NRM Primaries-Final before the Final!

By: Tumusiime K. Deo

International Communications Consultant

Kampala, Uganda 26 /10/2015: In the beautiful game of Football, when two giants meet say at Quarter Final or Semi-Final stage, we often call such a scenario a Final before the Final. Reason being that the preferred scenario should be to have two giants at the very final game to afford spectators a spectacular moment.

The game of Politics is however quite apart from Football, and as is the case with the ongoing business within the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) party, the game is currently prevailing among the same team members, a big game at that. Quite like training ground stuff-yet in reality, the results of this NRM vs NRM game could pretty much determine the scoreboard come February 2016. One wonders then-Where’s the opposition?

Again like is the case with Football, this NRM team is insanely rich just as the likes of Manchester United or Barcelona or Real Madrid. They can afford a hefty price to pay for a world star player in Museveni, just as Real Madrid coughed 80 Million Pounds to fetch Christiano Ronaldo from Manchester United. And while all this luxury prevails, these folks are happy to take to the pitch and compete against lowly teams that can only afford a handful Pounds in payment for new signings.

Well, the pitch may be leveled, the number of players may be the same on either side and the referee may be agreeable to both sides, BUT the balance of play is unquestionably tilted towards the ruling Party, thanks to a number of factors in their favor; they have colossal sums of money to put up showy primary elections across the country; they have representation in every corner of the country thanks to co-option local leaders as NRM representatives; they are 29 or so years to the good in experience; and needless to say, they are in the thing, the thing is them and they are the thing. At the end of the day, the 2016 Presidential and General elections look in every sense to be a mere formality, which will unfortunately cost the country a bounty that could otherwise have been put to more developmental purpose.

But tell you what? It is so boring having the Ballon d'or oscillate between Christiano Ronaldo of Real Madrid and Lionel Messi, year after year. Yes the two are undoubtedly the best in Football on the planet, but for purposes of fairness of the game, it would be nice to widen the yardsticks for selection to accord other players chance to win the accolade. Back to the talk of Politics, Ugandans have known only one President since 1986. Certainly such a scenario of dominance in Football would be absolutely boring and frustrating too-not that it’s any more palatable in politics. I am sure many a player and many a manager must have by now ran out of ideas on how to oust the NRM star man, Yoweri Kaguta Museveni. Incidentally, no manager wants to rest his star performer in key games unless he is injured. And to make matters worse for the opposition, while Mr. Museveni is actually injured, it is only his finger and yet he needs the brain and two feet to keep scoring goals. Aw, Politics, what a game!

Hmmm, and Parliament voted in time to set tougher conditions supposedly for all teams but with the obvious target being the smaller teams that are already struggling in everything but the desire for change. Is there anything as bad as a hungry man watching over food but not having the stamina to even pick a crumb off the master’s table? In Tunisia, Mohamed Bouazizi set himself ablaze out of hunger and frustration, and I hear folks that hate the United States of America with so much passion have resorted to everything desperate including ending their own lives cheaply. Yet at a period when the world so cherishes democracy as the only way to change leadership, I am worried but the opposition has very few options other than preying on leftovers.

Talking of Democracy, the NRM has taken it to another level, inculcating it in-house as espoused in the ongoing Primary elections. With the big shots in the likes of Kahinda Otafiire, Tarsis Kabwegyere, Daudi Migereko, Jessica Alupo and others already confirmed kicked out, the exercise can only work to galvanize the believability in the efficacy of the NRM irrespective of what opponents might think of it. Suddenly we could even wake up to Musician-cam politician, my namesake Raggae Dee taking over the mantle as Lord Mayor of Kampala!

On the balance of the game though, I think Uganda’s politics has quite matured, only that further sidelining the traditional opposition may not quite deliver the true fruits of a democratic nation. Internal democracy within NRM is a good thing of course, but it may not be sufficient in terms of ensuring the necessary checks and balances that define an affluent society-the kind that Uganda aspires to be.

