happy with what has been going on in this country related to what people refer to as justice. At one time I made noise. There are people who have been detained in Luzira for the last five years without being tried in a court of law. I once visited Luzira and I was shown certain personalities people who are getting aged in jail, and Government is not caring. If the Minister is not aware of that, I am prepared to travel with her to Luzira, and take her to specific cells in Luzira where these people are rotting. I need an explanation.

MR.OMODI OKOT (Kole County, Apac): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have one or two comments to make. One, I would like to thank the Committee for the thorough work it has done. I think much of the gratitude should go to the Rt. Hon. Prime Minister, whom I am sure has been able to put the Members of the team, that is the Ministers, to task in order to keep coming with a good report to this House. I am saying this because in the past, this House has had quarrels with most of the reports that do come before the House. So, I would like to thank the Prime Minister for having done very well to put his Ministers on footing, and to make them come with very good reports.

I want to say something about the Judicial Service Commission. Mr. Speaker, Article 146 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, sub-section (2) provides that the Commission shall be composed of eight Members, and out of the eight, six must be lawyers, and two non-lawyers. I am saying this because in the Committee report, on page 2 of the introduction, it talks about inadequate staffing of the Commission. I would like to suggest that arrangements be made to recruit and fill all the approved personnel structure of the Commission.

Secondly, arrangements should be made to authorize Public Service Commission to relinquish Members and Staff of the Commission and take them back to the Judicial Commission in order to strengthen the staff position of the Commission.

Having said that about the Judicial Commission, I want to say one or two things about the Judiciary. Unlike in the past where the State of Uganda used to provide legal aid only to cases which are like murder, treason or some other previous cases, at the moment, the practice is to give legal aid to all the people who qualify. For instance, those people who are poor and cannot afford to pay for legal services.

At the moment when you look at the structure of centres where such advice and guidance are sought, I think they are too few. For instance, in Northern Uganda, from Apac to Lira, if you want legal service, you have to go to Gulu. I think it is the same case with say the West, Mbarara; the East, Mbale, and the like. Can I, therefore, find out from the Minister, why it is not possible for this Ministry to increase the number of centres from which such services could be obtained in order to make it easy for people who want such services? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: But hon. Omodi, the legal aid centres you are talking about, do they come under the Ministry of Justice or you are talking about centres manned by the law society, which is a different body? What you are talking about is the law society legal aid. But, do we have offices by Ministry of Justice for legal aid?

MR.OMODI OKOT: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware where they fall, but I am of the opinion that (Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: It is okay.

MRS. RUTH TUMA (Woman Representative, Jinja): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to refer to page 28, and I would also want to commend the Committee for the good work they did, the projects they have proposed and I am sure that as new Parliamentarians read this page, they are very excited because they are going to learn a lot in their first year in Parliament.

I would also like to get clarification on the second paragraph from the bottom: World Bank has committed US Dollars 100,000 for strengthening the role of Parliament in the multi sectoral HIV/AIDS control programme. I was not aware that we had an AIDS programme going on. Maybe, I can get information from the Minister concerned where we can go and get more information because this is a very important issue. Because, as Parliamentarians and as politicians, we are expected to participate fully. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

DR. ATWOOKI KASIRIVU (Bugangaizi County, Kibaale): Thank you Mr. Speaker. I also want to thank the Committee for a good report, and I have a few comments to make.

Some time back, the IGG did mention that Police and the Judiciary were the most corrupt departments. Government reacted by appointing a commission to investigate the Police. It might have been yesterday that I saw in the papers that the Judiciary has set up a Committee to move around to get some views, and the impression created was that the views are geared towards getting information on how the pubic conceives the Judiciary to be corrupt. The impression I got is that the Judiciary might be trying to investigate itself.

Can I get a comment from the Minister, whether Government is also contemplating setting up a commission to investigate the Judiciary, and if it was a Judicial Commission, whether this time somebody else will investigate the Judiciary?

