Occupational Safety and Health Act in oil and gas industry in Uganda

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT AND THE UGANDA OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY.

*By Natumanya Bright
The basic law for protection of workers’ safety at workplace in Uganda is the Occupational Safety and Health Act No.9 of 2006. The Act is concerned with the safety, health and welfare of people engaged in work on employment. It is a multidisciplinary field of healthcare concerned with enabling an individual to undertake their occupation in a way that causes least harm to their health.
As defined by WHO, occupational health deals with all aspects of health and safety in the workplace. Its primary focus is prevention of hazards to ensure the health and safety of workers. Health is also defined as a state of complete physical, mental and social well being and not mere absence of a disease or infirmity.
The ILO and WHO have shared a common definition of occupational health as adopted by the two committees on occupational health in 1950 and revised in 1995 that the main focus of occupational health is on three different objectives: (1) the maintenance and promotion of workers’ health and working capacity; (2) the improvement of working environment and work to become conducive to safety and health and (3) development of work organizations and working cultures in a direction which supports health and safety at work and in doing so also promote a positive social climate and smooth operation and may enhance productivity of the undertaking.
Historical development
The 19th century was dominated by the laissez faire/ free economic theory whereby the welfare of the community was left to the individual who was free to pursue his or her own interests. However, the situation changed in the middle of the 19th century and courts began to recognize that even workmen needed special protection against dangerous conditions of work. Later on the law developed to protect workers due to increased pace of industrial revolution which involved the use of large labour force, the emergence of factories and mills powered by technology and also due to pressure from radical reformers and trade unions.
At the time the doctrine of common employment prevailed that is there was no duty owed to an employee by the worker.
In Priestly v. Fowler 1837, it was held that the master was not liable for the injury caused by the negligence of fellow employees.
However, towards the end of 18th century liberal approach was adopted aimed at protecting employees and a duty of care was imposed on employers. Thus in Wilson and Clyde coal co. V. English 1938, court held that the employer’s duty to ensure safety at the workplace is non delegable. Lord wright saw the employer’s common law duty as comprising of three separate duties that is competent staff, adequate material and proper system of work and supervision.
In Uganda, our constitution recognizes the importance of working environment for all workers. Article 39 accords all citizens the right to a clean and healthy environment while article 40(1) empowers parliament to enact laws to provide for the rights of persons to work under satisfactory, safe and healthy conditions. And as a result the OSH Act came into force in 2006.
The main objective of the Act is to operationalize articles 34(4), 39, 40(1), state the steps to be taken before operating a workplace, duties and obligations of employers and employees in ensuring safety and health for all at workplace.
Before, we had the 1919 Factories Ordinance, then the 1952 Ordinance after world war two industrialisation policy of the colonial governments which later became Factories Act cap 198 and repealed by cap 220.
The Act has several provisions that can guarantee the safety and health of workers in the oil and gas industry in Uganda:
Under s.13 employers have a duty to protect workers and general public from dangerous aspects of employer’s undertaking at the employer’s expense. In Paris v. Stepney borough council [1951]1 ALL ER 42, the claimant worked with one eye which was also damaged by a metal causing him permanent blindness. Court held that in the circumstances the defendants owed a special duty of care to the claimant and whether or not goggles should have been provided for the regular workers, they should have definitely been provided to the claimant.
Subsection 2 requires that employers should sure ensure that he working environment is free from hazards arising from pollution given the risky of oil and gas industry. The oil and gas industry should go beyond the wording of section 13 which requires compliance only when it is reasonably practicable given the nature of the industry.
Further, under s.56 the employer must provide safe means of access to the work place for every person. This includes ensuring that the floors, walk ways, combustion chambers are properly constructed and maintained and that they are also kept free from obstructions which may cause workers to fall and or suffer any other injury.
It was clear from Asile Vs Nyanza Textile that the plaintiff had to prove negligence on part of the defendant, which he has not done. He must also show that the thing complained thereof was under the management and control of the defendant which has also not been proved.
The Act can also guarantee workers’ safety under s.61 where the employer has to fence every moving part of a machine and flywheels of their machinery. The fences should be such as to prevent workers or their cloth from being engulfed into the moving parts of the machines. In Gloves v. Winborne [1898]2 QB 402, the plaintiff was a body employed in the service of the defendant. The plaintiff’s right arm had been caught in the cog wheel of a steam winch whose fencing had been removed for some reasons. It was held that an action would lie in respect of personal injury occasioned to a workman employed in a factory through a breach of his employer, the occupier of the factory, the duty to maintain fencing for dangerous machinery.
S.69 can also guarantee protection in oil and gas industry whereby lifts and hoists at the work place should be kept in good mechanical condition safely of even the most negligent workers. This provision of fencing imposes a strict duty on employers which helps protect workers safe at all time given the fragile nature of the oil and gas industry.
It further provides in s.71 that lifting gear such as cranes must be kept in good condition and should be of sound and suitable material, free from patent defects and should be properly maintained. This can guarantee protection of workers in oil and gas industry that even if the crane is not in use at a certain point in time it should be of proper mechanical construction.
Furthermore, s. 95 can guarantee safety and health of workers in the oil and gas industry since it requires employers to replace the use of harmful substances with less harmful ones or harmless ones. And under S.97 hazardous chemical must be labelled and an appropriate datasheet for chemicals be provided to workers.
Uganda can study the situation of Nigeria’s oil industry and see how best to protect the safety of workers. For instance in SERAC v. Nigeria court held that the government had a duty to ensure that oil companies do not pollute the environment depriving people of their right to food and health as a result of oil spills all over the Ogoni land. If the provisions of this Act and other law are properly implemented, our workers’ safety and health and that of our environment can be secured.
In conclusion this Act if properly applied and well implemented will protect the health of our workers and the environment as Uganda joins the countries that produce oil. The Act under part II provides for administration and enforcement that is s.3 on appointment of inspectors, and s.6 giving them power to inspect and prosecute under s.9.
Other bodies like the occupational safety and health Board in s.15, the safety representative health board in s.10 and an advisory panel can greatly help in implementation of this Act.