I urge all Ugandans to embrace peaceful coexistence during the looming campaigns and elections, because at the end of it all, Uganda is here to stay. Even if some of the desires of the present generation may not be realized today, at least it is imperative to clear the ground, and our children or grand children shall look back to our contribution with admiration to vindicate our efforts. Perhaps we Uganda could be opening the page for a new shade of democracy. I am Watching the sprouting through my binoculars, through the ventilator of my house!

God bless Uganda, For God and My Country!

Uganda: End Police Obstruction of Gatherings

Teargas, Brutality Threaten Free Assembly as Elections Loom

(Kampala, October 19, 2015) – Ugandan police are using teargas, rubber bullets, and brutality to obstruct political meetings and rallies, Human Rights Watch said today. With elections scheduled for early 2016, the government should condemn police interference with peaceful opposition rallies and publish guidelines on police use of teargas that comply with international standards.

In two recent examples of the abusive and unlawful response to opposition gatherings, on September 9 and 10, 2015, police in the towns of Soroti and Jinja, eastern Uganda, fired teargas to disperse people who had gathered to hear opposition candidate Amama Mbabazi, even though there had been no disorder or violence. In some instances, police fired teargas canisters directly at individuals, turning the canisters into projectiles that caused injury, in addition to the harmful effects of teargas on the skin, eyes, and breathing. In Jinja, police lobbed teargas canisters into the grounds of a primary school, harming children.

“Ugandans have the right to gather and hear information, never more so than when an election is coming up,” said Maria Burnett, senior Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch. “The reckless use of teargas is injuring people and jeopardizing a free and fair democratic atmosphere for campaigns.”

Ugandan police response to opposition gatherings has been a source of serious human rights violations in recent years. Opposition rallies and meetings have been met with police teargas numerous times and the recent events in eastern Uganda are only the latest example, Human Rights Watch said.

Shortly after Mbabazi’s September rallies, Human Rights Watch interviewed 40 people in eastern Uganda, including journalists, victims, witnesses, and opposition organizers, about the events and police response.

Presidential and parliamentary elections are set for early 2016, in what will be President Yoweri Museveni’s 30th year in office. Mbabazi, his long-time ally and former prime minister, has broken with the ruling party to run against Museveni. Another opposition presidential aspirant, Kizza Besigye, has been arrested numerous times, most recently on October 15, for allegedly seeking to hold public rallies. The official presidential campaigns are to begin on November 9.

In interviews about the September rallies, witnesses from each location told Human Rights Watch that the gatherings were generally peaceful and had barely begun when police arrived and released teargas. In some cases, the candidate had not yet arrived. Dozens of people said they were injured or felt ill from the teargas, and some were injured by rubber bullets and police beatings.

Teachers at the Main Street Primary School in Jinja reported that police fired three canisters of teargas into the school grounds, stinging the young students’ eyes and faces. “Hospitals and schools aren’t supposed to be attacked,” a teacher said. “They’re children, innocent kids. They’re not supposed to be attacked.”

A restaurant worker in Jinja’s Kazimingi Industrial Park told Human Rights Watch that her three-year-old daughter had lost consciousness after inhaling large amounts of teargas. The mother rushed the child to medical officers who confirmed that her daughter was suffering the effects of teargas.

At a rally on September 9 in Soroti sports grounds, police in riot gear used teargas and shot rubber bullets at civilians. Several witnesses said the police gave no warning and there had been no disorder before police arrival. The police fired teargas canisters under an NTV news vehicle, forcing journalists to take cover inside. Some people at the rally eventually threw stones and unexploded teargas canisters toward police.

Human Rights Watch spoke to eight journalists who were injured while covering the events. The injuries included contusions, and in one case a rubber bullet wound. Journalists also had difficulty breathing due to the teargas. One print journalist said that as he left for his office to write his news story about the day’s events, two police officers openly threatened him, with one officer pointing his teargas gun directly at the journalist until he fled.

