FOR GOOD GOVERNANCE, DELINK GOVT AND THE STATE

The Constitution of Uganda cannot steer this country to democratic order because it suffers from internal contradictions. If independence of the three arms of the State is the fulcrum of democratic governance, having the President appoint judicial officers, 20% of the legislature and the entire State infrastructure, as Uganda’s constitution provides, raises the concept of confusion to unprecedented levels.  The State of Uganda must be delinked from Govt, even if the USA does not fully delink them, as some people argue. Uganda’s constitution must be designed to serve the interests of Ugandans, not emulate other countries’ constitutions.

                                                                                            

Govt serves on a management contract, which may or may not be renewed by voters.  It might even not serve the full contract term due to impeachment, death or resignation of the president.  The State on the other hand should be permanent and non-partisan, providing infrastructure to any Govt and all citizens, without fear or favour. Fusing Govt and the State, the way the Constitution of Uganda provides, creates a powerful center, patronage, job insecurity and sycophancy. Delinking the State from Govt guarantees job security, meritocracy, efficiency, equity, predictability and continuity.

Uganda’s constitution instructs that the President appoints all political officials and non-political public officials from the rank of commissioner upwards.  President Museveni has used this provision to appoint all NRM politicians who lost in their Party primaries and National Elections as ambassadors, RDCs, Presidential Advisors, Board Members of Statutory Bodies and Commissioners of State institutions.  So, when Uganda Federal Alliance went to Lira on 17 Dec 2012 to launch the National Referendum program to trim the powers of the presidency, an activity compliant with the Constitution under Article 255(1), the RDC, Town Clerk, RPC, DPC wouldn’t let us, because, according to the official letter we received, “the Lira Local leadership might be misunderstood to be collaborating with UFA against the President”. We explained to them that we were operating within the law, but  “we might be misunderstood…., especially that Hon. Norbert Mao, President of DP, was the Chief Guest!”, they said!

The opposition can’t engage in any political activity in peace, because the IGP and all State Departments’ officials owe loyalty to the appointing authority!

Opposition Ugandans like Anne Mugisha had to denounce her opposition conscience in order for the NRM Govt to second her for a UN job. Prof Kanyeihamba who would not denounce his opposition conscience wasn’t seconded to a UN job by the NRM Govt, so the job went to a non Ugandan. Dr Otunu had to seek citizenship elsewhere to get a UN job, because the Govt of Uganda would not second him!

While all this discrimination happens, Parliament, whose ONLY constitutional role under Article 79 of the Constitution of Uganda is to “make laws…for the peace, order, development and good governance of Uganda” are busy fighting consequences of a bad constitution, which they have authority to amend!

Fortunately, Article 255(1) of the constitution provides for ordinary citizens to make direct decisions, without reference to Parliament, the Executive or Judiciary, through referenda. Citizens only need to raise 10% signatures of registered voters, from at least 1/3 of districts of Uganda, submit them to the Electoral Commission, which must then organize a referendum on the contentious matter.

Ugandans must hail Hon Norbert Mao, President of the Democratic Party and Hon Isha Otto, former MP for Oyam County, for being the first and second signatories, respectively, to the petition for a national referendum to overhaul the constitution and trim the authority of the presidency, so that no public official is blackmailed into partisanship while on duty.

Beti Olive Kamya-Turwomwe

Chief Petitioner,

National Referendum to amend the Constitution

UGANDA's JUBILEE ACTIVITES

Uganda’s Golden Jubilee

For 49 years, it’s been known that in October, 2012, Uganda would celebrate her 50^th Independence Day Anniversary – yet year 50 is here but there is no indication that there is anything to commemorate!  There is “The Uganda Jubilee Handbook 2012”, courtesy of Uganda Jubilee Network, a consortium of Faith organizations. (The) Daily Monitor and New Vision have each reserved a weekly column to mark the jubilee, the NGO Forum are planning something low-key, known to very few and some other organizations are individually planning things, but where is the official Govt of Uganda plan?

There is likely to be uncoordinated flurry of activities without a common theme, leading to triplication of costs, but leaving no mark of the occasion. What happened to old-fashioned, coordinated, long-term planning? I would not be surprised if, to some people, the “obvious” theme is “consolidating the achievements of NRM” all dressed up in yellow!!

Remember the respective 1977 and 1978 Church of Uganda and Catholic Church Centenary celebrations? They were launched in the January of the respective years, at the village church level, with a national theme that run horizontally through all churches and vertically through the Churches hierarchy, building upward momentum through the village, parish, archdeaconry, diocese, reaching crescendo at the Archdioceses, with celebrations that lasted the whole month of December with different activities each day.