* Natumanya Bright is a finalist law student at the prestigious Makerere University law school in Uganda. natumanyab@yahoo.com

18/April 2018

 

Advertisements

Rubabo series

Rubabo series No.1 of x

The History of Rubabo

Rubabo countituency is one of the 3 constituencies that form Rukungiri district. But let me first go back to where it all started from, where Rukungiri district itself emerged.

This brings me to the rich and beautiful history of the Hororo or Bahororo and Nkore kingdom. The Hororo are a small nomadic Bantu tribe living in the north of the Kigezi district of Uganda. They are made up mostly of the Hima (historically the land owners as one could only own land if they had cows).-reference is made to a facebook post by Charles Rwomushana on 27th February 2018.

The Bahororo(of which i am a muhororo) are more associated with Kigezi than Ankole. They reside mainly in Rujumbura in south western Uganda and are related to the Tutsi of Rwanda most Bahororo can trace their roots to the Buyumba region. The Bahororo speak a dialect of Nkore-Kiga, Ruhororo and are subdivided into clans most of which are common to both the Nkore and Kiga Nations.

The Bahororo trace their roots back to the kingdom of Cush in modern day Ethiopia. However, human and cattle genetics indicate that Bahima and Batutsi probably originate in central Sahara area.

The people of Mpororo became “Bahororo” meaning people of Mpororo. Mpororo became independent state after the futile wars between Basongora and King Kigeri ii of Rwanda. (For more information about these wars refer to Charles Rwomushana post above).

The state of Mpororo had lasted about 50 years until about 1775 when it was broken up into six independent states led by six sons of Kahaya: Nshenyi state under king Rukaari, Rujumbura state under king Kirenzi, Igara state under king Mafunda, Kajara state under king Kihondwa, Bwera state and Rukiga state.

Mpororo kingdom remained famous and states continued to self identify as primarily as Bahororo.

When Morton Stanley was denied permission to cross Mpororo, he had this to say, “i had to negotiate with people of Mpororo who were absolutely savage and never before come into contact with the stranger besides being in perpetual blood feud.”

Now such reports and many others of traders who were looking for ivory in Mpororo poisoned the reputation of Bahororo that when Fredrick Lugard and other colonial officers came they were afraid of Mpororo and Songora communities. As a result they forcibly annexed all states of Mpororo and added them to the neighbouring Nkore Kingdom.

Nkore Kingdom only had three provinces, currently the counties of Isingiro, Kashaari and Nyabushozi. With this addition, Nkore doubled in size. However, today many people still proudly refer themselves as Bahororo despite attempts to make them Banyankore. (I happen to be one of such people. My mother being a muhima from present day Kiruhura district and my father hailing from the Mpororo, in Rubabo-Rukungiri district).

