Uganda: 2016 General Elections cannot be qualified as peaceful, free and fair.

#UGDecides2016

The International Election Monitors are in Uganda and they need to be oriented that there will never be a “peaceful”, “free and fair” elections. This will help them when reproducing, or recycling their rather menacing reports that usually concludes that “generally the elections were peaceful, free and fair”.  At least, the 2016 general elections cannot be qualified as peaceful, free and fair.

First, it is important to note that the 1995 Constitution makes it impossible to hold a truly “free and fair” elections anywhere in Uganda. It concentrates too much power in the hands of the President, and it is designed in such a way that an incumbent, when seeking for re-elections, contests as the state - not a Party candidate. 

As such, it is very difficult to separate the incumbent, his Party and the State – they are inseparably fused. The Constitution does not require that an incumbent relinquishes power to a neutral Party, so as to separate the individual or his Party from the State. This is critical. While contesting for the Presidency, this particular incumbent President continues to implement Party programs using State resources - funds his old pledges, orders road constructions, commands extra-judicial arrests of opponents, et cetra.

The second problem is inherent in this concentrated Presidential powers, which makes him the appointing authority of the Electoral Commission. This has entrenched a culture of clientelism and affective ties, enabling the incumbent to exploit patronage for political legitimation. For instance, the President has ensured that key positions in the Electoral Commission are handled by individuals closely related to him. Both the influential positions of Secretary and Spokesperson of EC are handled by his confidantes and Party loyalists.

The third, is the exploitation of affective ties. The President has appointed his son as the head of the elite Presidential Guard. He has appointed his trusted lieutenants, to head the Police, and transformed the Police from a civil force to a partisan NRM Police. Given his continued occupancy as head of state, the President remains commander-in-chief of all these armed forces during elections. He orders, and deploys them to stifle the operations of his opponents. The personalization and ability to deploy the armed forces as he wishes, makes the “fair” from democracy’s free and fair” lexicon, obsolete.

Are the elections free? This question can best be answered by understanding the inherent relational processes that results from the imbued culture of clientelism and exploits of the affective ties. First, all state organs are headed by cronies and cadres of the President. The EC chair attested that EC derives its livelihood from the executive, which compromises its independence.  

Every head of government agency owes their loyalty to the person of Mr. Museveni for their jobs, not the State. During elections, they must organize all their resources to pay back. This is the directive that the Secretary General of the NRM issues to civil servants, to actively support positions taken by the President, even when it is illegal. Second, when the President orders arrest of people who stop his Party members from breaking the law, and such actions leads to the disappearance of  individuals like Mr. Christopher Aine, the head of security for Mbabazi, it is coercion. 

It is a restraining force intended to strike fear and trepidation in the hearts of the voters. Then the Police blocks Opposition candidates with tear gas and shoots indiscriminately at Opposition rallies using live bullets. The impartiality of the Police in elections, makes the entire process devoid of the “free” component in democracy’s “free and fair” lexicon. The manner in which the Electoral Commission has responded to some candidates, in particular, Dr Besigye, demonstrates that they are no longer in charge of this elections. Clearly, EC has capitulated to a subordination under the NRM Police and their illegal “Crime Preventers” intended to bully villagers and supposedly, tinker with the voters’ registry.

END