The national Independence Day (Uhuru) celebrations for this year will take place at a time of particular political tension and uncertainty.

(Strictly speaking, for most of the past 47 years, October 9 has felt more like a public holiday to most Ugandans than a real commemoration of independence, as most Ugandans have experienced much greater suffering under their own governments than under the former colonial power Britain).

The riots that erupted in Kampala on September 10, 2009 and quickly spread out to much of Buganda have been the most important political development of the year and the ramifications continue to be felt.

The crackdown on the opposition and the media that has followed the riots has created fear in Buganda and, for many, brought back painful memories of a similar confrontation between the government and the Kingdom of Buganda in May 1966.

The fact that 43 years since the 1966 Mengo crisis events of a similar nature are still being witnessed points to how certain matters have remained exactly as unresolved after 47 years as they were in 1962.

Before he came to power, President Yoweri Museveni argued that Milton Obote was the cause of all Uganda’s problems. Now that he occupies the office Obote once did, it must surprise him to find himself in the exact position Obote did in the 1960s.

Uganda, like most African countries, continues to grapple with several matters that independence did nothing to resolve.

The chief of these is Buganda. Its status within the wider Uganda, its demand for a federal status (some view it as a privileged status) has remained as thorny as it was in 1962, and 47 years later, in September 2009, the central government was burdened by what to do with Buganda following riots in Buganda.

Considering how the treasury has been looted, especially over the last 23 years, it should by now be abundantly clear that only a federal political system, or some form of it, is the answer to the question of how national resources can be equitably shared.

The majority of Ugandans favoured a federal system of government during consultations ahead of the constitution-making process. However, the sensitive issue for many is that a federal system would overwhelmingly favour the central region of Buganda which continues to be resented by many small entities who feel Buganda was unduly favoured by the British.

Certainly the various central governments have understood that a federal Uganda would not only equip Buganda with real clout but it would render the central government a weak or at least not the domineering institution it is today and that has not been in the interest of any executive.

The second is over the powers of the president. In 1962, it was decided that Uganda would have an executive Prime Minister and when the British Governor-General departed in 1962, the position of a ceremonial President was created in 1963.

The Kabaka of Buganda, Edward Mutesa, was named the new president and it was not long before it became clear that there would be tensions between him and the Prime Minister Milton Obote.

When Uganda became a republic in 1967, the powers of prime minister were vested in the president, becoming the nearly all-powerful person that he remains today.

In 1979, there was a power struggle between President Yusufu Lule and the post-war National Consultative Council over exactly what powers the president had in the UNLF government following the fall of Idi Amin.

The 1995 Ugandan constitution attempted to limit the powers of the president but the bearer of the office at the time, Yoweri Museveni, saw to it that not only was the presidential two-term limit of the 1995 constitution lifted in 2005, but by October 2009, his powers had now become almost equal to those of a 19th century African king.

Museveni more or less ruled as he pleased.

The third unresolved matter is over the role of the army in the country’s politics. The army was called in to end the May 1966 standoff between Obote and Mutesa and since then, it has never returned to the barracks. It has remained the final arbiter and decider of who holds state power.

Those presidents viewed as not in control of the army or not in charge of a personal army within the army that was loyal to them, like Lule and Godfrey Binaisa, were regarded as puppets even though, on paper, they were commander-in-chief.

The problem of a country where the commander-in-chief is not really a commander-in-chief or when he is a real commander-in-chief, as with the case of Museveni, then he can ignore the wishes, votes, and protests of the majority of Ugandans remains the most serious of the unresolved national questions.

Also, Uganda’s economy has the same face in 2009 as it had in 1962. Nothing fundamental has changed about that. It is still mainly agricultural, still mainly subsistence, and still weak.

No matter what government has been in charge of the country’s affairs, it has always needed significant external monetary and technical assistance. The Israelis and French built the Bugolobi flats. Entebbe International Airport was built by the Yugoslavs. Mandela National Stadium (or Namboole) and the new Ministry of Foreign Affairs building was by the Chinese.

Today, the entire economy, it seems, is in the hands of South African, British, Middle Eastern, American, French, and Dutch hands, although some might argue that it was always like that in one form or another. Aid in the form of grants, donations, and the seemingly endless number of western or western-backed charities and NGOs remains a central feature of the national economy and society.

The vast majority of Ugandans who pursue post-graduate degrees do so abroad and the vast majority of them, over 95 percent, study on scholarships provided by European, North American, Chinese, and Indian governments, universities, and private foundations.

The English Premiership football tournament has supplanted the domestic Uganda league as the most popular national past time among both the urban and rural population.

The fact that at the most critical juncture Ugandans turn to outsiders and outside influences for help and reinforcement has remained unchanged since 1962.

Finally, since the elections of 1962, no other election has been conducted without it causing an uproar. Be it the 1980, 1996, 2001, or the 2006 elections, there has always been an outcry.

Whatever the facts, enough ordinary people, scholars and military people have felt that the various elections have been rigged for rebel groups to sprout up.

This is an overview of Uganda since independence and as such it should explain why nothing ever seems to change, no matter how many times we change governments.

Comments (9)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Add Comment Preview