By Owek. Henry Munaaba Dhikusooka
Intercepting communication has been a common act of late between politicians, business actors, spouses and bosses with iron feast management style.
This is always done as a form of intimidation and getting prior knowledge of what type of conversation the interpreter is having using his communications gadgets.
The Regulation of Interception of Communications Act,2010 which came into force on the September 3, 2010 which other players refer to as the Mbabazi act ( because he was at the center of it’s enactment as Minister of Security); Provides for the lawful Interception and monitoring of certain communications in the course of their transmission through a telecommunications, postal or any other related service or system in Uganda and also provides for a monitoring center besides providing for any other related matters.
I have witnessed situations where politicians ( be it local or National),bosses and spouses unlawfully intercepting communications of their opponents, subordinates and spouses without knowing the end result of such illegality.
Interception of communication can only be undertaken by four individuals as provided for in part 111(4) through application of a warrant of Interception to a judge of the high court.
Such Interception can only be made by the;
Chief of Defense forces or his or her nominee,
Director General of the External Security Organization or his or her nominee,
Director General of the Internal Security organization or his or her nominee,
Inspector General of Police or his or her nominee.
Like I have indicated earlier, such Interception is only possible through an application to a designated judge to issue a warrant for the interception of any communication and such warrant can only be issued if there are reasonable grounds for the judge to believe that;
An offense which may result to loss of life or threat to life has been or is being or will probably be committed.
An offense of drug trafficking or human trafficking has been or is being or will probably be committed.
The gathering of information concerning an actual threat to National Security or to any national economic interest is necessary.
The gathering of information concerning a potential threat to public safety, national security or any national economic interest is necessary; or
There’s a threat to National interest involving the state’s International relations or obligations.
The continued misuse and illegality committed by bosses and politicians to intercept communications has far reaching consequences which an ordinary person should get acquainted with.
Even your spouse has no right whatsoever to cause an interception unless it’s done through the above processes and procedures.
Even warrants issued to interception have a time limit of three months and can only be renewed by the judge with a number of prerequisite requirements to justify the interception.
It’s therefore incumbent on the citizens to understand their constitutional right to privacy under article 27 of the constitution, freedom of speech and expression.
Under Part B 15(3) of the Regulation of Interception of Communication Act,2010 provides for offenses for a person who discloses any information in contravention of subsection (1) to a fine not exceeding one hundred and twenty currency points or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years or both.
This is therefore a warning to the careless people who think can easily go away with it when infringing on the right to privacy as provided in the 1995 constitution of the republic of Uganda as amended; it’s not business as usual.
Forewarned forearmed.
The author is Owek. Dhikusooka Henry Munaaba
Member- Busoga Lukiko/Minister of Foreign Affairs, Bugabula Chiefdom.