In 2009 and 2011, police used live ammunition to disperse people at several opposition gatherings, as well as at rallies and demonstrations against government actions, killing at least 49 bystanders and protesters.

In early 2014, a coalition of opposition and non-governmental organizations began a countrywide campaign called “Free and Fair Elections Now!” about the importance of electoral reforms. In Mbale on March 22, 2014, and in Soroti on the following day, police used teargas to forcibly disperse people peacefully gathered to listen to opposition politicians from several parties. According to the United States State Department, several people were injured when police used teargas in Mbale.

Ugandan police use several justifications for forcibly dispersing people at opposition gatherings, citing violations of various laws as a basis to use teargas and unleash violence. The Public Order Management Act (POMA), passed in August 2013, grants the Inspector General of Police wide discretion to permit or disallow public meetings. Opposition leadership argue that police routinely do not respond when they are notified or deny opposition requests to hold gatherings. In some instances, opposition organizers have been told on the day of the event that the site is no longer available.

The Electoral Commission stated in September that political rallies are currently unlawful because the campaign has not officially started in accordance with the Presidential Elections Act. The Commission argued that “[s]ome aspirants are turning consultative meetings into open campaigns and rallies contrary to the law.” However, Museveni routinely speaks and attends public events and communicates with voters about his political intentions. As one journalist noted, “There is selective application of POMA. When it is [the ruling party] nobody bothers to notify police.”

Under the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, to which Uganda is a party, every potential voter in Uganda is guaranteed “the right to receive information.” Similarly, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) cites “the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds.” Police actions in the context of these public gatherings violate the right to free assembly and right to free expression, denying opposition political groups and potential voters the ability to communicate on a range of issues, Human Rights Watch said.

Under international law, the freedom to take part in a peaceful assembly is of such importance that an unlawful but peaceful situation does not justify an infringement of freedom of assembly. In instances in which there are no acts of violence, public authorities should show tolerance toward peaceful gatherings for freedom of assembly to have real meaning.

Both the African Charter (article 11), and the ICCPR (article 21) provide that no restrictions can be placed on freedom of assembly other than those imposed in conformity with the law and that are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, the protection of public health or morals, or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Any general prohibition on political rallies taking place except during a very short period set by the authorities does not meet the necessary standards and is incompatible with freedom of assembly.

As a riot-control method, teargas should be used only when necessary as a proportionate response to quell violence. It should not be used in a confined space, and canisters should not be fired directly at any individual, and never at close range. International guidelines, such as the United Nations Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms, stipulate that the police are expected to use discretion in crowd control tactics to ensure a proportionate response to any threat of violence, and to avoid exacerbating the situation.

The Ugandan Police Force should draw up guidelines on the use of teargas, Human Rights Watch said. The guidelines should be unambiguous that teargas may not be used simply because police deem a gathering unlawful, including when police believe organizers have failed to comply with the Public Order Management Act’s requirements regarding police notification or permission.

Uganda’s key development partners, such as the US, UK, the European Union, and Ireland – some of whom have directly supported public order management and community policing programs in recent years – should publicly support a call for guidelines on the use of teargas in compliance with international law. They should also publicly call for police to respect freedoms of assembly and expression throughout this critical campaign time.

“Police should be protecting the right of all Ugandans to hear and debate a variety of issues as the 2016 election looms, no matter the political inclinations of the gathering,” Burnett said. “Instead they are unlawfully interfering with basic freedoms through the reckless use of teargas, damaging the outlook for a free and fair election in a few months.”