Our history evolved to the now modern Era where the memory of Kitami-Kya-Nyawera inspired in the 20th century the powerful politico-religious movement known as “Nyabingi” that was important during the struggle against colonoal occupation by the British. Muhumuza, the last queen of Mpororo was captured by the British and detained in Kampala where she died in 1944.

In 1973, Rukungiri district which used to be Rujumbura, separated from Kigezi district by the then president Iddi Amin.

In 1980, it was divided into Rubabo and Rujumbura.

Rubabo is one of the two places which Winston Churchill based to call Uganda the pearl of Africa. These places were Ryakasinga planes and Rubabo planes.

(Read more about WinstonChurchill)

Kigezi had resisted Lugard imperialism and seceded to Congo with Leopold, but in 1914, Kigezi was brought back to Uganda.

Fact sheet

Rukungiri is a district in the western region of Uganda with headquarters in Rukungiri town. The region is sub saharan region and Kigezi sub region.

Rukungiri district now has three constituencies of Rujumbura, Rubabo and Rukungiri municipality: Nine sub counties of Nyakishenyi, Nyarushanje, Buyanja, Kebisoni, Bwambara, Bugangari, Ruhinda, Buhunga and Nyakagyeme.

There are three divisions; southern, Eastern and Western; 79 parishes, 4 town boards and 899 villages.

It has area: land 1,444.9 km squared.(557.9 sq.mi); water 222.4km squared (85.9sq.mi); website: http://www.rukungiri.go.ug

…to be continued about leadership of Rubabo. Dont miss.

I want to thank major Godfrey Katamba for the brief history of Rubabo he taught us (student youth leaders from Rubabo), Charles Rwomushana whose writings inspired me to write this whole series, Barungi Alex for the guidance and information and our dear patron Narcis Rwangoga of FICA seeds for the guidance. Plus all Rubabo and Rukungiri students in universities.

@ Natumanya Bright, president Rubabo students association Makerere University chapter 2017/2018

For more information

natumanyab@yahoo.com /0775788115

health rights are key in ensuring patient safety and patient empowerment

“Health rights are key in ensuring patient safety and enhancing patient empowerment.”

 

The preamble of the 1946 World Health Organisation, (WHO) constitution defines health broadly to mean a state of complete physical, mental and social well being of a person and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.

The constitution further defines the right to health as the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health and enumerates some principles of this right as healthy child development, equitable dissemination of medical knowledge and its benefits; and government provided social measures to ensure adequate health.

Article 25 of the United Nations Declaration of human rights 1948 states that everyone has a right to a standard of living adequately for the health and well being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing and medical care and necessary medical services.

Article 16 of the African Charter reiterates the same principle of the highest attainable standard of health.

Furthermore General Comment no.14 which addresses the right to health makes a direct clarification that the right to health is not to be understood as a right to be healthy but instead the right to health is articulated as a set of both freedoms and entitlements which accommodate among other things the individual’s biological and social conditions.

The constitution of Uganda though does not expressly provide for the right to health, it is included in the National Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy and courts have also make judicial decisions imputing the right to health from other civil and political rights for instance the right to life, freedom from torture and discrimination, right to receive information among others.

Patient refers to health care users, also known as health care consumers and patient rights are seen as a subset of human rights and can be substantive like right to information or procedural for instance a right to complain.

Patient safety is the freedom for a patient from unnecessary harm or potential harm associated with health care.[1] It literally refers to a collective term which refers to strategies and protocols to minimize the risk of harm occurring to patients. Every year an estimated one million patients die in hospitals across the world because of avoidable clinical mistakes.

Thesaurus dictionary defines empowerment as the exertion of a strong influence or control over others in a variety of settings. Patient empowerment could therefore be defined as the process by which patients gain more control over their health and health care.

The Ministry of Health in a bid to promote patients awareness developed Patients’ Charter[2], which outlines patients’ rights and responsibilities. The rights in the Charter include: the right to medical care; prohibition of discrimination; participation in decision making; confidentiality and privacy; informed consent; and refusal of medical treatment and these rights are 19 in number listed in the Charter. The responsibilities of the patient include provision of information; compliance with instructions; and respect and consideration of other patients and health workers.[3] The discussion below highlights health rights and how these rights ensure patient safety and enhances patient empowerment:

The right to information about the safety and quality of health services:

Article 41 of Uganda constitution provides that every person has a right to receive information even that in the hands of the government. This being a civil right has seen courts giving it interpretation to include right to health and health rights.