As part of the centenary commemoration, each level of the church hierarchy was required to perform a modest development activity such as renovation of the church or acquisition of a musical facility for the church.

Construction of the (“defunct”!) Church of Uganda Centenary House on Kampala Road was inaugurated in 1977 as the major activity to celebrate 100 years of the Anglican Church in Uganda.

Themed songs and poems were composed. Themed music, dance and drama festivals and competitions were held in schools, churches, youth and women groups. Thematic clothes were worn - almost everybody was drawn into the “Centenary” mood because of activities that were visibly, audibly and psychologically coordinated.  Is it possible that 35 years later, in the global village of internet, professional consultancy and advisory services, Ugandans can’t do better than in those “..dark days of Amin”?  

I suggest that while it is too late, it must be done. The appropriate Ministry should commission (obviously they are incapable of putting together) a program that should begin with each household required to do something for themselves, e.g. plant a tree in their homestead, paint their house or formalize their marriage. This should lead to Village Councils initiating a community project and express, in writing, their consensus view on the good and ugly in their village, during the past 50 years. Seminars should be held parishes, sub counties and districts, on a given topic, conclusions of which should be compiled in a “Golden Jubilee Book of unedited views of Ugandans of the fifty years of independence - the past, present and future”. Views of the young, youthful, middle aged and old should be captured separately. Songs, poems and drama shows on a national theme should be encouraged and construction of a National Asset, such as Mulago Hospital should be seriously considered.  Through such activities, true feelings of Ugandans will be manifested.

Now that we are late, planning for the celebration should begin immediately, and 9 October 2012 should be used to launch a year-long program of Jubilee activities that should end on 9 October, 2013 - with the official opening of the National Asset.

Beti Olive Kamya – Turwomwe (0783 438 201)

President

Uganda Federal Alliance (UFA)

UFA HAS BEST STRATEGY TO FORCE CHANGE IN UGANDA

Public discontent in Uganda is no longer a matter of speculation, but reality, to which several political players have responded differently: - (i) Parliament has attempted the legislative channel to block oil contracts and State House budget, censure Ministers and the Governor of Bank of Uganda, impeach the president, and now, restore terms’ limit, yet, one year in office, they have nothing to write home about. (ii) A4C have been walking for over a year to overthrow Museveni, and still walking. (iii) The Clergy  have sought the pulpit, but may need a miracle as well (iv) Owekitiibwa Muliika and Bishop Nyiringiye are traversing the country,  agitating against the status quo (v) Some Opposition Parties convey their frustration through press briefings  and (vi) Uganda Federal Alliance (UFA) is working on referenda to change the governance system and to restore terms’ limit. In the olden days of “Snow-White and the Ugly Queen” Fairy-Tale, the question would be asked “So Who Is The Fairest Of Them All?”

I love the referenda route because not only is it rooted in the constitution through Article 255 which provides for “citizens’ right to demand referenda ON ANY ISSUE”, it is also “SMART”- as in Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time bound, attributes globally acclaimed as basic tenets of a viable project. 

UFA’s “referendum project” is Specific, it specifically seeks to replace unitary with federalism and to restore terms’ limit. It is Measurable because we need to collect 10% signatures of registered voters from 1/3 of total districts in Uganda (i.e. 37 districts) and present them as petitioners to the EC, upon which the EC MUST organize a referendum. Collecting petitioners’ signatures from just 37 districts, moreover, where one can pick districts with the least voter population makes the referendum option Achievable. If it took me two weeks to collect signatures from 113 districts to support my nomination as Presidential candidate, operating in just 37 districts is Realistic. Once the petition for a referendum is submitted to the Electoral Commission; the law specifies Timelines for each successive activity during the referendum process, within which the Electoral Commission must operate or else suffer dire constitutional repercussions.

Once the petition is delivered to the EC, the EC must verify the petitioners’ signatures within two weeks then issue a Certificate of Compliance, after which the EC has one month to declare the referendum date. The EC then has one month to cause the framing of the Referendum Question to the satisfaction of the referendum promoter(s), after which, the EC has two months of voter education, and one month to display of the Voter Register. The referendum must then be held and results declared immediately. According to Article 255(3) “the referendum results are binding on all organs and agencies of the State, and on all persons and organizations in Uganda….” - in short, once we submit the required signatures of petitioners to the Electoral Commission, the referendum process is regulated by the Referendum ACT like clockwork, or else the EC faces the wrath of the constitution.