For more Human Rights Watch reporting on Uganda, please visit:
https://www.hrw.org/africa/uganda

For more information, please contact:
In Washington, DC, Maria Burnett (English): +1 917-379-1696 (mobile); or burnetm@hrw.org. Twitter: @mariaHRWAfrica
In Amsterdam, Leslie Lefkow (English): +31 621-597-356 (mobile); or lefkowl@hrw.org. Twitter: @LefkowHRW
In New York, Daniel Bekele (English, Amharic): +1 212-216-1223; or +1 917-385-3878 (mobile); or bekeled@hrw.org. Twitter: @DanielBekele

THE QUESTION OF UNEMPLOYMENT, A COMMON MAN’S VIEW

INTRODUCTION

At such a time when our nation is engulfed in record unemployment rates, and our position continues to dwindle among development indicators, the hope initiative club is redefining the future of this nation. We cannot help but appreciate the visionary management of the Centre for constitutional government and all members of their staff, we owe many things to come, to their selfless efforts towards the involvement of young people in processes, programs and debates that set precedent for the leadership module this country will take in the near future.

For the different university chapters present here today, my hope is that the attendance of these forums does not become to us, a ritual exercise, but rather a reflection mechanism towards the country where we want and where we want it to go from our generation, henceforth. It is my discrete honor to share with you thoughts on the subject of unemployment from the social, political and economic dimension to enable us contextualize the need in addressing this problem as a country, but more importantly, as a generation.

                                                                  

CONTEXT ANALYSIS

Our country has achieved a status of damnation when it comes to the question of employment. Young people have resorted to luck oriented means of earning a living as opposed to the work oriented means.

They seek their luck in sports betting, political commentary and appropriate branding like the poor youth or any availed means that seems to present a future of some form of livelihood, by this I mean the crime preventers in their thousands. On wonders how we got here.  How that a nation so endowed with natural resources spanning from lakes to forest cover, from mining fields to fertile soils cannot seem to translate the same into opportunities for job creation. In 1990, at the time of our salvation from anarchy of political history with regard to the gun rule, there was a genuine feeling that the country was on a forward path to economic development which include the expansion of employment opportunities in economic activities in deafening silence of guns through the peace then achieved. At about the same time, the World Bank issued structural re-adjustment policies for low developed countries that would limit government expenditure to core administrative means and liberalize the economy to be private sector driven. Of interest to me is the particular idea by the World Bank that government should invest more money in primary rather than tertiary education. 

Our nation moved from necessity in the target of employment that includes skills development and economic research to inform investment for greater employment opportunity creation; to provision of basic education, incapable of transformational power to a nation in dire need of developmental agenda. As such, the challenges of the nation took an economic trend with regard to employment opportunity creation and development.

As the nation transitioned from a political muddle termed ‘the movement system’ where we had all people as members of the movement, yet there were celebrations of people crossing into the movement, but this is besides the discussion. The period of transformation for this nation from a single party system to a multi-party dispensation came with implications on the part of political organisations and parties, to provide policy alternatives and not simply rhetoric abilities for their disagreements with government proposals and positions on issues in the country, including the issues of institutional growth, economic policy and of particular interest to us, policies on employment.

Today therefore, we seek to interrogate the different political players’ offers with regard to the question of unemployment and hopefully stir up discussion from the able panel meant to discuss the current state of the employment in our nation.

MANIFESTO PREVIEWS

It is important to start by noting that the youth through their various organisations, political and civic, placed as the first issue in the recently adopted national youth manifesto at the national youth festival.

Whereas the government rotates around consolidation of wealth creation schemes and enhancement of access to startup initiatives like the youth livelihood fund, it does not seem to present more solutions to the nation than in the notion of investment. It is indeed true that investment is an indisputable route to availing of jobs, we cannot ignore the fact that in our country’s case, it is an uphill task to inspire enough local investment because of the inequality rate and tax policies. Other initiatives of funding, that I have hinted on above have been an interesting failure, because economic capital is handed to people without management ability to run an effective economic venture, let alone have more than just an idea to warrant their funding. The reformed ten point program of the NRM highlights two key indicators of will, one is socio-economic transformation towards increasing markets and two ICT enhancement to tap into new employment opportunities for young people. These if pursued fully, would be a big step in the right direction, however though; it seems more and more apparent that the challenge of the establishment is not policy formulation but implementation.

