MPs fault speaker for ignoring committee report in enacting wildlife law

Kampala, Uganda | THE INDEPENDENT | A recent decision to allow debate on a bill, before its second reading, has triggered controversy among a cross-section of legislators and analysts.

According to parliamentary guidelines, all bills presented before parliament are sent to the appropriate committees for analysis before they are presented for second reading. The committee is expected to review the draft and its contents, hold public hearings, include new clauses, suggest amendments if any, and report back to parliament within a period of 45 days.

Upon adopting the committee report, the bill is then considered for the second time, allowing the committee of the whole house to go through the bill, clause by clause.

But despite the guidelines, Deputy Speaker Jacob Oulanyah last month opened debate on the Uganda Wildlife Bill without a report from the Committee on Trade, Tourism and Industry. The bill that provides for compensation for loss occasioned by animals escaping from wildlife protected areas had been under review for more than one year. It was referred to the committee in July 2017.

Alex Ruhunda, the former chairperson of the trade committee of parliament says that although his team had started reviewing the bill in question, the work stalled when the committee was prematurely disbanded over allegations of bribery. He adds that his committee did not do much on the Bill, which was later taken over by a team led by Nansana Municipality MP Robert Kasule Ssebunya.

Meanwhile, Ssebunya says that his team could not process the Bill within the stipulated time because it needed wide consultation. The committee had held meetings with officials from the Ministry Of Tourism, Uganda Wildlife Authority, Uganda Wildlife Education Centre (UWEC) and communities surrounding conservation areas.

UWA spokesperson Bashir Hangi says that the committee travelled to at least five conservation areas that included Queen Elizabeth National Park, Murchison Falls National Park, Lake Mburo National Park, Kidepo Valley National Park and Bwindi Mgahinga Conservation area. On average, the committee spent three days in each of the five areas.

Ssebunya adds that the bills second reading process was listed on the order paper of Parliament long before the committee could finalize its report. To date, the committee has not written a report on the Bill, which was passed on February 23.

However, Beatrice Atim Anywar, the chairperson of the gender committee of Parliament argues that the decision by the Deputy Speaker is demoralizing and wasteful.

But Paul Amoru, the vice chairperson of the ICT committee welcomed the decision by the Deputy Speaker to disregard the committee in the process of debating and passing the Wildlife Bill. He is optimistic that the move will awaken dormant committees.

One of the members of the Parliamentary Commission, Peter Ogwang, says that there is a need to investigate why the committee failed to table a report on the bill.

Meanwhile, the chairperson of the Rules Committee Obote Ongalo says that an amendment has been fronted to provide that when a committee fails to table a report on a Bill, a select committee shall be instituted to present a report to guide the House on the Bill.

Obote says that the amendment is to cure potential wastage of public funds injected in committees that fail to conclude work within stipulated time.

*******

URN