For instance in the case of The Center for Health, Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) and others V. the executive director Mulago National referral hospital and AG, court held that there was a violation of article 2 (a) & (b) of the protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights of women in Africa which requires state parties to keep appropriate measures to provide adequate, affordable and accessible health services, including information, education and communication programs to women especially those in rural areas and now days the rampant development of slums in Uganda whose occupants require medical attention.

 

Communication between patients and health care providers, and the barriers many Ugandan patients face in this regard, has an important impact on quality, cost, and patient safety and may lead to misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment leading to longer stays in hospitals or death. Therefore by upholding this right a change can be created and patients empowered.

Similarly in CEHURD V. Nakaseke District Local Government[4], the case was brought on behalf of a pregnant woman while awaiting obstetric care died in a hospital. It considers whether the hospital failed to provide appropriate obstetric and management thereby violating her rights as well as those of her surviving children. This case establishes principle that Ugandans can sue health workers for medical negligence and offers a mechanism to demand accountability from the government as to how it is investing in social and economic rights such as health care. Therefore such civil rights have been interpreted to include health right for the protection and empowerment of patients.

 

The right to informed consent and a patient to be given adequate and accurate information about the nature of their illness, diagnostic procedures and the proposed treatment for one to make a decision that affects one of these elements helps patients to make informed medical decisions hence ensuring patient safety and empowerment. The information should be communicated to the patient at the earliest possible stage in a manner that he/she is expected to understand in order to make a free, informed, and independent choice. However in certain situations the doctor may withhold the information where he believes that it will cause harm to the physical and mental wellbeing of a patient.

Treatment against a patient’s will may be provided under the following circumstances:[5]

  • If the patient has received information as required to make an informed choice.
  • If the treatment is anticipated to significantly improve the patient’s medical condition.
  • If there are reasonable grounds to suppose that after receiving treatment, the patient will give his/her retrospective consent.

Consent provides legal justification of care to avoid allegations of committing the tort of trespass to the person; Consent represents the legal and ethical expression to one’s autonomy and self-determination.

In the South African case of Christian Lawyers Association v Minister of Health and Others, the High Court considered informed consent in the context of termination of pregnancy. The court stated that the concept forms the basis of the doctrine of volenti non fit injuria that justifies conduct that would otherwise have constituted a delict if it took place without a victim’s informed consent. All this is aimed at promoting the health wellbeing of a person.

 

The right to medical care:

The UNESCO Declaration aims at the promotion of equitable access to medical, scientific and technological developments as well as the greatest possible flow and the rapid sharing of knowledge concerning those developments and the sharing of benefits with particular attention to the needs of developing countries.[6] The Declaration calls for respect of human dignity, autonomy, consent and other human rights and the need to maximize benefits and minimize harm to patients, research participants, and other affected individuals.[7] It recognizes the ethical principle of respect for persons including patients.

In Nalwendo Vs Attorney General,[8] the plaintiff was shot by a policeman in kajjansi and taken to Mulago hospital for treatment but that to date; the hospital has declined to give her a medical report. In defense the defendant denied liability and averred that the Uganda Police Force paid for antenatal services and medication until her recovery and discharge from Mulago hospital after delivery of her baby. Court held that the defendant should pay the plaintiff medical expenses to go for further treatment in India since such medication is not available in Uganda. This decision ensured her safety especially from itching scars and she would get better treatment in India.

 

In FB v Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 334 (12 May 2017), it was the patient’s case that the doctor was negligent in: (i) failing to take an adequate history and (ii) failing to conduct an adequate examination…the history taking was not carried out to the standard to be expected of a competent SHO is inevitable. The doctor was in breach of duty and negligence is established. The court considered standard of care of hospital doctors in the context of their function and grade. This decision and many others act as deterrence to the doctors for fear of court actions and heavy penalties imposed on them hence ensuring patient safety and empowerment.

Prohibition of discrimination:

The Collins English Dictionary and Thesaurus defines the word “discrimination” as follows, “The singling out of a particular person, group, etc. for special favor or disfavor…” in case of medical care this involves discriminating patients and denying some individuals health rights especially those from poor economic ground. These health rights therefore protect patients from such kind of discrimination and despite their economic and social status. This guarantees patient safety and empowerment due to the fact that they are assured of treatment whenever necessary.