The FDC on the other hand believes that the country needs to heavily support local investment, it subscribes to the notion that local capacity must outcompete foreign presence. The challenge with this position in my opinion is the idealism in it. To assume that Uganda provides a suitable environment by alienation of self from international relations presented by FDIs and regional and continental trading and development blocks like the EAC, the COMESA , the great lakes region and  IGAD, would be to at least, stir great debates of conflicts of interest. However though, the idea of local investment and growth of such capacity is a noble aspiration in a fight to get a country out of an unemployment catastrophe.

The Go-Forward movement, has preferred to own monopoly over provision of 21^st century jobs, as stated in their 8-point program, we would fault to pre-empt what it was they meant before looking at their detailed manifesto, so I will restrict myself to what is known to common men, such as i.

I will summarise the aspirations of other players subscribed under the TDA as of the TDA protocol, to suspend taxation on local investment to a degree that facilitates their rapid emanation and growth for a given period of time. These are noble aspirations, but the question of pragmatism comes out again. And the concept of TDA is only understood when discussed in the totality of it’s the protocol.

I hope this discussion today, shall give us insights into what we as young people are yet to see, and perhaps forge ideas into a future that we seem oblivious to. I look forward to an interesting intellectual discourse by the panelists as we together join efforts to address a common man’s problem, that of unemployment.

WE BUILD FOR THE FUTURE

……………………………………………………

JACOB EYERU

Eyjaco3@gmail.com

MEMBER, HOPE INITIATIVE CLUB MAKERERE.

·         PRESENTATION FOR THE HOPE INITIATIVE DIALOGUE HELD AT MAKERERE UNIVERSITY ON 25^th/9/2015

STATEMENT BY CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE ON THE 20TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE 1995 CONSTITUTION

THE 20TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE 1995 CONSTITUTION:

Today marks the 20th Anniversary of the 1995 Constitution as Amended.

Many, if not all African countries have Constitutions. It is one thing to have a Constitution; it is another to practice Constitutionalism.
Constitutionalism presupposes three things: 

i) A belief in the Constitution by many political parties and political leaders. If the main political actors do not believe in Constitutionalism, you may have a constitution as a mere document with no constitutionalism;
ii) Recognition of its importance by the main actors in the citizenry or population. If the Constitution is of relevance to a few people in the capital, in the political parties or academia; then you cannot have constitutionalism where there is no minimum consciousness by major actors amongst the population.
iii) Presence of organized political forces that are not only interested in constitutionalism but are ready to defend it.

Once you don’t have the above three elements, you cannot have constitutionalism – a belief needed by the major political actors, recognition of its importance by the citizens or its major actors and the presence of organized political forces that are prepared to defend it. If these tenets are not present, constitutionalism becomes an academic or religious ritual; the way like many people say “our father who art in heaven, or hail Mary full of grace”.

A constitution may also become a ritual if the above elements are not present among the political leaders, among the citizen and if there are no organized political forces prepared to defend it
The passing of the Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2015 yesterday, 11th August 2015 by majority MPs, after totally dis regarding the peoples’ views amounted to an overthrow of the 1995 Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, as amended.

The spirit of the Constitution is enshrined in its preamble and paragraph 5 of that preamble states that: EXERCISING our sovereign and inalienable right to determine the form of governance for our country, and having fully participated in the Constitution-making process. The sovereign and inalienable right of Uganda was usurped by the MPs through the failure of the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee of Parliament to integrate peoples’ views in their report and the subsequent total disregard of the peoples’ views by the whole House.

