The Judge thus quashed the findings saying that the Select Committee of Parliament cannot purport to dismiss the applicant who holds the position of Chief Finance Officer as per the terms of Employment inaccordance with the qualifications that were deemed sufficient.
Justice Musa Ssekaana made the decision.
The High Court in
Kampala has quashed key findings and recommendations made by Parliament's
Select Committee on the National Social Security Fund (NSSF), among others the
prosecution of the Fund’s Chief Finance Officer Steven Mwanje.
The Civil Division Judge Musa SSekaana in his October 31st
2024 decision nullified the March 9th 2023 recommendations by Parliament
saying the decision was marred with procedural impropriety, irrationality, and
unfairness.
Mwanje’s issues started on January 25th 2023,
when the Speaker of Parliament Anita Annet Among constituted a Select Committee
on the Affairs at the National Social Security Fund (NSSF).
According to Court records, the terms of reference of the
Select Committee were to examine the corporate governance structures at NSSF,
the circumstances surrounding the appointment of management director, to
evaluate the status and safety of savers' money in NSSF and the extent of
stakeholder engagement in decision-making at NSSF. The Committee was also
expected to inquire into any other matter incidental to the aforementioned
points.
This was done after the Uganda Police Force had alleged that
Mwanje caused financial loss to NSSF through fraudulent payments totalling 1.43 billion
shillings and operated as Chief Finance Officer without a practising
certificate.
As a result, on March 9th 2023, Parliament adopted
the Report of the Select Committee and made several resolutions under the title
“Resolution of Parliament on the Report of the Select Committee on the State of
Affairs at NSSF.
Parliament had recommended
that Mwanje should step aside and face prosecution for allegedly practising
accountancy without a practising certificate.
The report had specifically targeted Mwanje in
recommendations 8, 9, and 25, directing the Inspector General of Government
(IGG) to investigate him for alleged abuse of office, corruption, and
conspiracy to commit a felony.
Additionally, resolutions 7(c), 8, 16, 25, and
27 of Parliament's Resolution on the Report of the Select Committee on the
State of Affairs at NSSF had also implicated Mwanje and ordered his subsequent
prosecution.
But Mwanje was not happy with the findings and
recommendations and thus challenged the report, arguing that he was not given
adequate notice or opportunity to respond to allegations made against him.
Mwanje told the Judge that as a Chief Finance Officer at
NSSF, his role is a leadership one involving planning, coordination,
implementation, and management of activities.
He said he does not practice accountancy as defined in the Accountants
Act 2013.
Court heard from Mwanje that at NSSF, services such as
auditing, verification, and certification of financial statements are performed
by the Financial Controller, and the Board of Directors signs off the audited
financial statements.
Mwanje thus said that the Select Committee’s conclusion that
he should step aside, that the Board should terminate his employment, and that
he should be prosecuted for practising accountancy without a practising
certificate was tainted with illegality, arbitrariness, unfairness, and
unreasonableness.
He added that several findings, conclusions,
recommendations, or directives made by the Select Committee and adopted by
Parliament, such as the directive for a lifestyle audit and the investigation
of all NSSF departments, are generalized, blanket, and fishing expeditions.
On his part, the Attorney General argued that during the
inquiry into NSSF, the management and staff, including Mwanje, were duly
represented. The Government said Mwanje was given several opportunities to
respond to questions regarding financial affairs, operations, qualifications,
and job descriptions at NSSF. His submissions were considered, and all
related evidence was evaluated by the committee before making its findings.
In his ruling, Justice Ssekaana ruled that this
recommendation was irrational and unreasonable, as Mwanje's role as Chief
Finance Officer did not involve practising accountancy and that Parliament exceeded
its powers.
“The terms of reference were made clear and concise and the
Select committee did not have the power to make findings and recommendations not
within the terms of reference given by Parliament. The exercise of power not
vested under the terms of reference is a reviewable error committed by the
decision-maker (select committee) which will lead to an excess of jurisdiction
(power). This in turn would imply that all unlawful acts are void on account of
their having never had any legal basis”, held Ssekaana.
The Judge thus quashed the findings saying that the Select
Committee of Parliament cannot purport to dismiss the applicant who holds the
position of Chief Finance Officer as per the terms of Employment in accordance with the qualifications that were deemed sufficient.