The issue raised in the Report about the domestic arrears is such a big problem that every year, Government is losing cases and court is awarding. Bugangaizi County has about 4,000 people who are claiming money as a result of court awards. So far, in the last three years, about 100 of them have been partly paid. That means about 3,900 are remaining. At this rate, it might take about 20 years to pay them. That means some of them will have died before their money is paid, and then the money will eventually go to the Administrator Generals office. And as you have heard, hon. Pajobo said there are real tears in the office of the Administrator General.

What practical steps have been made by the Ministry of justice in conjunction with Finance to make sure that court awards are settled as soon as possible? Because the lawyers who represent certain clients are so vibrant that they know how to calculate interest. They are not like other suppliers of Government who may be paid after so many years and may not get interest. But as court awards, there is a lot of accumulated interest. So what proper steps are we going to have, maybe with the next budgeting, to make sure that these court awards are paid and people dont die before they receive their money? Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Can we hear replies from the Ministers?

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS (Mrs. Janat Mukwaya): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker and colleagues. I take this opportunity to thank the chairperson of the Committee and the Members of the Committee and all the colleagues of the House for the concerns and issues that you have raised.

I am so gratified because, at the beginning of the debate there was concern from a colleague that Why should the thin Ministry of Justice get a development budget of 10 million shillings? But as the debate progressed, it was exciting to see that people recognise that there is no way we are going to fight poverty, if there is no justice for all. And if we have to provide justice for all, then we must have a well-funded justice, law and order sector, which can provide justice for all.

I have to inform the House that for the last few years, Government has reduced investment in this sector. That is why you hear all these concerns about the courts, the magistrates and the Administrator General. I am glad that you have given us that report, so next years budget, I think, will be more realistic and down to earth. Let me go straight to the issues as they were raised.

Yes, it is a concern for everybody, both in Government and the public that court awards are not immediately paid. Such issues pick interest, but you are all aware that the resource envelope is the problem. We sit here and distribute the resources, and court awards have not emerged as a priority. Once Government picks this up as a priority, then I think that money will be given to me to pay the people.

There was a question as to whether it will be the Ministry of Justice that will pay Luweero Triangle. Originally, there was a policy that individual Ministries should pay for awards as granted by courts from individual Ministries. Later, Government decided that we should have a common pool, and that is the Ministry of Justice.

There are two categories of people in Luweero Triangle who will benefit. There are those people who are going to be appreciated for a service rendered. So, a token of appreciation will be given. And it is the person who appreciates you who will decide how much they will give you. That is a different category. It is not compensation.

There are people who lent items to the Government. Those amount to compensation. And once the Committee that has been put in place has cleared and verified the claims, the Ministry of Justice will pay those - (Interruptions).

MR.BASALIZA ARAALI: Thank you, hon. Minister, for giving way. Does Luwero Triangle include Kabarole as well? Actually, Luwero Triangle has got its own definition. So, I am seeking for that definition because Kabarole is also supposed to be part of Luwero Triangle. So, I am seeking for that definition. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MRS.MUKWAYA: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Institutional memory is also good, because I was formerly Minister of State for Luwero Triangle. I have to inform this House that Luwero Triangle, as I knew it then, is still what it is. I have not heard anything to the contrary. But even in Kabarole, there are people who supported and rendered service without expecting pay. Like those people in Luwero and Mukono, they will also be appreciated. We will give them akasimo. That is a different category. There are those people who gave food and medicine and other things. That is compensation.

There are two categories of people in Luwero Triangle. I will only be handling properly verified claims for compensation as forwarded to the Attorney General. So, the Ministry will pay. As for akasimo, the Minister for Luwero Triangle will handle it.

On the Domestic Relations Bill, there is no financial implication. If I understood my sister well, she seemed to be saying that the Domestic Relations Bill is not coming to Parliament because we may need money to transport it here. The problem is that there has been a change of hands. According to the priorities of my Ministry, we are handling The Lawyers (Amendment) Act, we are handling The Magistrates and Judicature Act, and The Domestic Relations Bill will come soon.

About the Equal Opportunities Commission, this is a job for the Minister of Gender, Labour and Social Development. So, at her own time, she will inform the House when the Commission will be put in place.