 

The Equal Opportunities Act 2007 ensures that no patient’s health rights are violated hence their safety from hospitals and it provides guidelines of redress including causing appearance to their tribunal over any form of discrimination against any person in need of medical treatment. This means that all persons despite their status, gender, religion are empowered to access medical treatment without any fear and in the exercise of their health rights.

The existence of racial and ethnic disparities in health and health care has not been well documented in Uganda. In USA, Institute Of Medicine, IOM’s Unequal Treatment was the first major report to highlight that in addition to racial and ethnic disparities in health, there is evidence of racial and ethnic disparities in health care. Patient safety efforts are now a central component of efforts to improve the quality of care for all patients. However, the role of language barriers and its impact on adverse events is less well documented. Health right are there meant to remedy such problems by relaying information to the patients in a clear and precise manner.

 

The right to participation of patients in decision making:

Patient safety is about designing strategies to protect patients from harm. It is a discipline on how to make patients safer. Patient participation in decision making leads to safe investigative space in case of any negligence, it reaffirms the statutory duty of candor on part of doctors and it rejuvenates the health care safety investigation branch.[9] The patients no longer fear to bring up their claims against hospitals for violation of their health rights.

Patient participation also leads to transparency and better and efficient communication with authorities especially the doctors.

Patient participation is a major patient safety culture right to ensure that health and social care services provide people with safe, effective, compassionate and high-quality care. It encourages medical care service providers to be on an upward trajectory of improvement and at the same time protecting and empowering patients and the community at large.

The health right to confidentiality and privacy in ensuring patient safety and empowerment:

The Institute of Medicine (IOM) (USA) report[10]states that patients should not be harmed by the care that is intended to help them, and they should remain free from accidental injury.

Confidentiality in health care refers to the obligation of professionals who have access to patient records or communication to hold that information in confidence.  Rooted in confidentiality of the patient-provider relationship that can be traced back to the fourth century BC and the Oath of Hippocrates, this concept is foundational to medical professionals’ guidelines for confidentiality and protection of patient safety.[11]

An example is the landmark Jaffee v. Redmond decision where the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a therapist’s refusal to disclose sensitive client information during trial (Beyer, 2000). In writing the majority opinion, Justice Stevens said:

Effective psychotherapy… depends upon an atmosphere of confidence and trust in which the patient is willing to make a frank and complete disclosure…The psychotherapist privilege serves the public interest by facilitating the provision of appropriate treatment for individuals suffering the effects of a mental or emotional problem.[12]

The confidentiality provisions will improve patient safety outcomes by creating an environment where providers may report and examine patient safety events without fear of increased liability risk.  Greater reporting and analysis of patient safety events will yield increased data and better understanding of patient safety events.

Privacy, as distinct from confidentiality, is viewed as the right of the individual client or patient to be let alone and to make decisions about how personal information is shared.

The Supreme Court’s holding in Whalen v. Roe addressed the notion of balanced interest.  In saying “disclosures of private medical information to doctors, to hospital personnel, to insurance companies, and to public health agencies are often an essential part of modern medical practice”, the court did not give individuals absolute control over sharing of their own health information.

This empowers patients to disclose their problems to doctors because they expect reciprocal duty of privacy from the doctors whereby if such information is disclosed it may lead to discrimination from the public and self hate by the patient.

The health right to healthy and safe environment:

Finally the right to healthy and safe environment can be read from article 39 of the Ugandan constitution and it is as well listed by the Charter to be observed and respected as a healthy right aimed at protecting patient safer and empowerment.

The healthy facilities are in sorry state and do not conform to healthy and safe environment standards. Some patients sleep on the floor after giving birth exposing them to more dangers of infections. Other hospitals with structures have no source of power to enable both operations at night as well as running of necessary equipments like refrigerators.

This has further exposed the lack of political will to improve our health sector and in total violation of international obligations like the Abuja Declaration of committing 15% of the budget to health sector. Patients have now developed a belief that whatever is provided is a favor from government and yet they are entitled to such services as of right.

It should however be noted that in certain circumstances these rights undermine patient safety and empowerment. For instance in Re T patient refused blood transfusion citing religious grounds in which case doctors had to respect the patient’s rights at the expense of putting the patient’s life in danger.

