KYENJOJO BODA RIDER CHALLENGES MPs' HUGE ALLOWANCES IN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT; SEEKING THEIR NULLIFICATION AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

BY OUR REPORTER

A Boda Boda rider from Kyenjojo District has petitioned the Constitutional Court seeking a declaration that the salaries, allowances and other emoluments awarded to Members of Parliament are unconstitutional, null and void.

The Petitioner, Robert Mwesige, a Ugandan citizen and taxpayer who earns a living as a Boda Boda rider, instituted the petition under Constitutional Petition No. COA-00-CV-CPC-0010-2026, naming Parliament of Uganda as the 1st Respondent and the Attorney General as the 2nd Respondent.

GROUNDS OF THE PETITION

In his petition, Mwesige contends that the impugned benefits conferred upon Members of Parliament are excessive, disproportionate and inconsistent with the prevailing economic realities in Uganda, where the majority of citizens continue to grapple with poverty, unemployment and the rising cost of living.

He avers that the said benefits were approved and are being implemented without sufficient transparency, public participation and accountability, contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution.

The Petitioner further contends that the said emoluments are drawn from the Consolidated Fund and other public resources, yet the taxpayers who bear the burden were neither consulted nor involved in the process leading to their approval.

He submits that the manner in which the benefits were determined raises grave constitutional questions regarding accountability, checks and balances, and the prudent management of public funds.

PETITIONER DOES NOT OPPOSE REMUNERATION PER SE.

Mwesige is emphatic that he does not challenge the constitutional entitlement of Members of Parliament to be remunerated for services rendered to the nation.

His contention, however, is that the power to determine such remuneration is not absolute. It must be exercised within the limits prescribed by the Constitution and in strict compliance with the laid-down legal procedures, including adherence to principles of good governance, transparency and fiscal responsibility.

He therefore invites this Honourable Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 137 of the Constitution to interpret the Constitution and determine the constitutionality of the impugned schemes.

CORAM

The petition came up for hearing before a coram of five Justices of the Constitutional Court sitting in Kampala, presided over by the Deputy Chief Justice, Hon. Justice Moses Kazibwe Kawumi, sitting together with Hon. Lady Justice Irene Mulyagonja, Hon. Justice Dr. Asa Mugenyi, Hon. Justice John Mike Musisi and Hon. Lady Justice Florence Nakachwa.

The Petitioner appeared in person to prosecute his case and also sought a conservatory order restraining the Respondents, their agents or servants from approving, disbursing or continuing to pay the impugned benefits pending determination of the petition.

RELIEFS SOUGHT

In his prayers, Mwesige prays this Honourable Court to be pleased to grant the following orders:

1. A declaration that the impugned benefits and emoluments were not approved and implemented in accordance with the Constitution.

2. A declaration that any benefits, allowances or approval process found to be inconsistent with the Constitution is unconstitutional, null and void ab initio.

3. A permanent injunction restraining the Respondents from approving, disbursing or continuing to pay the impugned benefits.

4. An order compelling strict compliance with the constitutional procedures governing Parliamentary remuneration and public expenditure.

5. Any other or further relief that this Honourable Court may deem fit and just to grant in the circumstances.

He further prays that the Constitution binds every organ of State, and that Parliamentary remuneration must be determined and implemented strictly in accordance with constitutional procedures.

PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED

The 1st Respondent was represented by Counsel Moses Akena, while the Petitioner appeared in person following the absence of his Counsel on record.

Upon the Petitioner's application for an adjournment, the Honourable Court adjourned the matter sine die without fixing a return date pending further directions.