There is concern for the ratio of magistrates to the population. I must admit here that I do not have the facts with me, but I will check with the registrar of the High Court and I will come back to this House.

The public and Members of Parliament are concerned not only about adultery but fines on many criminal cases. I have to inform the House that the Law Reform Commission has revised all the fines, and a Bill will come before the House very soon.

I thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, for having guided my colleague who was asking about this. That is the status quo as we were advised. But I must add quickly that it is unfortunate that many people are handling this issue. There were the elders who wrote to us, and we gave them a legal opinion. There are Members of Parliament who came to us, and we gave them the same legal opinion. Let me hope that today this matter will be rested until 2006.

On the issue of the Administrator General, there was a presentation which rather confused me. It appeared that a colleague was talking about the Registrar General. In his presentation, he was actually talking about the functions of the Registrar General or both issues.

Government is working towards making the offices of the Registrar General and the Administrator General executive agencies. A law was prepared and discussed here, turning the Administrator Generals office into a bureau. Later, Government realized that this was not the best way to go. Government revisited that position and decided that the Administrator Generals office should be an autonomous agency or an executive agency.

The Ministry of Public Service is now working on a law to provide general provisions for executive agencies and authorities. I hope that the Ministry of Public service can tell us when that law will be brought to this House. And once that law has been passed by this House, the Administrator Generals office will automatically change into an executive agency, which will be an autonomous body. It will run commercially, and the executive directors of the agency will decide how much to charge on any activity of the Administrator General and also the Registrar General.

That brings me to the Constitutional Review Commission. It is unfortunate that hon. Ken Lukyamuzi, who was very concerned about this, and who was here when the Commission was put in place in the Sixth Parliament, has forgotten so soon. He has forgotten that he participated in endorsing these names, and now he wants me to bring the names back for the Seventh Parliament to endorse. I think that is absurd!

We are all Ugandans, and I know that this Commission has a fifty, fifty representation. All the political shades are catered for. So let Ugandans rest assured that these Ugandans that we have entrusted to do the job will do a good job, and the House will finally decide which way Uganda will go. Let us wait for that time, and let us trust these people.

I have already explained why the Commission has not gone outside. When the budget is passed, there will be a programme to go to the districts and to the sub-counties. But I call upon my colleagues to start sensitizing our people to write memoranda, because it may not be feasible for every Ugandan to walk to the sub-county. People can write memoranda and submit them through their chairpersons or through the sub-counties like we did in the Constitutional Commission of 1994. I know that the Commission was set to meet Members of Parliament as individuals and as a group, but I can avail that programme later.

I will have to bring a brief on why we used those cameras and not the still cameras in the registration exercise. In cleaning up the register, Government decided that we should use the photographic recording system. This system works on comparison. Even if you have one million pictures, the scanner can tell you that Mukwaya has a beard or Mukwaya has a bald head. It can tell you that some three people are the same, so you go and find out actually whether these three people are different.

The digital cameras that we have used have to record the physical picture and also a number, and it has a bar code recorded on that sheet that you have. So, each individual picture that is taken will be recorded in the central data system of the Electoral Commission, and it has to be compared against the eight million pictures there. It can give us those pictures that look almost the same. So, it is those that it has rejected that we can put in another machine, a scanner, to tell us actually the physical stature of these two Ugandans that the computer has rejected.

I also know that if all of us participated as we participated during the parliamentary election registration, we would have supported the people who had the cameras and the batteries. This is the best technology that we could have in the countryside. Short of that, we cannot have the photographic registration.

The other issue that Government had wanted in place was to have the thumbprint. This was for further cleaning of the register, but we realize that because of the network infrastructure that we have, the thumbprint is not feasible in the meantime. That is why we are progressing with the photographic register.

When the Commission heard that many people had not been registered, we extended the time. But you must also be aware that the election of a chairperson of LC3 and LC5 has a constitutional deadline. So, we have to work within that constitutional deadline in order not to have a constitutional amendment. Perfection will be attained as we progress towards 2006, but for now, let us begin. Please move with us as we begin. Rome was not built in a day (Interruption).