 

Similarly in Medical and Dental Practitioner tribunal V. Okwonkwo, patients refused blood transfusion citing the book of Leviticus in the Bible that man shall not take blood. The wife died and the doctor battled with proceedings for almost six months before being set free on appeal.

These decisions are based on established law for instance in Sideway V. Bethlehem Hospital, it was held that a patient can refuse treatment for rational, irrational or no reason at all if they are mentally capable. This however has not greatly impacted n doctors that go a head and prescribe treatment to save life. For example in the case of Njareketa where a doctor amputated a leg of the patient to stop further affecting the whole body, court on appeal awarded her a mere 1 cent after deliberating on the circumstance of the case.

Recommendations

From the foregoing discussion I therefore recommend the following to be done in order to promote healthy rights and patient safety:

  • The Ministry of Health should establish and extensively publicize guidelines for patients to report cases of violation of their health rights.
  • The Ministry should also enhance legal education of health workers and citizens, and provide legal assistance to abused patients.
  • Inadequate resources for health promote unethical practices such as health workers demanding illegal fees and thus propagating the abuse of health rights.
  • The Ministry should commit more funds to ensure availability of basic resources for implementing health rights issues, and improve supervision of health workers.[13]

Conclusion

The realization of health rights in resource-constrained and patient-burdened public health care settings in Uganda remains an obstacle towards quality health care delivery, health care-seeking behavior and health outcomes.

Although the Uganda Patients’ Charter of 2009 empowers patients to demand quality care, inequitable access and abuse remain common. For instance in 2013, “African Journal of Primary HealthCare and Family care”, carried out research at Mulago Hospital assessing “the Awareness of, responsiveness to and practice of patients’ rights at Uganda’s national referral hospital.”

 

The results showed that at least 36.5% of patients faced a challenge regarding their rights whilst seeking health care. Most of the patients (79%) who met a challenge never attempted to demand their rights. Most patients (81.5%) and health workers (69.4%) had never heard of the Uganda Patients’ Charter. Awareness of patients’ rights was significantly higher amongst health workers (70%) than patients (40%). Patients’ awareness was associated with education level, employment status and hospital visits.

The results further indicate that Patients feel powerless to negotiate for their rights and fear being discriminated against based on their ability to bribe health workers with money to access care, and political, socio-economic and tribal status.

Unfortunately systems of checks and balances on the practice of health rights at the hospitals remain unclear to both patients and health workers, contrary to provisions in the Constitution that the State will take all efforts to ensure provision of health services to its population. This situation has led to many deaths in Uganda resulting from clinical mistakes or situations that could be prevented. It has also affected the lives of women by failing to provide adequate Emergency Obstetric Care services leading to countless casualties.

[1] Exploring patient participation in reducing health care related risks, WHO 2013

[2] Ministry of health patient charter 2009

[3] B.K Twinomugisha, ‘’Fundamentals of health Law  in Uganda’’ (2015) Pretoria University Law Press, pp 192-229

[4] Civil suit no. 11 of 2012

[5] Article 12 b & c of the patients Charter

[6] Article 2(f)

[7] Articles 3-6

[8]Civil suit no. 70 of 2013 [2017] UGHCCD 103 (13 July 2017).

[9]John Tingle, Associate Professor Nottingham Law School, “Reverse Innovation and Patient Safety in transitioning and Developing countries”

[10] ‘’To Err is Human: Building Safer Health System’’

[11] Valerie Prater, University of Illinois at Chicago, “Confidentiality, Privacy and Security of health information: Balancing interests “December 8, 2014.

[12]Jaffee v. Redmond, 1996, p. 9.

[13] “African Journal of Primary Health Care and Family care “research at Mulago Hospital assessing “the Awareness of, responsiveness to and practice of patients’ rights at Uganda’s national referral hospital.”

acts of parliament in Uganda: the Companies Act 2012

THE COMPANIES ACT, 2012.THE EAST AFRICAN EXCISE MANAGEMENT (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2012THE EXCISE TARIFF (AMENDMENT) ACT 2012THE FINANCE ACT 2006 (AMENDMENT) ACT 2012THE INCOME TAX (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2012.THE PREVENTION AND PROHIBITION OF TORTURE ACT, 2012.THE TRANSFER OF CONVICTED OFFENDERS ACT, 2012.THE UGANDA NATIONAL METEOROLOGICAL AUTHORITY ACT, 2012.THE VALUE ADDED TAX (AMENDMENT) ACT 2012