On July 28, 2005, a referendum was held.
‘Do you agree to open up the political space to allow those who wish to join different organisations/parties to do so to compete for political power?’ was the question. Some 3.6 million Ugandans, or 92.44 percent of those who participated in the exercise, voted in favour of a return to a multiparty political dispensation. Only 297,865 people (7.56 percent) voted in favour of retaining the Movement system. The referendum lifted the shackles that had been placed on political party activity for a period of 19 years and five months.
The shackles were first placed on the parties in 1986 when the National Resistance Movement (NRM) passed Legal Notice No. 1, which suspended several provisions of the Constitution and ‘all forms of political activities and any other form of political activities’ until further notice. The same instrument directed that all forms of gatherings had to be cleared by police. The National Resistance Council (NRC) tightened the shackles during debate on the Constituent Assembly (CA) statute of 1993.
The NRC slapped a ban on the recruitment of members by political parties. It also did not allow parties to open branches or hold delegates’ conferences. Campaigning under the banner of any political party was also banned. It was during the same debate that the politics of ‘individual merit’ was born. The NRC decided that candidates who desired to participate in the CA would only contest on ‘individual merit’. They could not use their affiliations or memberships to existing political parties for purposes of their campaigns.
There was no reprieve during the making of the Constitution. On June 20, 1995, the CA voted to constitutionalise the ban on political party activity. Article 269 barred political parties from engaging in ‘any activities that may interfere with the Movement political system’, which was subsequently written in the 1995 Constitution. Political parties were barred from operating branches, holding public rallies and sponsoring candidates for political office for as long as the Movement system was in force.
It is more than 20 years since the parties were unshackled, but the thinking is that multiparty democracy has failed to take off as it should have done. Critics say one of the problems is that the ruling NRM government simply will not allow parties to operate the way they should have. Their activities are heavily restricted, with the Public Order Management Act (POMA) as the main tool that has been used to keep them on a leash. Police, too, they say, continues to operate as if the provisions of Legal Notice No. 1 and Article 269 are still in force.
Disruption of public rallies and meetings by firing teargas and live ammunition continues despite the fact that the Constitutional Court declared in June 2019 that Section 36 of the POMA was unconstitutional. The ruling meant that police no longer had the power to disperse public gatherings.
Individual merit
The assessment of different analysts and observers is that political parties are weak and not grounded in ideology. Their membership, too, remains largely ignorant. The parties, they argue, have failed to grow over the last 20 years. There are, however, those who think if parties have failed to grow, it is not because their activities have been constantly interrupted or interfered with.
Retired Makerere University don, Prof Oweyegha Afunaduula, who heads the think tank, Centre for Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis, blames the situation on the politics of individual merit, which he says has eroded political pluralism. ‘There has been an exaggerated tendency for people not endorsed by their parties to represent them in elections to choose to stand as Independents, which resuscitates, entrenches and perpetuates individual merit approach to politics in Uganda, thereby undermining the solidity, integrity and strength of the political parties, including the NRM itself,’ he argues.
He points to the rise in the number of Independent candidates who contest for parliamentary and local council elections, often after losing the primaries of the parties that they claim to belong to, as the biggest testimony that the politics of individual merit continues to thrive. ‘When the Independents present themselves to the electorate, they don’t campaign for their parties or the presidents of their parties. They cast themselves as politicians pursuing their own political, economic and social interests, although they are able to convince the electorate that they will represent its interests. Therefore, Independents are the vehicles through which individual merit approach to politics is preserved and perpetuated,’ he says.
Individualism
Dr Livingstone Sewanyana (PhD), the Executive Director of the Foundation for Human Rights (FHRI), weighs in, saying even political parties are perceived or supported not because of their respective ideologies, or the programmes of action as presented in their manifesto, but on the basis of who heads them. ‘The parties are seen more in light of who leads them than what they stand for. It’s difficult now to ask anyone what the ideology of any party is. When you talk about the People’s Front for Freedom (PFF), they will say it is Dr Kizza Besigye. When you talk about the National Unity Platform (NUP), they will say Bobi Wine (Robert Kyagulanyi). So people see more of the individual at the helm of the party than the party,’ Dr Sewanyana says.
That, it would appear, is a problem that has plagued the parties for quite a while now.
One of the conclusions of an analysis of the organisational and administrative strength of all parties and how they could be assisted to become strong alternatives to the NRM, which was sanctioned by the Netherlands Institute for Multiparty Democracy (NIMD) in 2016, was that the founding presidents of the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) and the ruling NRM were bigger than their parties. It looks like this is not about to go away.
