Would unity in opposition do the trick?

Daily Monitor's Allan Ssekamatte looks at the need for the opposition to stay together

If President Museveni wins his fourth term in office next February, it will be as much an endorsement of his leadership, as it will be an indictment on the opposition for their failure to provide evidence that they can be better governors of this country.

US Ambassador Jerry Lanier was literally speaking for most apolitical Ugandans when he delivered a stunning indictment about the political opposition in a cable recently released by whistle-blowing website Wikileaks.

The diplomat was shooting from the hip when he wrote: “Opposition political parties, however, are fractured, politically immature and greatly outnumbered in Parliament. They control no government ministries (no surprise there); and are not skillful using either press or protest, their primary political tools. Nor can the opposition provide a coherent and attractive platform of proposals to counter the NRM. And it is by no means clear the opposition would improve governance in Uganda in anyway.”

Inter-Party Cooperation spokesperson, Ms Margaret Wokuri, is shocked the American diplomat has a very low opinion of the opposition. “That is his assessment but we are politically mature. You can go to our website and see our manifesto. We have concrete proposals. We are emphasising five key issues; which are the economy and job creation, education, healthcare, infrastructure and agriculture. These issues are affecting all Ugandans,” she said.

By-elections held after the 2006 presidential and parliamentary polls were the best opportunity for the opposition to eat into the National Resistance Movement’s “near total accumulation of power”, as Lanier put it, but they blew it. On more than one occasion, failure to field a joint candidate, or to support the strongest candidate resulted in defeat. The opposition won 4 out of the 18 by-elections held after the 2006 polls, but squandered an opportunity to eat into NRM’s absolute majority in at least 5 more constituencies.

Abdu Katuntu (Bugweri, FDC), Dr Michael Lulume Bayiga (Buikwe South, DP), Betty Nambooze (Mukono North,DP) and Jack Wamanga Wamai (Mbale Municipality, FDC) were the legislators who enabled the opposition to capture 22 per cent of the available seats.

Democratic Party strategists were openly furious that Forum for Democratic Change colleagues in the opposition failed to back their stronger candidates in Kyadondo North and Kalungu East. Regina Bakitte Nakazzi’s loss by 60 votes (8,123 compared to 8,183) to NRM’s Robert Ssebunya Kasule was particularly painful to DP because FDC’s Pollyne Grace Nakabuye took 1,900 of the opposition vote.

Following the death of Winnie Makumbi, DP, the former Rubaga Division chairman, the opposition failed to rally around a single candidate, handing victory to NRM’s Peter Sematimba. It is instructive that the former radio deejay won 15,799 or 47 per cent of the ballots cast beating DP’s Moses Makumbi with 9,807 (29 per cent). FDC’s Joyce Ssebugwawo meanwhile took away 4,969 or 15 per cent of the opposition vote, with Justin Ssendikadiwa of the Social Democratic Party picking up 1,748 votes or 5 per cent. DP once again had the stronger candidate but failed to get opposition backing.

DP legal secretary Fred Mukasa Mbidde, who lost the Kalungu East by-election to NRM’s Umaru Lule Mawiya by 922 votes, is however adamant that rigging is a bigger threat to opposition candidates than cross-party bickering. He says the FDC candidate in his constituency got less than 100 votes, which could not have altered the overall outcome of the poll. “It is imperative that you look at the total votes of opposition candidates.

The character of the candidate and quality of elections is more important. Rigging can deny you even though you have the right support. More often, results announced are not the real results and this requires different action,” he told Uganda Decides. He said that when Bakitte went to court, she was challenging the validity of the announced results, rather than decrying Nakabuye’s spoiling role.

Mbidde also denied that DP refused to join IPC in retaliation against FDC for their failure to back them in various by-elections. He described any perceived differences with FDC as clashes of personalities.

“We refused to join IPC for the very reason Olara Otunnu (UPC leader) withdrew. We desire to establish a firm opposition with solid and robust organisations called political parties, so that we can win power as institutions, not as individuals. Our calculations are to deny the winner (of presidential elections) 51 per cent of the vote and force a rerun so that we have a coalition government,” Mbidde said.

FDC vice president Salaamu Musumba, who lost by-elections for the Kamuli district chairmanship to NRM’s Steven Mubiru by less than 2,000 votes due to the presence of a certain Moses Paul Lubowa who collected 7,171 votes, later showed her disappointment when she said they didn’t really need DP. “Let them go to hell. We already have an established protocol and arrangement to follow and if they (DP) accept to join, they will have to abide by it,” she said.

Another feature of the by-elections was the low voter turnout which pointed to a lack of mobilisation. For example, Rubaga Division had over 170,000 registered voters at the time of the by-election Sematimba won.

Do manifestos reflect people aspirations?

Michael Mubangizi of Observer asks the ultimate question in this article. And we answer, yes, IPC's manifesto reflects people's aspirations!

A lot of promises are being made by different political aspirants in next year’s general election. Some of these promises are feasible while others are empty and can’t be achieved. But an important question is whether these promises meet the needs and demands of the electorate who are meant to be the beneficiaries.

While it may not be possible to tell the actual needs of the people because they differ, depending on who you talk to, groups like the Uganda National NGO Forum and Uganda Governance Monitoring Platform have come up with a document dubbed the ‘Citizen Manifesto’ that summarises what the authors believe are the aspirations of ordinary citizens.

