Namuganza had requested court to quash the recommendations.
The resolutions, which were presented by the parliamentary Ad-hoc Committee on May 18, 2022, had pinned the minister for misleading the Uganda Land Commission (ULC) into illegal allocation of Nakawa-Naguru land to some investors.
The land in question which totals to 142 acres was withdrawn from Opec Prime Properties Ltd which had been allocated the land in 2007 to develop a satellite city in the Nakawa-Naguru estate.
In May, the committee chaired by Dan Kimosho indicated that the land had been illegally allocated to individuals and entities basing on presidential directives which it said were non-existent, and had recommended that Namuganza be held liable.
However, the minister had run to High Court civil division, challenging Parliament’s adoption of the committee’s resolutions.
In her application filled through her lawyers, Namuganza argued that the committee was illegal, unreasonable and comprising procedural irregularities and biased.
She had further argued that the May 18 report was presented before the Parliament without the minutes of the proceedings of the said committee.
Questioning the authenticity of the report, she had asked the court to issue a permanent injunction stopping any authority from relying on the recommendation or findings made by the committee against her.
She had also sought general damages and costs to a tune of Shs1 billion, citing that she had suffered mental anguish and her name tainted due to the investigations she said were unjust and unfair.
In response, the respondent in an affidavit addressed through the clerk to Parliament, Adolf Mwesigye, insisted that the recommendations were arrived at in a procedurally proper and rational manner in accordance with the laws of Uganda.
The respondent added that recommendations had not received approval by the executive and that the application was therefore prematurely before the court.
“The recommendations of the Parliamentary Ad-Hoc Committee report on Naguru-Nakawa land allocations are currently awaiting consideration by the Executive in order to assess the propriety of their implementation,” the respondent stated.
Having heard from both parties, the court chaired by Judge Musa Ssekaana, on Monday, dismissed Namuganza’s application.
The judge stated that the application was dismissed on grounds that the court had not found any abuse of authority or power by Parliament in coming up with the recommendations.
“This application fails on all the orders sought and the same stands dismissed. Each party shall bear their costs,” the judge ruled.
Ssekaana maintained that by adopting the committee’s recommendations, the legislators were exercising their powers based on evidence.
The judge also ruled that the applicant is not entitled to any damages since the court had not found any abuse of power by Parliament.