Read my concise rendering of today’s events and those leading up to today at Huffington Post.
For details, read on…
Despite being called to business today by Speaker Edward Ssekandi, Uganda’s parliamentary session has been stalled today and may adjourn (it did adjourn, see update below) without taking any action on pending legislation, including the Anti-Homosexuality Bill. According to parliamentary spokeswoman, Helen Kawesa, Parliament is stalled on a “technicality.” She said there is no Cabinet in place because it was dissolved in preparation for the end of the 8th Parliament in advance of yesterday’s Presidential inauguration. It is unclear who raised the issue of the necessity for Cabinet to be place for business to be conducted. However the effect is that the session is winding up, with members discussing how to proceed before the end of the 8th Parliament on 18th.
According to this report, Speaker Ssekandi ordered Ministers on Monday to “vacate their seats” yesterday, the same day as the inauguration of President Museveni. However, at that time, the Speaker seemed to indicate that business could be conducted.
He said the directive to vacate the front bench seats which are only a reserve for government ministers and shadow ministers (opposition) does not mean affected members should stop attending and transacting parliament work.
He said the Eighth parliament runs till May 15, a day before the members of the Ninth parliament’s swearing-in-ceremony commences. The ruling NRM ministers and shadow ministers known occupy front bench seats in the parliament chambers while transacting parliament business.
The order paper on the Parliament website shows no bills on the agenda which indicates that the matter of the missing Cabinet must have come up prior to convening the session. The fate of the AHB is still not clear and may not be resolved until the last day of Parliament. Ms. Kawesa said the MPs were discussing a motion to continue all business until the next Parliament perhaps next week, when a new Cabinet is in place.
UPDATE: Apparently, there will be no more business but it is unclear whether a motion to continue was entertained. This announcement just appeared on the Parliament website:
Emotional farewells as Eighth Parliament closes
The term of office for Members of Parliament elected to the Eighth Parliament of Uganda has come to an end. Speaker of Parliament Rt.Hon.Edward Kiwanuka Ssekandi announced to MPs, in an emmotional (sic) sitting , the end of the term of the Eighth parliament urging MPs to appreciate and embrace the multiparty political system.
“This Parliament was different from all parliaments before it. But my assessment is that people still long for the movement political system other than the multiparty system. The two systems are different and what you must know is that under multiparty system, Mps on the government side came with one manifesto that the executive is trying to implement,” he told MPs.
Speaker Ssekandi announced that the official proclamation for the end of the Eighth Parliament had already been signed and would be gazetted on May 18, the day the ninth Parliament would commence.
If he was quoted properly by the Uganda Razor, he said earlier in the week that the Eighth Parliament went to the 15th and business could be conducted without a Cabinet. Today, at a session that he called, he said business could not be conducted and announced that the proclamation ending the Parliament had been signed.
UPDATE: I have confirmed with Helen Kawesa that Parliament was adjourned sine die, meaning that the Speaker could call the members back to session if needed. In this way, there is always a legislative body, even when not in session. The proclamation to close the Parliament is signed but will only go into effect on the 18th.
When I asked spokeswoman Kawesa whether or not the AHB could come up next Parliament without the continuing motion, she said she knew of no means, but would not rule it out. I also asked her why the Speaker called the members back to session knowing that there was no Cabinet. Kawesa said she did not know.
As is stands, with no further action, Bahati will have to ask Parliament permission to move AHB-II as a private member’s bill. If they give him that permission then he can introduce the same bill or a modified one and the process will begin again. Today, however, is a good day for freedom of conscience.
The AP has a report on the matter…
Speaker of Parliament Edward Ssekandi Kiwanuk said there is no time to take up the bill this session, which ends Wednesday, leaving the bill’s future uncertain. Kiwanuk adjourned the parliament Friday and set no date for the body to return.
Maazi – Is this XXXXXX?
Why should XXXXXX admit all this? And why was the Committee report leaked? And by whom? What’s going on?!