What we have in place after the 4th Amendment is a New Constitution that has no consensus of the people, which does not represent the peoples’ views and aspirations of the people on how they would like to be governed. This was in fact the birth of the 2nd "Pigeon Hole Constitution" of the Republic of Uganda.
Faced with a rubber stamp Parliament which ignores peoples views and goes ahead to amend the National Constitution ,the people of Uganda should therefore, strive to restore constitutional order premised on peoples’ views and aspirations on how they wish to be governed. We call upon the people to elect MPs that will respect their allegiance to the Constitution and commit to restore the sovereign and inalienable right of Ugandans by setting up a qualified Constitutional Review Commission to restore the supremacy of the people.

FOR GOD AND MY COUNTRY

Top of Form

Is the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee of Parliament ready for Constitutional Horse-Trading

Published in 9th June 2015 in Daily Monitor Uganda is currently undergoing a process of amending the Constitution. The Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee is holding public hearings on Constitutional Amendment Bill No 11 of 2015. This process will lead to the fourth amendment of the 1995 since its promulgation. It’s important to note that this is a unique approach to the process of amending the 1995 Constitution, save for the first amendment when a vote for a referendum was passed without quorum and was successfully challenged in the courts of law. In 2005, the two subsequent amendments were made after debate on the Sempebwa Constitutional Review Commission Report which had been constituted to receive and compile peoples’ views for Parliament’s consideration. A principled constitution building process means that everyone will need to lose something in order to gain something better. What distinguishes constitutional politics is that constitutional amendments will gain legitimacy only if they have the broadest base of supporters. So, political players of constitutional politics realize that their success also needs to be built on shared values and principles as the only way to give everybody a stake through constitutional horse – trading. The main reason why constitutional reforms succeed or fail in their countries is the way people in power behave at critical times when there is need for cooperation in stakeholder-driven constitutional reforms. In South Africa, the text of the constitution emerged as a final negotiated settlement between the leadership of two dominant parties during the post-apartheid era in 1994. Also in 2010, Kenya enacted a politically negotiated constitution after the polarization of the 2007 post-election violence. From these and numerous other examples, divided societies could draw the general lesson that constitution building is all about exclusionary pragmatic politics of accommodation. Yet while politics may be the decisive and necessary factor for the successful completion of constitution building, it involves the unacceptable risk that partisans will go no further than is needed to entrench their own primary interests, even if the distance required for a durable and broadly legitimate constitution requires more work. Constitutional Review Processes are concerned with the strategic use of principles to shape processes rather than constitutional content. The relevant principles are not merely an idealistic aspiration.  There must be inclusive dialogue in the process of constitutional reforms especially between and among political actors, often times because of their partisan interests. This prevents any single party acting alone from obstructing the completion or reverse the rules of the game at a future stage. Constitution building anticipates the politics of accommodation so that everyone owns the outcome and is supportive of the New Constitution that is representative of the broader views of all stakeholders. Shared principles are one way to give everyone a stake in constitutional horse-trading, while realistically acknowledging that constitution building is fundamentally political.

The 9^th Parliament has a duty to ensure that the amended Constitution has acceptability and legitimacy from all the stakeholders. A nation confident in a stable future of internal harmony and agreed purpose is not the typical site of constitution making today. A changed world calls the utility of the traditional model of the constitution into question and how high a bar that traditional model of an act of completion sets to establishing and legitimating constitutions for posterity.

Gone are the days when a constitution is seen as a contract, negotiated by appropriate representatives, concluded, signed, and observed. The constitution of new constitutionalism is, in contrast, a conversation, conducted by all concerned; open to new entrants and issues, seeking a workable formula that will be sustainable rather than assuredly stable.

The Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee has replaced the Odoki and Sempebwa Commissions and should genuinely assess peoples’ views to come up with representative amendments to the Constitution.

Constitutional making processes have no room for party positions and the only victors are the people.

Sarah Bireete (Lawyer)

Center for Constitutional Governance

s.bireete@ccgea.org