The document also contains what its architects define as the concerns of the ordinary people, the kind of Uganda they desire, key national values, interests and demands in the economy, society, politics and policy.
In it, Ugandans have proposed eight national values upon which governance and development should be based: Reverence for God, equity, tolerance, constitutionalism, hard work, moral uprightness, national solidarity and discipline.

Arthur Larok, the focal person for Uganda Governance Monitoring Platform, who initiated the manifesto, says the different manifestos on show during this electoral season have significant convergence with the citizen’s manifesto. He personally puts the convergence at 70%.

“We all live in the same country and face the same problems,” he explains. He cites proposals to institute a truth and reconciliation commission, a constitutional review on major issues and guaranteeing federalism, which he says are in line with the views in the citizen manifesto.

Larok, however, adds that some parties make glossy promises without serious commitment or track record on delivery. He, for instance, says NRM’s promise of fighting corruption can no longer be believed. Larok also points out that most manifestos lack detail on how their promises will be implemented. He cites transformation of agriculture, a promise made by all political parties but with no details on how they plan to deliver on it.

According to Larok, NRM’s NAADS programme “is not a strategy for agricultural transformation.”
The electoral promises of presidential candidates on managing the economy, Larok says, are also wanting.
He says most political parties focus on private sector-led growth and economy, yet the citizens want a balance between private and state ownership. Citing agriculture, roads, railway, education, health and security, Larok argues that certain sectors can’t be left to the private sector.

He says the country is facing disparities in the quality of services offered in the private and government institutions because the state has abandoned some sectors to the private sector.

Larok notes that now there are excellent health and education facilities in private schools and hospitals, but very deplorable services in public institutions.

Citizen manifesto

According to the citizen manifesto, Ugandans want a review of the country’s economic model to restore state ownership and shepherd critical areas that drive the economy.

Other demands include subsidising critical agro-based industries and where necessary protecting them from harmful external competition; investment in agriculture and revival of cooperatives; massive investments in economic infrastructure, like energy, roads, rail and water transport; reduction in the costs of production and making the Ugandan economy more competitive, plus ending corruption.

The citizen manifesto lists ten concerns that citizens want addressed: fighting corruption and poverty, investing in agriculture, stemming population growth, improving the transport system, health services, education system and intensifying civic consciousness and environmental degradation.

The document also lists key demands that people want addressed in politics, society and economy.
In politics, it says people want strengthening of state institutions, a review and amendment of the constitution to take care of unresolved historical questions and an end to the creation of districts, the establishment of an inclusive government and a truth and reconciliation commission.

The citizens also want a fully fledged ministry of people and culture to help Ugandans appreciate their history, culture and identity, reclaim and conserve positive cultural resources for development.

Others are implementation of Kiswahili as the second official language to forge unity ahead of the EAC full integration and strengthening of the Equal Opportunities Commission to end development imbalances.

The document says the citizens want 15% of the national budget to go into the agriculture sector. They also want cooperatives revived.

While most parties promise to revive cooperatives, PDP’s Dr Abed Bwanika’s manifesto promises to invest 15% in agriculture. The FDC/IPC manifesto promises a 12% increase.

Bwanika’s manifesto also promises to revolutionalise the agriculture sector to turn Uganda into a food basket and raise productivity through improved farming practices and better access to markets.

In a bid to shift from subsistence to commercial farming and raise household incomes to a minimum Shs 20 million per household annually, NRM also promises to increase investments in agriculture in the next five years.

The party, however, does not specify the exact amount but says NRM will do this by increasing investments in several areas. It cites investing in NAADS, commercialization of agricultural, agriculture research, value addition and post-harvest management, pest and disease control.

Bidandi Ssali’s manifesto promises to review the operations of programmes such as NAADS, Prosperity for All and the Plan for Modernization of Agriculture. It promises to ease the process of accessing credit. The party doesn’t talk of increasing funding to agriculture. It instead talks of targeting small-scale farmers to boost their productivity.

However, Bidandi Ssali urges voters not to vote for candidates basing on their promises because some of them have a history of not delivering on them. Larok agrees with him on this and advises voters to consider the track record of both individuals and the parties they represent.

“It is not all about the promises but delivering also,” he says, though stressing that promises are a good starting point.

The citizen manifesto arose from findings contained in a 104-page document titled, “Our idea of a peaceful and prosperous Uganda with happy people, a National Citizen’s Manifesto Synthesis report.”

According to that report, the process of developing the citizen manifesto was very consultative. Information was collected from at least three districts from each of the 13 sub-regions. The sub-regions are Ankole, Acholi, Buganda, Bunyoro, Karamoja, Kigezi, Lango, Bukedi. Others are Busoga, West Nile, Sebei, Teso and Toro.

Women, teachers, farmers, youth and cultural organizations were among those consulted. The methods of data collection included citizen dialogues, radio talk shows and interviews with key informants such as spiritual, political and opinion leaders.

Others were desk reviews and analysis of governance issues from different government and non-governmental reports, the media and inter-agency processes, as well as the national youth essay competition which attracted 200 entries.

Two hundred citizen consultative meetings and dialogues were held across the country. The citizen manifesto is an initiative of the Uganda Governance Monitoring Platform, a civil society governance and monitoring group comprising 17 Ugandan and five Dutch NGOs.

Over 90% of its budget was funded by the Democracy Monitoring Programme. The participating NGOs included Anti- Corruption Coalition of Uganda, Foundation for Human Rights Initiative, Uganda Debt Network, Uganda Joint Christian Council, Uganda Women’s Network, Uganda National NGO Forum and Caritas Uganda.