I doubt that Warren and his coworkers were ever, for a moment, fooled or distracted by the ‘hanging’/'no hanging’ bit. We all knew from the get-go that the Bill was a totalitarian monster from the oeuvres d’oeuvres to the nuts. Western governments know that too, and they know also that we know that they know that (if you see what I’m driving at).
The story in that woman’s blog is just gay propaganda meant to keep US State Department focussed on Ugandan affairs. NRM has a huge majority in the parliament and does not need to bribe its own MPs to pass legislation favourable to an executive branch also run by NRM officials. It is a no-brainer really. The so-called “whistleblower” cited in the story is quite funny and comes across as daft fellow. He claims that once “hanging” is removed, foreign gay activists would be stripped of arguments. What an idiot !!! Was he holidaying on Planet Mars when Western government officials/ gay activists issued public statements saying that any modifications to the Bahati Bill will still be unacceptable to them? In fact, I do not even think that this “whistle-blower” chap exists in real life. I think he is a fake and an imaginary character made up by the propagandists. Having said that, I do not deny that we are working on “something”….
@ ‘Maazi’
I tend to agree that this latest ‘revelation’ is very odd indeed. After all, why should anyone ‘blow a whistle’ under the circumstances, unless that someone wants to ‘tell us (as in opponents of the Bill) something’? Very odd – just as the apparent leaking of the Committee report was, to my mind, very odd (if I were trying something like this, I’d make darn certain that there were no leaks!).
I see that you and I both agree that simply removing the provision for ‘quick’ (as opposed to ‘slow’) slaughter is not going to convince any knowledgeable person opposed to the Bill. Nor would it convince the US or EU.
You miss the point !! Nobody is labouring to convince the US or EU of anything. Everyone who can read a newspaper, listen to radio or watch TV in Uganda knows that the only thing that will satisfy Western governments is legalization of gayism—–which aint gonna happen in my life time or even that of my grand kids ! What I am trying to say is that eventually the anti-sodomy laws will be updated regardless of western pressure.
I know exactly what you’re trying to say, dear! It just that I wanted to say something else!
WakefulUgandan# ~ May 18, 2011 at 4:25 pm
hmm. somehow I missed this posted (perhaps it got stuck in moderation).
@ Ken
” “and yes, I saw your claim about 1 in 20 homosexuals being child molesters.”
Cameron P., Proctor K., Coburn W., Forde.N, Larson H., Cameron K. (1986). Child Molestation and Homesexuality. Psychological Reports, 1986, 58, pp. 327-37
Satisfied?”
yes. except that this article doesn’t say what you claim it does (that 1 in 20 homosexuals are child molesters). In fact given how the data is collected (surveying adults about 1st sexual experiences) it would not be possible to determine that. You can get the summary here: Child molestation and homosexuality
However, to quote from this article (p. 333):
(note the Now that you bring Evelyn’s Research, the question begs, was it scientific?percentages were 39.2% (bi/homo) to 44.5% (hetero) from the table on p. 334).
Although, I thought NARTH removed all its references to Cameron’s work. You might want to do a bit of research on Cameron before you cite him again. And you might want to reconsider using NARTH as a source of info. Or at the very least, read the citations yourself before parroting what they say.
“Now that you bring Evelyn’s Research, the question begs, was it scientific?”
Yes, it was. It wasn’t perfect (no study is), nor, as I said, was it the only paper, it was merely the start. Now if you’d like to get into the specifics of the studies (and the significance of Dr. Hooker’s paper), I’d be wiling to do so. However, are you now willing to admit that your claim that there was “no scientific evidence” was wrong?
Ah stray mouse clicks messed up my quote from the Cameron article it should read:
However, to quote from this article (p. 333):
(note the percentages were 39.2% (bi/homo) to 44.5% (hetero) from the table on p. 334).
to clarify. the 39.2% and 44.5% numbers are for the “pre-18-yr.-old” interest.
@ Ken
I think ‘WUg’ has gone now (that’s what he told me, anyway).
Talking of child abuse, what might one make of the photograph of children accompanying this article? (I know what I think!!!) http://sxnews.gaynewsnetwork.com.au/news/uganda-anti-gay-bill-still-on-cards-008877.html
Glass houses and stones spring to mind!