The referendum option is free of Party Caucuses, Cabinet or Parliamentary Rules and Procedure, it is The Peoples’ Process! It has a clear beginning with specified activities, milestones, timelines, destination and output, not to mention the opportunity to traverse the country, at State expense, sensitizing Ugandans about the benefits of power devolution and term limits, plus, political party bosses cannot order the public what not to discuss. With the referendum option, Ugandans need not lose their limbs, lives and property, fighting police. They can just sit home, listen to “Yes” and “No” debates on radio and wait to vote. Yes, there will be challenges in the referendum process as there are elsewhere, but, it provides the most conclusive, safest and clearest sequence of activities to deal with the current impasse.

Beti Olive Kamya-Turwomwe

President

Uganda federal Alliance (UFA)

ufapresident@gmail.com

RESPONSE TO GAWAYA TEGULLE'S ARTICLE!!

This is in response to Gawaya Tegulle’s article titled  “Beti Kamya’s ‘referendum’ on federalism is misconceived” which was published in The Daily Monitor of 15 March, 2012. He argued that federalism not being a political system as defined in Article 69 of the Constitution of Uganda, the federal question cannot be settled under Article 74 of the Constitution, as proposed by UFA, because it provides for “Change of Political Systems…” , yet federalism is not a political system. Other people, like Buganda Govt Ministers Peter Mayiga and Apollo Makubuya have voiced similar views to Tegulle’s.  I could  agree with them to a large extent but I could also seek the Constitutional Court’s arbitration on the universal meaning of “political system”, Article 69 of the constitution of Uganda notwithstanding.

My concern, though, is whether their nay arguments (and spirit) carry the federal agitators’ wishes closer to their “hearts’ desire” or just hold it stagnant, at the status quo.

“Where there is the Will, there is a Way” is an old adage, so in the interest of moving the “federal question” forward, if Article 74 (recommended by UFA) cannot provide the channel for settling the forty-six year old argument, surely, I expect the federal agitators to propose another channel, not just dismiss a possible route!  In everyday life, it is common for one  disinclined to undertake a task or journey, to find excuses not to. They decry insecurity, bad roads, inadequate resources, ill-health, wild animals… – anything to discourage forward movement. On the other hand, those determined to move forward will adopt a positive attitude and propose alternatives that encourage forward movement, in-spite of risks, known and unknown.

Typically, the anti-referendum group are eloquent on why we should not move under Article 74, but they do not offer opinion on how else we might move, save cling to good old fashioned, twenty-six-year old negotiation-with-the-president, which, incidentally, has no constitutional backing. Their adamant “CAN’T” is loud and clear but not their alternative proposal to move federalism a step forward from the forty-six-year-old position! 

Determined to break the barrier of presidential whims and in the spirit of minimizing negative and diversionary media engagements with fellow federalists, UFA resolved to evoke Article 255, which is not confined to “change of political system”.

 We combed the political map of Uganda, the Constitution, and found that under Article 255, calling for a referendum on “any issue” is not only shorter, cheaper and friendlier than under Article 74, but actually, several matters can be settled through multiple referenda held on the same day!

Hurray!, we are now going to hit two birds with one stone, by holding two referenda, on the same day, on: (i) Change of system to federalism (ii) Re-instate a limit on the number of terms that the president of Uganda may hold office.

Agitation for federalism and re-instatement of presidential term limits have dominated the political stage in Uganda for a long time. Besides, all political parties that participated in the 2011 General Elections, except NRM, professed, in their manifestos, their intention to “introduce” federalism and reinstate presidential term limits. It is for that matter that UFA decided that the two issues are too important to wait for the next election, due in 2016, and so resolved to re-table them before the people, through a referendum, under Article 255.

There are many constitutional avenues available to settle contentious issues, without necessarily awaiting the next election or resorting to costly military engagement.

Beti Olive Kamya

President

Uganda Federal Alliance

0783 438 201 / 0751 590 542

ufapresident@gmail.com

DAILY MONITOR EDITORIAL ON FEDERALISM

The Daily Monitor’s Editorial of 12 January 2012 titled “Can federation cut national cake fairly?” raised issues, questioning UFA’s motives for promoting federalism -: (i) “…parochial desire to supplant centralized governance with divisive Buganda nationalism?” (ii) a platform for “uncharitable Ganda nationalists…to secede? (iii) the unlikely answer to “equitable re-distribution of resources” (iv) “unmindful of the economic plight of “marginal and depressed regions…?”. This response is intended to put those reservations to rest.

UFA’s brand of federalism slightly differs from ‘federo”, which, admittedly, looks like a hi-breed of monarchism and federalism. UFA advocates for federalism for the entire Uganda, and in this, differs from FDC, DP and UPC, who, in their respective manifestos, promised federalism for only those regions which want it. UFA believes that federalism is good and should be promoted throughout the country, even among regions that do not want it, because we believe that their abhorance for federalism is premised on ignorance, arising out of calculated distortions of the system’s values, by self-seeking politicians, hence, UFA’s deliberate policy to de-Bugandanize and Ugandanize federalism.

