KAMPALA: The Makerere University Students’ Guild Tribunal has dismissed a petition seeking to remove Guild President Vincent Lubega Nsamba, ending weeks of anticipation and political tension on campus. The petition, filed by Hon. Mufakinanye Moses, a Guild Representative Council (GRC) member and leader of the opposition, accused Nsamba of incompetence, absenteeism, and neglect of duty. However, the Tribunal ruled that the allegations lacked substantial evidence and were procedurally flawed.
Delivered on December 15, 2024, the Tribunal’s decision highlighted critical procedural missteps, declaring the petition time-barred under Article 84(2) of the Guild Constitution. With less than three months remaining in Nsamba’s term, the Tribunal found the proceedings unjustifiable.
Key Allegations and Tribunal Findings
One of the central allegations concerned Nsamba’s alleged absenteeism from GRC sessions. The petitioner claimed that the guild president attended only one session. However, the Tribunal found no credible evidence to substantiate this claim. Nsamba clarified that his duties were delegated as permitted under Articles 22(3) and 14(2) of the Guild Constitution. Furthermore, he fulfilled his obligation to deliver a state-of-the-hill address during the first Guild House session each semester, as mandated under Article 2(1).
The petition also raised concerns about Nsamba’s extended absence following an official trip to the United States. The Tribunal confirmed that Nsamba had formally submitted a leave notice on August 27, 2024, in compliance with Article 23 of the Guild Constitution. The claim that Vice Guild President Miss Joy Eve failed to fulfill her duties during his absence was dismissed due to insufficient evidence.
Another allegation centered on a lack of communication from the Vice Guild President during Nsamba’s absence. However, the Tribunal found no substantial evidence to support this claim.
The petition further alleged that government-sponsored students were disadvantaged due to delays in their allowances during Nsamba’s absence. The Tribunal dismissed this claim as moot, clarifying that the allowances were eventually paid and that the semester had already concluded.
Tribunal’s Verdict and Recommendations
In its conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the petition in its entirety, citing a lack of credible evidence and procedural irregularities. It urged petitioners to present well-substantiated claims supported by documentation to avoid wasting institutional resources.
Following the ruling, Guild President Vincent Lubega Nsamba called on Makerere University students to study the Makerere University Students’ Guild Constitution 2022 and the Makerere University Students’ Guild Statute 2022. He stressed the importance of understanding these legal instruments to prevent historical mistakes like those raised in the case.
Tribunal Chairperson Aijuka Allan expressed disappointment at the apparent lack of legal awareness among students. He criticized the tendency of some student leaders to sign documents without fully understanding them, calling it “an embarrassing situation.” Aijuka further recommended including more law students in the Tribunal to improve the quality of deliberations and ensure balanced representation. Currently, he remains the only member from the School of Law, which he argued presents challenges in collaboration. Additionally, Aijuka appealed for increased resources to facilitate effective investigations and hearings.
Efforts to reach the chief petitioner, Hon. Mufakinanye Moses, for comment were unsuccessful.
Lessons and Implications
The ruling comes as campaigns for the 91st Guild elections gain momentum, underscoring the importance of due process, evidence-based petitions, and adherence to constitutional guidelines. The Tribunal’s decision serves as a lesson for aspiring leaders to understand the legal frameworks governing student governance. It also highlights the need for accountability and institutional responsibility in addressing disputes.
As Makerere University prepares for its next leadership term, this case stands as a reminder to all stakeholders to uphold the principles of fairness, transparency, and due diligence in governance processes.