MRS. MUKWAYA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for that wise counsel. For purposes of the local government elections, there must be a cut-off point, for us to be able to hold that election, but the registration will continue.

If Government was to find money for the Registrar General to start on the programme of registering births, deaths, marriages and so on, time would come when we would no longer need to go and register, because the system would be picking everybody that clocks 18 into the Electoral Commission data system. Continuous registration will always be there, but for the purposes of the local government elections, that was the time that was set.

Anybody who is concerned about the peasants, our people suffering at the Administrator Generals office, should go and mobilize our people. ACFODE is very active and willing to help our people. People should make wills, and in the wills, they must indicate the executors of the Will. Those people who make wills and do not identify who the executors will be end up in the Administrator Generals Office. Even amongst us here, people fear to make wills, and you will end up in the Administrators Office. If you want to help me off-load the Administrator Generals Office of these burdens, let us mobilize our people to make effective wills so that their children and widowed spouses do not end up in the Administrator Generals Office.

There was a concern about what I call de-linking judicial officers. There is a debate as to whether the court clerks and the court bailiffs should really be people under the Public Service, like a tea girl, a secretary, or any other administrative officer.

In our view, we think that court clerks and court bailiffs should remain part of the judicial system as the servicing officers. If you trained this person - a court clerk to go to LDC, have training and next year you transfer this person to Ministry of Agriculture or Ministry of Transport and Works, really one will be displaced. So, that is the issue, but the debate is continuing.

I have already answered why in Buhweju there is no Magistrate. For hon. Baba Diri, I have written to the Minister of Health of your concern, because that is a sectoral law.

MR.OKOT OGONG: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. On the issue of the outdated laws that was raised by Margaret Baba Diri, I want to inform her that the law is being prepared; it is within the proposals that we are going to debate in this financial year 2001/2002. So, the Ministry is preparing it.

Regarding the Mental Health Act 1948, there is a law that is going to come in respect of how to treat mentally retarded people. It is going to be called The Mental Health Treatment Bill, which is going to be presented on the Floor here.

MRS.MUKWAYA: Thank you colleague for that information. (Mr.Bikwasizehi rose_)

MR.BIKWASIZEHI: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Minister said that she has indicated why we have no Magistrates in Buhweju. Personally, I have not heard that. Maybe she can repeat it.

THE SPEAKER: No, I think she said she is going to get information from the Registrar of the High Court to tell her the problems and so forth, and then she will come with an answer. But currently she is not in position to give you an answer.

MRS.MUKWAYA: And for the satisfaction of my colleague, the core Ministry of Justice is the Attorney Generals Chambers, which is the Ministry. So, all the other autonomous bodies are here, I am responsible only for budget and policy, because you know under the Constitution, the Judiciary is independent like Parliament. That is why I said, I will check with the Registrar of the High Court who handles issues of the day.

I have already answered hon. Lukyamuzi. I want also to be recorded that I am one of the visiting justices of -(Interruption) But hon. Lukyamuzi should know that recently the Chief Justice visited the prisons. Hon. Kategaya as Minister of Internal Affairs visited the prisons, and I am yet to go there, but I think we shall discuss because if you are on a murder charge and the court has a lot of work and it has not scheduled a case for hearing, there is no way you can let this person go. You go because the court is not here. But anyway, that we can discuss in the corridor.

The Speaker assisted me to answer somebody who was concerned about the law society, and I think we should commend the law society because this is a donor-funded activity. We really need these services. So, as Government we must support the law society to go and assist out people.

For my colleague who was worried as to why the Judiciary has sent out committees to find out what the population feels about the Judiciary, to me, I think we should commend the Judiciary. The Judiciary received the IGGs report. It took note of the recommendations, but I think it also wants to satisfy itself on the findings of the IGG, and I think this is in the right direction. And it is under the department of integrity and capacity building within the Judiciary.

I want to tell this House that the findings are so shocking that the lower magistrates courts are running without officers. There are no court clerks there; if the court clerks are there, they dont have a pen, they dont have stationery and so on. So, if we really want justice, then let Government and this House make the Ministry of Justice a core Ministry in order to provide services -(Interruption)- yes! For everybody.

