I have noted with concern the ongoing discussion about the positions of leadership in the three arms of government and the calls for gender parity at top levels, upon which I wish to convey the following views.
In British history, Queen Elizabeth I was one of the most prominent English monarchs, having reigned in the 16th Century.
Successive leaderships followed with both male and female crowns, including the notorious Victorian era in the 19th Century.
In all these reigns of the women as the Queens of England, the situation and treatment of women remained largely the same.
For example even when Elizabeth had executive powers, she never appointed fellow women even in advisory roles.
The oppression and exploitation of women remained prevalent in England until World War I when reforms started rolling out, with the prominent one being the 1928 reform that granted women voting rights.
In 1762, Czar Catherine became the Russian monarch after overthrowing her husband in a bloodless coup. Yet Catherine, with full executive powers, did not upgrade the status of women in Russia and they remained relegated to kitchen work.
Thanks to the Bolshevik Revolution, which ushered in communism that promoted free education for all (men and women).
21st Century Uganda has seen women as heads of government institutions. For example, women have headed Parliament for the last 15 years.
Women hold key positions in Cabinet, including the education and health docket. Yet Ugandan school girls are yet to have sanitary pads provided for them by government.
These anecdotes point to one key fact; elevating a few women in positions of power does not in itself improve the general status of women.
Instead, it creates a political ghetto for the elevated women and keeps the majority relegated.
Therefore, the war calling for appointment of the already elevated women into more powerful positions, seems to me, is a misguided approach to women empowerment as it sacrifices the greater cause of women to benefit a handful.
A deduction of the historical facts presented proves that women empowerment becomes possible only when proper laws and policies that promote inclusivity are pursued.
The problem of Uganda, as [Opposition activist Dr] Kiiza Besigye has always argued, is an institutional question – not personalities.
The call for inclusiveness necessitates a comprehensive institutional reform that promotes economic welfare of women and Ugandans in general – ensuring equitable access to education, employment opportunities, and an easier way to establish income generating vehicles.
Judging by the events in [President] Musevenic Uganda, it appears to me that only revolution with a targeted system and policy reform can help us arrive at that milestone.
I hope that with concerted efforts, we can focus on pursuing a socio-economic reform process to help us arrive in the promised land.