The republic of uganda in the supreme court of uganda at kampala

(11) That the tarmacking and upgrading of the Ntungamo — Rukungiri road is part of the Ten Year Road Sector Development Program referred to in paragraph 6 above and only the contract for tarmacking and upgrading the Ntungamo — Kagamba section has so far been signed as part of implementing this program.


(12) That the signing of contracts for tarmacking and upgrading of roads under my Minister has always been done publicly.


(13) That it is false to allege that the award and signing of the road contracts resulted from the first respondent’s campaign manifesto or at all”

It was submitted for the petitioner that abolition of cost-sharing in all the Government Health Centres including those operated/run by Local Government and Increase of salaries of medical workers in the middle of the budget year and increase of teachers pay were all done to influence voters to vote for the respondent. It was contended that these were done out of Government business schedule; and that they were hurriedly made by the 15^th respondent to woe votes.

It was submitted that all these had been budgeted in the budget of 2000/2001. The affidavit of Mr. Benigna Mukiibi, Minister of State for Public Service stated in his affidavit, paragraphs 5, 6, 7, 8,and 9 that the National Budget for Financial years 2000/200 1 had addressed the plight of the middle rank professionals in medical and teaching profession. He stated that the increament of salaries for medical workers and teachers was a result of funds designated in the Budget under the Public Service Pay Reform Programme and that it was not done by the 1 s respondent to induce voters to vote for him.

Dr. Kiyonga’s affidavit corroborated Mr. Mukiibi’s affidavit in so far as salary increase of medical workers was concerned.

On cost-sharing in Government Health Centres including those run by Local Government, Dr. Kiyonga’s affidavit from paragraph 8 to 1 8 shows that abolition was not done for purpose of inducing voters to vote for the respondent. The Government was already concerned about the policy of cost-sharing as it was blocking the poor from accessing health services, and because of this concern with or without election, the government agenda on cost-sharing had already been set by the budget of the Financial Year 2000/2001.

Therefore all in all, the affidavits of Hon. Mr. Mukiibi and Hon. Dr. Kiyonga, which are not rebutted, indicate that the abolition of cost-sharing in all Government Health Centres, including those operated by Local Governments and salary increase for teachers and medical workers had been budgeted in the National Budget for the financial year 2000/2001.

In view of the above evidence, I would not accept the complaint of the petitioner, in his affidavit, that abolition of cost sharing in all Health Centres in the whole country, and increase of salaries for medical workers and teachers were made for the purpose of inducing those who benefited to vote for the respondent.

In the result I would find no merit in this complaint.

On the complaint that the 1^st respondent hurriedly caused his Minister of works and campaign agents Hon. John Nasasira to publicly and out of the ordinary in full view of voters to sign contracts for tarmacking and upgrading of the roads indicated in the affidavit, Hon. John Nasasira denied the allegations, because he stated that he never personally signed the contract.

Paragraph 8 of the Hon. Nasasira’s affidavit, which was not controverted states that: