Adolf Mwesige, Clerk to Parliament, stands resolute in his defense against disciplinary action related to the controversial Shs1.7 billion service award. With a career marked by dedication to public service, Mwesige seeks to clear his name and uphold the principles of natural justice.
Adolf Mwesige, the Clerk to Parliament, has petitioned the High Court to set aside a ruling that recommended disciplinary action against him for his role in the controversial Shs1.7 billion award to four back-bench commissioners. Mwesige argues that he was not a party to the original case and was condemned unheard, violating his right to natural justice.
In his application, Mwesige states that the court’s findings and orders were arrived at without affording him an opportunity to be heard, constituting a violation of his constitutional right. He seeks an interim order stopping the execution and implementation of the orders against him, particularly those directing disciplinary proceedings.
High Court judge Douglas Singiza had ruled that the process leading to the service award was legal, but faulted Mwesige for neglecting his duty as an accounting officer. Singiza directed the Permanent Secretary and Secretary to the Treasury to institute disciplinary action against Mwesige within 12 months.
Mwesige’s application will be heard by Justice Singiza on September 10. The controversy surrounding the service award led to an online campaign, #UgandaParliamentExhibition, and prompted the National Unity Platform leadership to ask one of the beneficiaries, Mathias Mpuuga, to return the money and resign from the parliamentary commission.
Mwesige’s petition highlights that he was not a beneficiary of the Shs1.7 billion award and therefore should not be punished for something he did not benefit from. The outcome of the application will have significant implications for Mwesige’s role as Clerk to Parliament and the broader controversy surrounding the service award.
The petition also raises questions about the fairness of the disciplinary action recommended against Mwesige, given that he was not given an opportunity to be heard in the original case. The High Court’s decision on Mwesige’s application will be closely watched, as it will set a precedent for similar cases in the future.