The Attorney General William Byaruhanga has requested Parliament to give him more time to come up with the final decision on the fate of vehicle inspection contractor, SGS.
“I was requested to look at the minority and majority reports as well as the contracts and advice on the impact if we were to error; if we were to take the position by the minority report (to terminate the contract),” Byaruhanga told Parliament on Tuesday.
“We have examined both the reports and examined the agreement as well but unfortunately, the Minister of Works and Transport was unable to come and their the Ministry’s input and they requested I give them three days, therefore I am requesting for adjournment for a week at which point will give a position,” he added.
It should be noted before Parliament to recess, Attorney General had requested for one week before Parliament takes a decision on whether to terminate SGS contract or renegotiate the contract. But after three weeks, he asked for more time.
However, some members disagreed with him, arguing that there’s no need to consult the Works ministry.
Odur Jonathan, the Erute South MP said the AG was supposed to give legal opinion on the grounds for termination.
“There is no necessity for consultation with the Minister of Works. What is it that you want the Minister of Works to clarify because this is a matter of law,” he said.
James Kakooza, the Kabula county MP said: “I think we shouldn’t bend rules of this House, the Minister of Works was a witness in the Committee and when this report came on the floor, it was the ruling of this House for the Attorney General to give a legal opinion. So when you go back and consult a witness to make a legal opinion that is conflict of interest. I would prefer that depending on the report that was made, the Attorney General is able to give his opinion and Parliament pronounces itself.”
However the Deputy Speaker Jacob Oulanyah said: “A specific report has been made by the person who was asked to present an opinion on the matter, what is it to him is that in his judgment, it is relevant to seek another opinion, why don’t we give him that benefit?
Because it is in his judgment which he has exercised judiciously that he needs extension to do whatever he needs to do so that he can come back. So do we have any solid reasons why his request can’t be accepted?” The AG was granted more time before he gives his opinion on the matter.