Defiance
It has always been argued that Independent candidates have been products of weaknesses within the parties. Proponents of that school of thought have always pointed to loopholes in the party primaries and other methods that parties have often employed to arrive at who represents them at what level. Most NRM-leaning Independents have always defied their party and contested as Independent candidates even after losing the party’s primary. In the 2021 elections, more than half of the 2,801 nominated candidates were Independent. A total of 74 won the elections, making independents the second largest group in the 11th Parliament, behind NRM.
Seven ministers also got nominated to contest for parliamentary seats despite having lost the NRM primaries. The list included Maj Gen Kahinda Otafiire, who was the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs; Ms Jessica Alupo, who was the Minister of Education; Ms Sarah Opendi, who was the State minister for Primary Health Care; Mr Asuman Kiyingi, who was the minister for Regional Cooperation; Mr Henry Banyenzaki, who was the State Minister for Economic Monitoring; and Ms Aidah Nantaba, who was the junior Minister for Lands.
That story has continued into the current election cycle, with Ms Persis Namuganza, the State minister for Lands, Housing and Urban Development; Mr Fred Ngobi Gume, the State minister for Cooperatives; Mr David Bahati, the State minister for Industry; and Maj Gen Jeje Odong, the minister for Foreign Affairs, nominated to contest as independent candidates.
He thinks Mr Museveni and the NRM have what it takes to bring the tale of Independents to an end. ‘You do not undermine the power of the incumbent party. It has the capacity to unleash itself on a candidate, and that candidate will certainly fail miserably. In the past, people stuck with their parties. If you were for the Democratic Party (DP), you stayed in DP even if you lost. You would not say I am going to be Independent,’ Prof Makara says.
Mr Atukwase Primus Bahigi, the country director of the Netherlands Institute for Multiparty Democracy (NIMD), weighs in, saying if Mr Museveni has not applied the rules of thumb on them, it is because they pose no real threat. ‘If the patron is satisfied or is not threatened by an Independent, then the patron will be like, ‘It is okay, you contest. After all, you who are Independent and you, who are in the party, are all my people’. The party is threatened, the flagbearer is threatened, but the patron is not threatened,’ he argues.
Advantage Museveni
Prof Afunaduula thinks if President Museveni has continued to handle Independents with kid gloves, it is because he stands to benefit from the situation. ‘While this vehicle (Independents standing on individual merit) has undermined and continues to undermine the growth and development of pluralism in general and multiparty politics in particular, President Museveni has used them to great effect to advance his interests in Parliament,’ he argues. Mr Bahigi does not seem to agree. He argues that it would not be right to blame it all on Mr Museveni.
He points to the commercialisation of politics. Many people, he says, are entering politics because of what they stand to gain from it. ‘Politics has been overly commercialised. At the same time, people view it as a source of income. So when people go into elections, a majority are going there as dealers and not leaders. When people go into that space as dealers and not leaders, their first interest is profit, not what the people benefit. In such circumstances, they are in parties as vehicles that will deliver them. You cannot stop such a person from standing as an Independent,’ Mr Bahigi says.
Can there be an end to the politics of individual merit? Prof Afunaduula does not see an end to the emergence of Independents and the politics of individual merit.
‘It is likely that the number of politicians seeking to stand as Independents, exploiting the individual merit approach to politics to enter Parliament and councils, will not decline. Consequently, we should not expect to see strong parties with strong leadership. We should expect President Museveni to use Independents in NRM and other parties to entrench his hold on power,’ Prof Afunaduula says. Those who are keen on seeing political parties grow will be hoping that his reading is wrong.
What they say
“The parties are seen more in light of who leads them than what they stand for. It’s difficult now to ask anyone what the ideology of any party is. When you talk about the People’s Front for Freedom (PFF), they will say that it is Dr Kizza Besigye. When you talk about the National Unity Platform (NUP), they will say that Bobi Wine (Robert Kyagulanyi). So people see more of the individual at the helm of the party than the party,’ Dr Livingstone Sewanyana (PhD), the executive director of the Foundation for Human Rights Initiative
“Politics has been overly commercialised. At the same time, people view it as a source of income. So when people go into elections, a majority are going there as dealers and not leaders. When people go into that space as dealers and not leaders, their first interest is profit, not what the people benefit,’ says Mr Atukwase Primus Bahigi, the country director of NIMD.