By John V Sserwaniko
When he appeared before the Land Commission of Inquiry two weeks ago, Deputy Attorney General Mwesigwa Rukutana seemed desperate to run away from what he knew awaited him. And that is the tough (and sometimes very humiliating) questioning by Justice Catherine Bamugemereire and lead Counsel Ebert Byenkya. He said he got summons late and needed adequate time to prepare. Before reluctantly granting his request, Bamugemereire asked him how much time he needed. “Like one month my Lord,” he said. “I have given you two weeks up to 19th February,” she responded. He said that Tuesday he was committed and she reluctantly said “okay we take Wednesday 20thFebruary.” That day finally came and as widely expected, Rukutana ended up losing his temper, shouting at the Commission and in the end burning his fingers as Bamugemereire ordered for his very humiliating ejection by the Counter-Terrorism operatives attached to the Commission.
HOW IT UNFOLDED
“It doesn’t matter anymore how you make me exit this place. What is important is that I have discharged my duty and said to her face the truth the way I know it,” Rukutana protestingly said as the CT operatives prevented him from using the VIP exit. Its where all the big people coming to testify pass leaving the ordinary people to use the door designated for commoners. This time round, Rukutana too was shoveled to use the same exit as his entourage members (mostly soldiers) walked along. Before bitterly storming out, Bamugemereire announced they had reflected on Rukutana’s obstinacy during the short break she called earlier and had unanimously resolved to refer him to the President as a way of protesting his “never seen before combative, disrespectful and condescending attitude” which had made it impossible for the day’s proceedings to carry on. As Rukutana grabbed the microphone trying to defend himself, a fire-breathing Bamugemereire ordered him “this interview is over and you are now dismissed. Please get out of here.” When he hesitated, she vehemently got out of her chair and walked out without even waiting for the usual procedure of the audience being signaled to stand up as she leads other Commissioners out. Before it all escalated to this, Bamugemereire announced: “The Commission has been thinking about this…and we can’t continue because of disrespect by government officials. We are referring your case to the appointing authority.” The Rukutana provocation that preceded all this confrontation is what we reconstruct in the following article.
RUKUTANA VS. BYENKYA
Thinking he was putting his decades’ long lawyering skills to appropriate use, Rukutana behaved very indifferently throughout the interviewing session spearheaded by Byenkya with Bamugemereire occasionally calling him to order. To many, the learned AG bordered on being recklessly disrespectful in his answers prompting Byenkya and Bamugemereire to remind him the Commission was established by the President to do “very serious work.” We shall illustrate this with a few examples. The entire questioning rotated around the (mis)management of the Land Fund by Uganda Land Commission including the Shs24bn Rukutana directed to be paid to Dr. Mohammed Kasasa for land (12 acres in Mutungo) which government never got and won’t be getting soon because its subject to many adverse claims (including Kabaka’s & Ben Kiwanuka family). So Byenkya asked Rukutana why he didn’t think it irregular and improper (as pointed out by the Auditor General’s 2016 report) for the AG to sanction the Kasasa transaction without a valuation report yet he knew the same land was subject to caveats and court injunctions secured by Erias Lukwago law firm on Kabaka’s behalf. “The Auditor General is competent on auditing matters and not legal matters,” he dramatically answered prompting Bamugemereire to sarcastically interject “really?” Rukutana spontaneously roared: “It’s not the business of the Auditor General to do legal interpretation for government. It’s ours and we are doing it very well.” To Bamugemereire, this amounted to trivializing the day’s session. She wondered why a whole AG would demean the OAG’s mandate so casually. “Learned Attorney General I insist it’s his business whenever spending of government money is involved,” Byenkya said remarkably remaining calm and composed despite Rukutana’s endless rebukes (almost insults) to him. “Yes my Lord but he can’t know legal obligations of government on matters of contracting,” Rukutana shot back insisting OAG’s role is purely financial. “Yes he can give an opinion but should that opinion contradict the one of the Attorney General, then the AG’s position prevails.” Auditor General John Muwanga had stated the transaction shouldn’t have proceeded without the approval of the Solicitor General who is understood to have disagreed with Rukutana on the Mutungo deal. As Rukutana gestured saying he was waiting for Byenkya’s next question, Bamugemereire expressed shock a whole Deputy AG could lack clarity regarding AG John Muwanga’s mandate. She said it was so clear one needs not be a Deputy Attorney General to know. Unprepared to go down without punching back, Rukutana shouted “that is your opinion my Lord because as far as I’m concerned, I’m right.” Bamugemereire contemptuously shot back saying “really?” Rukutana, who Byenkya had by now failed to control, belligerently responded: “My Lord that remains your opinion but I also have mine about this Commission.”
BYENKYA RETURNS
Byenkya returned insisting the Auditor General can do a legal audit prompting Rukutana to ask “what does that mean?” Clearly irritated, Bamugemereire furiously turned to look at Rukutana and said: “If you are a whole Attorney General and you don’t know what a legal audit means, what are we supposed to tell you?” Determined to fight on, Rukutana asked “What is a legal opinion now? You [Bamugemereire] keep asking me what it means and of course you know that I know what it means but anyhow that is your opinion my Lord.” Byenkya immediately put a follow up a question and Rukutana, who was supposed to answer him, asked “Are you sure is that what I said? Why are you putting words in my mouth?” As Byenkya prepared to respond, Rukutana sternly warned him “please don’t misquote me and stop putting words in my mouth.” Bamugemereire called it incompetence for the D/AG to direct Shs24bn payment without due diligence to establish encumbrances on Kasasa’s title and Rukutana invited her to understand the historical circumstances surrounding the transaction. “Government had possession and is in possession. The owner [Kasasa] approached the President demanding compensation,” Rukutana said before (verbatim) reading out Museveni’s 16th January 2008 letter whose contents he said were “directives and not mere suggestions.” Byenkya said the President’s directive had been abused because there is a lot the big man didn’t know when he authored the letter and in any case he demanded procedures be followed. “The President acted in good faith and could have been misinformed,” Byenkya said and Rukutana shot back “misinformed by who?”