During the 2011 Elections, UFA fielded 65 Parliamentary candidates, only 24 of whom are from Buganda, 125 Local Governments’ Councilors, only 55 of whom are from Buganda. There is not a district in Uganda where UFA did not field a candidate, but more importantly, we won District / Sub county councillorships of Bukedea, Moyo, Manafwa, Bulambuli, Ntungamo, Luweero, Kumi, Pallisa, Malera, Kagadi, Kotido, Kaberamaido, Aleptong, Kalangala and others.

UFA’s Chairman, Peter Mayeku is from Bugisu, Vice President, Boniface Oniba is from Acholi, National Chief Mobilizer, Dr Waiswa is from Busoga, Chairperson of the Electoral Commission, Christine Kisubi is from Budaka, Chairman of the Federal System Development Commission, Yosam Baguma is from Kigezi, Minister of Finance, Ndugu Omong is from Lango, Chairman of the UFA Youth League, Kennedy Oluma is from Arua, Chairman of UFA UK Chapter, Akim Odong is from Acholi - how can all these people be working to promote “Ganda nationalism and secession?

Personally, with Banyankore children, a Kikuyu mother, Langi first cousins and Japadhola nieces/nephews, not only would I find life hard as a secessionist, I also happen to think it is defeatist. My view is that if you are not getting your fair share of anything, fight for it, but do not run to hide, which secessionism look like, to me!

As for regions that are “marginal and depressed”, Uganda does not have to re-invent the wheel, because old federal states like the USA, Canada, Australia, Malaysia and Nigeria already invented the “equalization grant” strategy, where, the better-off regions pay a special tax to support less endowed ones. This strategy is even provided for in the Regional Tier Act, which foresaw that regions are never equally endowed.

It is worth noting, though, that federalism is not just about resource sharing but more about policies and priorities. Japan does not have oil, but invested in human resource development. They are now world suppliers of electronics and vehicles. Dubai, one of seven Emirates in the UAE, owes its success story not to natural resources, but to a tax-free-trade policy. Sharija, another emirate, has oil but does not have the free-tax policy, and is not quite as rich as Dubai. Federalism creates space for creativity and innovation by different regions, instead of the socialist-like system where all regions wait for the center to think and plan for them.

Uganda will be better off with federalism for Uganda, than with “federo”, which Buganda, FDC, UPC and DP favour.

Beti Olive Namisango Kamya

President

Uganda Federal Alliance (UFA)

0783 438 201 / 0751 590 542

E mail: ufapresident@gmail.com   

PARLIAMENT FIGHTING CONSEQUENCES..

The 9^th Parliament must be congratulated for fighting corruption.

My concern, though, is that they are shooting at consequences of Uganda’s problem rather than its cause. Corruption, human rights abuse, electoral malpractices, Mbabazi, Basajjabalaba are consequences, NOT the cause of autocratic rule, therefore, fighting them offers temporary relief, not cure.

Imagine a garbage heap where waste from an abattoir are dumped. Maggots, a consequence of rotting waste will attract marabou stock (kaloli) and flies. Neighboring residents might chase away the marabou stock with stones and spray the flies, but since they come searching for maggots, they will keep coming back as long as the abattoir functions. A permanent solution would lie in investing in an effluent system which treats waste, at the abattoir – expensive the investment might be, but it’s the only way through which maggots that attract marabou stock and flies can be stopped.

Similarly, if termites threaten to destroy a nearby structure, harvesting edible ants flying out of their anthill will not save the structure. The anthill must be demolished and Queen Ant removed, else, the termites will never go away. There is no easy way out of a huge problem. Parliament should fight the termites and marabou stock (read corruption and human rights’ abuse) but more importantly, they must go for the root CAUSE of problem - the queen ant or the abattoir (read the constitution or the system).

The cause of Uganda’s problem is her Constitution, which makes the president Head of State, Head of Govt and Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces.  S(he) appoints the vice president, prime minister, chief justice, ministers, heads of statutory bodies, judges, commissioners, RDCs, Presidential advisors, vice chancellors, CAOs, ambassadors and permanent secretaries. S(he) apportions the budget at his/her discretion. In Uganda, the president is the sole employer, provider and benefactor, in short, displease him at your peril, yet, while holding office, s(he) is not liable to court proceedings!

There is a feeble attempt by the constitution to give parliament an oversight role but that can fall flat in the face of the president’s immense influence, if /when s(he) chooses to use it!