I have no intentions as of now to institute a Judicial Commission of Inquiry, because my Lord the Chief Justice is handling that and I think we are yielding results. I will be advised.

There was one point here; it is true that the Electoral Commission announced that within the next two weeks, we have to register. Why non-Ugandan? Because at LC.I, the first photographic registration was for the national register and non-Ugandans are not supposed to participate in our national elections.

When I talk about national elections, I am talking about the presidential, parliamentary, LC.V, LCIII and their councillors because a village is not a Government. But then, an Indian, an Ethiopian living here, a Nigerian living here really would want to know how the village matters are run. That is why we are registering outside the national register, a temporary register for the village to allow those people participate in the affairs of the village.

Lastly, I think I have answered literally everything, so, I want to thank, once again, the Members for having participated effectively, and also the chairperson for the report. Probably the Attorney General may have something to add, with the permission of the Speaker.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Mr. Francis Ayume): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want to supplement one or two points, which my colleague has already handled. The first one is relating to the issue of lack of Magistrates in many parts of the country. And this is a matter which is really being addressed under the Justice, Law and Order Sector Programme, where all the stakeholders, excluding the recipients of justice, are involved in ensuring that they participate, and their departments operate fairly optimally in order to deliver justice.

We have the department of Public Prosecutions, we have the CID, the Police, we have the Prisons and we have the Judiciary. So, the idea is that when this sector is properly funded - and, Mr. Speaker that is why I think the figure of 10 billion on our Development Budget is causing some concern.

This is precisely because Government in developing this sector is determined to ensure that justice reaches almost every corner of our country. Therefore, after a while, the question of a magistrate not being in Buhweju County, another one not being, say, in some parts of Lira and so on will be a thing of the past, provided of course the moneys are made available.

The second issue, Mr. Speaker, is to do with outdated laws. As hon. Members will probably have seen in our Policy Statement as well as in the Committees Report, there is an institution called the Law Reform Commission. This is an institution, which looks at various laws with a view to identifying those areas that need to be revised, either by way of amendments or by even overhauling the entire legislation.

So, I would therefore request hon. Members that whenever they have any ideas about those areas of the law which need to be attended to by this Commission, any memoranda or reports or submission from them are welcome. And that will help us in updating our laws as our country develops. Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Hon. Minister of Public Service, any comment?

THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE (GENERAL DUTIES) (Mr.Okumu Ringa): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Several Members making contributions on the Floor, including the chairperson of this Committee made reference to the role of the Ministry of Public Service and the Public Service Commission in the area of Human Resource Management.

It is true, Mr. Speaker, that the Ministry of Public Service is responsible for the overall management of the Civil Service. It is also true that under the Ministry of Public Service, we have four Constitutional Commissions. These are: the Public Service Commission; the Judicial Service Commission; the Health Service Commission; and the Educational Service Commission.

In this case, the Judicial Service Commission has a role in the overall management of judicial officers, but other categories of the work force, indeed, fall under the Ministry of Public Service. The Ministry of Public Service through the Public Service Commission does create jobs in areas where there are inadequacies. And when jobs are created, proper funding is made available.

In the case of the Judicial Service Commission, like the other four Constitutional Commissions, they have been restructured, and in particular the Judicial Service Commission has been restructured, and appropriate facilitation is provided for in the Budget. I am sure if the Judicial Service Commission comes up with advertisements with a view to filling the vacant positions, there will be no objection on the part of the Ministry of Public Service, and also on the part of the Public Service Commission.

The Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs referred to emancipation of certain departments. It is true my Ministry is working on emancipation of certain departments, one of which will be the Administrator Generals department, which should become an executive agency, and once these are restructured and given proper mandate, they will be made functional. These are a few of the issues I thought I should make clarification on. I thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Thank you very much.

MR.OULANYAH: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and hon. Members. Hon. Members, we appreciate your appreciation of our work, except for hon. Omodi Okot who decided to thank the Prime Minister instead -(Laughter). But the Prime Minister had no input in this particular Report.

