First, it was with our medical doctors who could not agree on what sort of drug prescription was best to treat Malaria. This is serious considering that malaria is the one of the biggest killer in most of our provinces.

Second, the legal intepretations surrounding the nomination and the subsequent re-election of Sir Allan Kemakeza. Of particular interest are the mixed legal advice given from opposite side of the issue.

What can we make of all these?
To those in doubt with malaria prescriptions by our learned medical doctors, better to go back to our traditional herbal drugs. In my province, almost 100% of the people on some of the Islands that have malaria carrier mosquitoes use traditional custom medicine to treat malaria or to act as vaccination and according to national statistics we have the lowest incidence of malaria cases.

On the re-election of Sir Allan, it was a clear example of how sometimes laws could be interpreted for political gains, that if the legal advice that Sir Allan claimed to have obtained was anything to go by. On another perspective, Sir Allan was just buying time, or the so-called delaying tactic. If the case goes to court, Sir Allan has nothing to lose. And as always with our court system, if the case drag on after January the 1st next year, by which time his 12 months suspended sentence would lapse (stand to be corrected), then he would be qualified to contest again if the recent by-election is disqualified. Its politic, the problem is, if at all the result will be disqualified it is a waste of gov't resources for the first by-election not to mention self-serving interpretion of the relevant regulations.