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

“8 The advertisement for short listing contractors for the tenders for the tarmacking of Busunju — Kiboga; Kiboga —Hoima and Arua — Packwach was issued in November
1999.”


In paragraph 9, he averred that the short-listed contractors for tenders for tarmacking of the roads referred to in paragraph 8 above were issued in July 2000. On tarmacking and upgrading of Ntungamo — Rukungiri road, no agreement had been signed.

After carefully reviewing the evidence in the affidavits from both sides, there is no doubt on the issues of abolishing cost-sharing in medical services, and increase of salaries for teachers and medical workers that the timing of implementation of the budget proposals and recommendations coincided with the Presidential Elections 2001. And for that reason, the petitioner may have had cause to suspect that the announcements by the 1 respondent were made for the purpose of inducing personnel from these line-ministries which benefited to vote for him, suffice it to add that, there was no time limit within which the budgetary proposals and recommendations would be implemented. In my view, I think there was nothing wrong with the Government implementing budgetary proposal and recommendation at the time they found they were able to do so. I must say that the petitioner never adduced evidence to prove to the satisfaction of the court that the 1^st respondent personally or his agents with his knowledge and consent or approval abolished cost-sharing in medical services in the central and Local Government Health Centres/Units and increased salaries with intention of inducing them to vote for him.

Further more, on the issue of the Minister of Works, Housing and Communication hurriedly signing the contract for tarmacking of the roads spelt out in petitioner’s affidavit, Hon. John Nasasira stated in his affidavit in paragraph 7 that the credit agreement between the Government of Uganda and the World Bank for the financing of the implementation of the tarmacking and upgrading of the Busunju — Kiboga; Kiboga — Hoima and Arua — Packwach was signed in November 1 999 copy of the Credit Agreement was attached to the affidavit. Further a copy of the advertisement for short-listing of contractors for the tenders of tarmacking of the said roads as spelt out in paragraphs 8 of Hon. John Nasasira was attached to his affidavit. In paragraph 9 of the Hon. John Nasasira’s affidavit letters inviting the short listed contractors for the tenders for the tarmacking and upgrading of the roads referred to in paragraph 8 above were issued in July 2000. He denied that any agreement had been signed for the tarmacking and upgrading of the Ntungamo — Rukungiri road.

I have perused the affidavit in support of the petition on one hand and those in rebuttal on the other hand but have not been able to find in the affidavit of the petitioner that the tarmacking and upgrading of these roads were out of government programme like in the case AG v Kabourou case (1995) (supra) where the Tanzanian Court of Appeal held that the sudden and total intervention by the Central Government in the absence of an earthquake or similar disaster or situation affecting the Kigoma — Ujiji road was clearly way out of the ordinary course of Government business. There, the court held inter alia:

‘In the present case the corrupt undertaking to repair the road amounted not only to non-compliance with the prohibition against electoral bribery contrary to Section 97 of the 1985 Act, but was also unfair to the political parties which were challenging CCM.”