I will make about three comments on the issues that came before the Committee, but were not really reflected in the presentation, but are contained in the Report. I would like to refer Members to the issues relating to the Electoral Commission. When the Commission appeared before us, they made two issues. One; they are never given enough time. Two; they are never given enough money.

Regarding time, it is Parliament, and they actually made this specific request to Parliament that the laws that we pass should give them enough time to prepare to implement the provisions of the law. They gave the example of the Presidential Elections Act, which came when the period for advertising or displaying the registers, the 21 days were exhausted. What was the Commission supposed to do? Were they supposed to display for the few days remaining or not display at all? Because they were condemned by the court, they were condemned by the petitioners, and respondents all round. So, that was their concern.

Let Parliament pass the laws in time so as to give them time to re-organize themselves and implement the provisions of the Law. It was the same with The Local Governments (Amendment) Act. These amendments were made after they had already submitted their Budgetary Proposals to the Electoral Commission. And now they found out that it has serious financial implications. So, they are forced to go back to the drawing board, and go back through the trauma of dealing with the Ministry of Finance to get money. And that has not been easy. And hon. Aggrey Awori you were not cheated. The second issue was money. So, they raised those two issues.

Parliament should help the Electoral Commission take out this because they are the test of our democracy; they are the test of our genuineness and legitimacy in sitting in this place. If the system is not proper, then we have no business sitting here and looking as if we are proper people.

The issue of the recommendation on page 4 was raised by hon. Jessica Eriyo from Adjumani. What the recommendation is saying is that there is such a big amount of domestic arrears in terms of quarter awards but the Ministry of Finance has only given two billion shillings. Now, we are saying, how do you prioritize? The recommendation is saying, for the awards that are Shs. 50 million, please pay them. For the awards that are in excess of Shs.50 billion, pay at least Shs.50 million as part payment, and we continue from there.

The question of the Administrator General has been raised time and time again by the Member from Jie and hon. John Kawanga. Actually, in our recommendation on page 9, we clearly state that the Administrator Generals Department and their financial implications should be centralised. All this is actually derived from Article 247 of the Constitution, which mandates the Administrator General to devise the most effective and efficient way of doing this. And in our view, decentralisation would enhance their effectiveness and efficiency.

The Member of Terego raised the question of the Constitutional Review Commission. As far as we were concerned, we did not feel obliged to challenge the Government decision to establish it the way it did. We understood that there was an urgent situation requiring them to act quickly, but it did not reflect it in the Budget. The Commission of Inquiry submitted a budget of Shs.4.6 billion, and they were given only Shs.600 million. Now, where is the urgency to make us to slightly bend the rules to come up with the Commission?

A matter was raised that the Ministry of Justice is very small, why does it have such a huge Development Budget? There are three projects constituting the development expenditure of the Ministry of Justice. There is the project PA 18C, Project PA 18D and Project PA 18B. The sum total of this is what constitutes the figure of Shs.10 billion. And by the way, the Ministry of Justice is not that small. It has a Civil Litigation Department, Legal Advisory Services, First Parliamentary Counsel responsible for bringing all these laws we debate and pass here. It also has the Administrator General/Public Trustee, the Registrar Generals Department, the Law Council, the Law Development Centre - the training institution there, the Commission of Inquiry which are all under the Ministry of Justice. So it may look small but it is not that small.

On the question raised by a Member of our Committee, hon. Pius Mujuzi, he wanted to put himself and his people on record. Well, that is allowed, but as far as the Committee was concerned, the two issues raised did not only have to do with age, it also has to do with the jurisdiction and the sentence given to the offenders. So, there are two aspects to it.

We cannot only focus on the age of the victims; we also need to focus on the jurisdiction because the complaint by most donors is that the prisons are clogged, the justice system is clogged and that 60 per cent of the cases are defilement cases. So, how do we solve the problem without offending any forces? As you are aware, the hon. Minister is already very cross with me, but let me just finish. And Mr. Speaker, I need your protection; she is about to charge. So, that was the A System Error Occur. Please reload page