For asking the Ugandan Army to take over the management of the National Agricultural Advisory Services, President Yoweri Museveni finds himself dragged to the High Court to explain why his directive should not be countermanded.
Court documents quote the plaintiff, Mr Daniel Byaruhanga as being “aggrieved with President Museveni’s directive” at the June 2014 National Heroes’ Day celebrations to the Army High Command to “deploy soldiers in every constituency to monitor government agricultural programmes.”
The directive is sequel to President Museveni’s condemnation of NAADs coordinators for having failed the national agric programme aimed at “improving people’s household incomes” through agriculture.
“I am disappointed that whereas the government disburses Shs120 billion to districts for NAADs activities every year, there is no change in the economic status of the rural beneficiaries”, the President deplored.
Mr Museveni recalled the success stories of Luweero Triangle projects that had been supervised by soldiers and urged the Army to replicate that success in the agricultural sector by restructuring the NAADs.
The plaintiff complained that consequent upon the President’s directive, the running contracts of the NAADs coordinators were being terminated by their respective district service commissions.
He is also aggrieved with the creation of new positions in the NAADs programme known as the “agricultural extension workers”, a post which he insists is unknown to the NAADs enabling documents as approved by the NAADs board.
Mr Byaruhanga is seeking a court order to nullify the President’s directive, Cabinet resolution and that of the Minister of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries that approve the incorporation of the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) in the activities of NAADs.
He desires “a declaration that the failure by the district service commissions to renew or terminate the running contracts of the agricultural advisory service providers, district and sub-county national agricultural advisory service coordinators on the advice of the minister of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries is unlawful.”
Plaintiff lawyers, claim that already 300 UPDF soldiers have been recruited, trained and appointed into the activities of NAADs without the approval of its board or the standing statutory instrument issued by the Agriculture ministry, making it unlawful.
They therefore want court to order the Chief of Defence Forces, Commander of Land Forces and the Joint Chief of Staff of UPDF to withdraw all soldiers from the agricultural sector; as well as an an order directing all the district service commissioners to pay all the salaries and allowances that have accrued during “the illegal termination of contracts of NAADs officials and also have them reinstated to their positions.
The suit which was filed on August 21 has the Attorney-General and NAADs as co-respondents.