Uganda: Does it Need a National Conference?

Published on 14th January 2014

The talk of a ‘National Conference’, I gather for purposes of a consensus on what some call serious issues affecting the country and achieving a compromise on national governance is back to the forefront. This issue is not new- especially within diverse political circles since early mid-2000s. Now it has been resurrected by some civil society groups in their New Year message.

What is rather intriguing is that neither members of the active political class nor these civil society activists chorusing it have been able to provide detailed and concrete terms of reference for such a National Conference. There are many questions to ask. For instance, what do they really mean by a National Conference? What do they really want with it? Where does it derive its legitimacy? Is it a search for another form of consensus different from the 1994/95 Constituent Assembly? Are a section of elites plotting to disenfranchise the masses or is it a search for a new form of elite settlement? What things will a National Conference achieve that can't be settled by a universally elected multiparty parliament in Uganda? If it’s about a political settlement, have we examined milestones of the Interparty Organisations for Dialogue (IPOD)? Even then, how will this National Conference be constituted?

This National Conference proposal needs to explicitly explained by its vendors. We also need to keep the probe on to be able to understand the overt and covert motivations of those proposing a National Conference.

Of course, some enthusiasts of ‘National Conference’ have given normative and unscripted off-cuff supporting detail. They argue that a National Conference would bring together all stakeholders in this country including traditional and religious leaders; academia, media, NGOs, farmers, private sector, professional bodies, students, youth and women, etc., as well as the executive, judiciary and legislature to analyse how they have been working, strategize to work better and chart the way forward for Uganda.  They also argue that the National Conference will debate electoral reforms, rule of law and economic management of the Country. Does the foregoing really need a new consensus to be settled?

NRM. A strong believer in dialogue has consistently extended invitation to various groups for dialogue. You recall when then Leader of FDC, Kiiza Besigye refused to attend one of those dialogues parading frivolous excuses of ‘tea, photo-op and handshake’! We must recall that, when NRA/NRM captured power in 1986, it did not go for a winner takes it all zero sum form of political management. All stakeholders were invited to take part in a transitional broad-based government. In that government, Dr.Paulo Kawanga Ssemwogerere, then President of Democratic Party (DP) was the boss of Dr. Warren Kizza Besigye, at the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Later, a Constituent Assembly was to be preceded by a grassroots-heavy consultative commission led by Justice Benjamin Odoki that set the stage for all-inclusive elected leaders from all parts of Uganda representing diverse groups and interests. In fact, the President even moved ahead to appoint people like Father Gaetano Bantanyenda of Kintanga parish in Kabale to expand the bandwidth of representation in Uganda’s ecosystem of politics. The result was the most fundamental national consensus achieved since Uganda became independent in 1962.  This consensus was codified by the 1995 constitution – a living document that put the power in people’s hands with a deeply embedded bill of rights for peoples of Uganda.

Now people determine how they are governed and through their representatives in a multiparty parliament their views are represented. Chapter 18 provides for amendment of this constitution to take care of changing and emerging national context.

Every election cycle is a renewal of national consensus. People choose leaders and ideas that resonate with their aspirations. So, to say NGO’s, academia, religious groups etc. should gather in a National Conference to determine the future of Uganda- is to miss the point. Behind the civil society groups are individual people who exercise their agency and rights through electing leaders or particular political organisations that captures their aspirations and imagination. If such leaders or political organisations fail to deliver on their constitutional obligations, people reserve the right to vote them out.

Leaders and political organisations vend to people manifestos that tackle economic questions, legal/rule of law issues etc. - and the people choose the best after every five years. Yet in between the five years period, discussions, conversations, dialoguing continues across the spectrum. There is even an Interparty Organisations Dialogue where all political parties with representation in parliament convene regularly to discuss issues of national interest.

In a multiparty parliament, there are myriad bipartisan committees that handle a wide array of issues – trade, economic development, finance, defence, environment, accountability etc. If parliament fails to agree on a certain matter- such a matter can be referred to people by way of referendum. So what is this National Conference about? What magic will it perform that existing institutions, platforms and forums can’t do? Perhaps the bigger point is to together work to strengthen our democratic institutions and systems. Whereas any opportunity for talking and resolving any issue is okay, we should avoid revisionism and be concrete on what we expect to achieve. I will be keen to learn.

By Morrison Rwakakamba

Special Presidential Assistant – Research & Information
[email protected]


This article has been read 1,932 times
COMMENTS