In the 1962 Constitution, Obote was Head of Govt, while Mutesa was Head of State and Commander-in-Chief. In the UK, the Prime Minister is Head of Govt while the Monarch is Head of State, Commander-in-Chief and Head of the House of Lords. In the USA, the vice president is elected alongside the president as Running Mate, therefore, cannot be fired by the president, plus the president has little influence on what happens in the States, that being the jurisdiction of Governors. In Kenya, the Chief Justice, judges and electoral commissioners apply for their jobs to an independent commission, power has largely been devolved to 47 Counties and the central govt budget has been cut to 20%.  Only in Uganda does the President appoint everybody. Ugandan presidents beat up anybody who tries to grab power from them and rig elections to keep it because there is only one power center. Patronage and corruption flourish under Uganda’s presidents because cohorts, sycophants and job seekers surround and cheer them.

Ugandans are so engrossed in fighting corruption and human rights’ abuse, ignoring that those are just consequences, NOT the cause of autocratic rule, a consequence of the immense power vested in the presidency by the constitution.

Article 74 of the constitution of Uganda empowers citizens to change political systems through  referenda. During 2012, UFA will mobilize Ugandans to evoke Article 74 and petition the Electoral Commission to organize a referendum, in 2015, to vote out the current political system that overloads the president with power, and vote in an equitable system that reduces those powers.

Beti Olive Namisango Kamya

PRESIDENT, UGANDA FEDERAL ALLIANCE

ufapresident@gmail.com   

OPPOSITION SHOULD MANAGE POLITICS LIKE MODERN BUSINESS

My beloved Baby Sister, Edith Mpanga of London - and Walk-to-Work enthusiast, warned me not to say “I told you so!” when it was reported that FDC had abandoned the A4C initiative that left several dead, maimed and jailed, on grounds that it is ungracious and reflects poor breeding, and I fully agree with her, so I apologize to her for this article, but it is intended to thank FDC, through their Spokesperson Hon Wafula Ogutu, who was not pretentious, but simple and honest, when he said “we have stopped W2W….., it has turned disastrous, people have lost lives, limbs and property…..”

Having witnessed many losses and casualties since 2001 when I joined full-time politics on the opposition side to the NRM Govt, my humble proposal to my colleagues in the opposition is that we should begin to conduct political business as a modern business, where, for every proposed activity, is defined the overall activity goal, activity objectives that are SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Time bound), a work plan, projection of risks, management of casualties, activity budget, projected profits and losses. It may sound hypothetical but all modern war-planning rooms go through this exercise thoroughly, before they send troops to war – and war may mean a football contest, launching a new brand, race driving, starting a business, buying a new dress, getting a new school for your child, courting a woman / man or renting a sex-worker. Field commanders, where applicable, are taken through this complete picture and even guided on when to call for a withdrawal of troops to minimize war losses, so that all participants are inspired and driven by a shared vision and common goal!

For the past ten years or so, it has been common to read / hear “the opposition are disorganized, they are divided, they need to work together…. in order to unhinge Museveni…., there is no single party that can dislodge Museveni alone…..”, but are we all clear and agreed on a shared vision, mission, goal, work plan and have we established SMART objectives? Are all opposition members equally inspired in the same direction? To remove a sitting Govt is not a tea-party, it is hard work, long hours!

NRM appears strong only because the opposition are ad hoc, do not invest in research, planning, long hours and grassroots’ mobilization, have no clear short term goals, no SMART objectives and only provoke police to teargas them while they wait for three months to the next election, to swing into vote-hunting action. To some people, poverty is the problem so when they get some money or a job from Museveni, their problem is solved, they down their tools. Others just need their political parties to get into power so that they can fix poverty through jobs, so Museveni must go, yet to others, their grandfathers belonged to a certain political party and that is where they will die, so Museveni must go.

To Uganda Federal Alliance (UFA), Uganda’s problem is more complex than Museveni, poverty, potholes, poor social services, etc, all of which we consider consequences, not the problem cause, hence, mere replacement of Museveni, without changing the unitary governance system which over-centralizes power and national resources, might replace him with maybe a worse Museveni, an exploiter and beneficiary of the inappropriate system, just like all previous Presidents were. In UFA, having learnt our lessons from the past, we wish to dialogue and plan how to change the system, rather than the just the current President.

My humble advice to colleagues in the opposition is that toying with ideas and experimenting with each every other day, without adequate research and planning will not deliver the beef, but will continue costing time, lives and property.

Beti Olive Kamya-Turwomwe

PRESIDENT

UGANDA FEDERAL ALLIANCE

0783 438 201