The Court of Appeal has suspended a petition by former nominated senator Gloria Orwoba who sued Parliament for unlawful stoppage of her salary, sexual harassment, discrimination and abuse of office by the Clerk of the Senate.
A bench of three judges of the appellate court noted that the issues raised by the senate, including whether the Employment and Labour Relations court’s (ELRC) has the authority to entertain a dispute implicating the powers and privileges of Parliament in regulating the conduct of a Member of Parliament, was significant.
The senate also submitted that the issues raised by the former senator had been determined by the High Court in a decision last year.
“These are not trivial points; they call for examination at the appellate stage. We are therefore satisfied that the intended appeal is arguable.
Ms Orwoba moved to court early this year seeking various declarations arguing that the withholding of her salary by Parliament violated articles 40, 41 and 47 of the constitution.
The former MP further submitted that the conduct of the Clerk of the Senate Mr Jeremiah Nyegenye amounted to gross misconduct and abuse of office.
She also wanted Parliamentary Service Commission (PSC) to investigate the complaints she made against Mr Nyegenye and to be paid damages for the alleged violations.
But the Senate opposed the petition arguing that the ELR court lacked jurisdiction because the respondent, as a former nominated Senator, was not in an employer-employee relationship with the PSC and that the matter had already been determined by the High Court.
In a ruling in May 2025, the court that the petition before it was not barred because the matters now raised, including the alleged unlawful stoppage of salary, sexual harassment, discrimination and abuse of office by the Clerk of the Senate had not been determined in the earlier High Court.
Discrimination and harassment
The court noted that the earlier dispute concerned suspension from the Senate under the Parliamentary Powers and Privileges Act and involved different parties, whereas the present case included new issues and incorporates the PSC, which was not a party in the previous matter.
On the issue of jurisdiction, the ELRC held that it had a constitutional and statutory mandate under article 162 (2) of the constitution and section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act to hear and determine the dispute.
The court held that the petition concerns alleged violations of the petitioner’s rights arising within her workplace, namely the Senate, and involved the terms and conditions of service of a serving Member of Parliament, including payment of salary and protection from discrimination and harassment.
Not satisfied with the ruling, PSC and Mr Nyegenye escalated the dispute to the Court of Appeal arguing the court was wrong in its finding that the ELRC had jurisdiction to determine a dispute touching on the exercise of the powers and privileges of a House of Parliament in regulating the conduct of an MP.
The PSC further faulted the court by failing to adhere to Article 105 of the Constitution which vests jurisdiction over questions relating to the vacancy of a parliamentary seat and matters tied to discipline of MPs exclusively in the High Court.
“We are satisfied that the applicants (PSC and the Clerk) have advanced sufficient grounds for grant of the orders sought, which we hereby grant,” said the court.