BYENKYA FIGHTS ON
Counsel asked Rukutana for proof the President was aware the purchase price (that began as Shs2.4bn in 2002) would grow to Shs24bn by 2016. Rukutana said it wasn’t his business to answer such questions. He said Kasasa was innocent and the bill grew to Shs24bn because of procrastination by government officials who delayed paying the original Shs2.4bn which became Shs24bn because of accruing interest. He refused explaining the formula used to grow the mere Shs1.3bn (GoU didn’t pay on time) to Shs24bn and Rukutana said he can’t answer such because he is a lawyer and not a finance person. The 27th December 2017 final negotiated agreement on final compensation indicated anything that had not paid to Kasasa as of August would attract interest and the balance stood at Shs1.3bn which Byenkya said can’t have grown to Shs24bn in such a short time. In the agreement was the term “bank rate” which Rukutana rebuked Byenkya not to ask him about since he isn’t a banker. At some point Rukutana said the Commission should thank him for saving GoU money because Kasasa’s original claim was Shs36bn “and not just that Shs24bn you keep talking about.” Rukutana arrogantly said Byenkya should go and ask officials of the Finance Ministry and ULC about the figure “because I don’t work there myself and please don’t take me to a place that isn’t my arena.” He said “it’s them who met the vendor and our work as AG chambers was to reduce that understanding into an agreement.” Byenkya insisted “but a good lawyer should understand all agreement provisions and doesn’t have to be an economist.”
CITING KAINEMURA
Byenkya added even Shs24bn was unacceptably high and asked Rukutana to tell the taxpayer what he was paying for since Kasasa is unable to give GoU any land. Rukutana said he was just following up this having started with Billy Kainemura who was the Solicitor General when the matter began. Byenkya told him there was no need to be bound and it’s possible he should have departed from Kainemura’s legal opinion since it had glaring anomalies. “In fact these are mere opinions that is why even in court the AG’s legal opinion can be disregarded in favor of what the other party is saying,” Byenkya said prompting Rukutana to say “yes even the opinion of this Commission can be inquired into by Court.” Asked about Kasasa’s claim that he only gets money on paper, Rukutana said: “Go and ask the ministry of finance. They know who they paid and it’s a question of mathematics because those are many years.” Commissioners insisted AG should have raised a red flag. Queried on absence of Government Chief Valuer’s input in valuing Kasasa’s land, Rukutana said the CGV has no power to determine valuations of things parties agreed upon prior. “In any case competent people do this and that is the Ministry of Finance,” Rukutana said causing Bamugemereire to ask why he didn’t raise those questions as AG. She then tutored her former LDC lecturer about the Good man’s case in which the Supreme Court rejected outrageous interest rates saying it’s unacceptable to “strangle government.” In response, Rukutana remorselessly said “my Lord you are right; I don’t have those facts but if you have them you are lucky.”
STATE H’SE LAWYERS
Byenkya referred to letters by Kasasa’ lawyers showing their client wasn’t aware of the taxpayers’ money being expended in his name and asked Rukutana about government officials who chewed the cash. The lawyer’s letter referred to State House lawyers and Rukutana simply replied: “You [Byenkya] go and get those facts from those State House people and bring them to book. That’s your mandate as a Commission.” Rukutana also explained why he wouldn’t be constrained by Lukwago and Sebalu law firms’ letters notifying him that the Mutungo matter was in court. He said the Kabaka case against government demanded compensation and didn’t dispute Kasasa’s ownership of the land. To him, Kabaka’s suit shows he has given up ever repossessing the land and all he wants is compensation from government which doesn’t vitiate the authenticity of Kasasa’s title whose encumbrances Bamugemereire had faulted him for overlooking as he signed off the Shs24bn. When Rukutana said he should be excused not adequately knowing about the Mutungo wrangle because he was new at the AG Chambers, Bamugemereire said he was just trivializing the inquiry. The two had a hot exchange. She accused him of being disrespectful and lacking decorum expected of a Deputy Attorney General. Rukutana, who had gotten used to saying many provocative things and getting away with it since morning, inadvertently crossed the Judge’s red line. “I’m ready to be respectful but as long as I’m respected also but as long as I’m not respected, I won’t respect anyone,” he said prompting Bamugemereire to shot back: “Learned Attorney General are you aware you are on record? Can you say that again for the record?” As if intoxicated, Rukutana repeated it several times saying he wanted to make himself abundantly clear. Burning in a rage, Bamugemereire hit the roof. “We are not here to just waste time as you may think. We granted you a two weeks adjournment last time to come and respond to these questions…We expected you to be helpful which you haven’t been since we started listening to you at 10am,” she asserted. He tried to be defensive speaking back unauthorized, which forced her to abruptly halt the proceedings and order him out. As he protested, she said nobody had disrespected the Commission since its inception like he did. As Rukutana protested, Bamugemereire declared “you are dismissed” and unceremoniously matched out. This clearly showed the angry mood she was in. Even when he was being humiliatingly shoveled out by the inquiry’s security who struggled to prevent him using the VIP exit, Rukutana remained in a triumphant mood saying he wouldn’t accept intimidation by the Judge. He condemned her for seeking publicity and stardom at the expense of people’s hard-earned names and reputation. It remains to be seen if Bamugemereire, who previously prevailed against equally stubborn ministers like Parsis Namuganza and Betty Amongin, wins this one too. Museveni will characteristically have the last word on who wins. For comments, call, text or whatsapp us on 0703164755.
