Opinion: The Back-Then UPM-Museveni is someone I could have supported; but today’s Museveni is totally opposite!

Back in the day, long before National Resistance Movement (NRM), the whole bush-war and the hostile takeover from previous governments. President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, the freedom fighter and former Tanzanian student, we’re the founder and leader of Uganda Patriotic Movement (UPM). It wasn’t a successful one at that, he even lost his district Member of Parliament position to Honorable Sam Kuteesa in the 1980 election. Clearly, the drive and the message didn’t sink-in, if not the rigging of Milton Obote was so rampant that none else than his candidates could win an election. Which is most likely if you followed the 1980 Election. The young Museveni was an idealist, not like today when the riches and stolen wealth has consumed the old-man. Who will find ways to buy his adversaries, instead of trying to reason with them? That is too hard for old man and he doesn’t even consider it. So today, I have dozens of outtakes of speeches he made while being a UPM leader. It is given that the times changes, as three decades of power and rule has eaten his soul. As much as the reality is different today, but the ideals and the governance he spoke of is still relevant today, as much as it was back-then.

“A Government that subjects its citizens to humiliation and desperate solutions is not worth the name and should hence be removed. It was the violation of this cardinal principle by Amin that forced Ugandans to take to arms to liberate their motherland” – Speech at Ishaka, Bushenyi District, Uganda Times (July 16th 1979).

“Uganda’s causes of disunity mainly spring from the fears that public officials are cutting up the national cake among themselves. During the last 12 years, most people especially the top brass had been grabbers” – Speech at a News Conference in Kampala, Uganda Times, (September 10, 1979)

“Ugandan would have been taught how to fight against dictatorship. Don’t fear anything. Amin used to say he feared nobody but God; but where is he today?” – Speech at a rally in Bushenyi, Uganda Times, (July 9th 1980).

“I am saddled by all types of unclean people in the UNLF government. Otherwise, things would have looked much better than they are today. Some unclean people are responsible for the suffering of the people of Uganda” – Speech at a rally in Masindi District, Uganda Times (July 15th 1980).

“Using a government position to a mass wealth is high treason. If the UPM is not going to be supported because it denounces such methods of getting rich, let it be” – Speech in Bushenyi and Mbarara District, Weekly Topic (August 27th 1980).

“Africa is tired of leaders who clings to power against the wishes of the masses” – Speech at the UPM fundraising at Fairway Hotel Kampala, Uganda Times (November 10th 1980).

The young man Yoseri or Yoweri is so more likable are reasonable, than the one leading the republic today. He has had no issues to rig himself, use the power of the army and police to intimidate and harass citizens. Neither, has he had any issues concerning the grabbing land and having cronies making wealth on the state coffers. It is like everything he stood for, was a shell that he decided to break. He used a sledgehammer against everything he believed in, when he got to power. Then he saw the potential and possible reach of power and ran with it.

That is why today he clings power against the will of the people. That why the army was the key group of people at his latest inauguration and paid crowds, not people celebrating his victory, because there was a small fraction of people who was cheering. Clearly, he knows it, that he has become everything he was up against as a UPM candidate.

When he had these speeches, the ideals we’re good and the man was talking righteous. Who knows how the wealth and trigger-happy donors in the 1980s and 1990s has sponged funds on him without any concern on how the funds gotten used by his government. As long as they showed some slow progress and had a few nice photo-ups for their timely magazines, it was funky-dory.

Clearly the revival of the donor-friendly environment and the possible all-control has eaten all his ideals, you can even question if he ever believed them. If it was a ploy to look significantly different from Obote and Amin. Nothing else. It would be an easy trick. Since, the relics of the state would so shatter the display of character they had. He could amaze and please with simple promises, but no need to keep them. That is why he promises industries and agricultural output today, without having any consideration for budgets or programs that is sufficient for this, if so he would have invested in it long time ago.

President Museveni is a shadow of his former self, the UPM leader I would have respected and cheered for, but the one he is today, I cannot stand and want to get rid-off. In a peaceful transition way, do not want use his tricks, there are better ways than bush-war. The uncertainty and loss of lives in the midst of that is not worth the coup d’état.

UPM Museveni, knew what Good Governance was and knew what a state was supposed to do. Not there to enrichen himself and the cronies, it was not there to prolong suffering and famine. It was there to serve and if they acted wrong. Fight them, dismantle them and get rid of the dictatorship. He is now the man he fought to bring down, he fought Amin, Obote, Lule and Biniasa. All of them got at one point played out by the men who was loyal to Museveni.

Certainly, the matter at hand, how long can he keep the ideals he believed in while leading UPM away from the citizens. How long can embarrass and humiliate citizens so he can stay in power. How long can he eat of the government plate without anyone toppling him. How long? What does it take, how much does the citizens of Uganda stomach of this mess? What is the final nail in coffin? When does the last drop of water hit the cup, so it spills over?

The UPM Museveni, anyone would consider as a fair and good leader, the one that is ruling today, has passed his prime and due date, long time ago. In addition, lost all his principles and values on the way, except for enriching himself and the ones who are by his side.

He is now the one he ones fought against, he is now mirroring the example of the ones who he overthrow. It is something rare and weird about it all, the UPM Museveni would say: “that would never happen, the Ugandans would not let that happen”. Well, they did and they fear you now, because they have seen your actions and your misgivings. They don’t respect you, but wonder how and when you strike. There isn’t a consensus, but a fear and tension to what you might bring, the game you set-up is for the ones who are abiding to you and the ones who could lose it all, since they are not your kind. Peace.

Opinion: Succession when talking about Mzee is nonsense!

“You do not lead by hitting people over the head — that’s assault, not leadership.”

Dwight D. Eisenhower

There is an ancient saying that you cannot teach old dogs new tricks, neither can you do with President who has been running a republic since 1986. Therefore, with this in mind, the new comic relief from the National Resistance Movement (NRM) is hard for me to take serious. Certainly, with the knowledge of all the men and possibly woman who could have become the leader of the party and the Executive of Uganda.

Still, in 2017, we are at the same crossroads, the same junction and nothing has changed. The partners and participants are practically the same, unless some new cronies and sugar-babies of the Movement comes into the mix. Perhaps, the most stunning fact is that old men like Gen. Otafiire steadily sink the world with his endless wisdom.

It is as if Museveni still is the Shepard and the Ugandan people is helpless sheep needing his guidance. The reality is that the belief that he can do something he has not done is pointless. The only card he has left is to destroy more kingdoms with force and kill more his opposition. If he had proved some sort of democratic figments in his in body, it has surely died with age. As his words are now more important than legislation.

The President handpicked elite and cronies, the suiters and the ones trying to eat while can. As they know not what will happen when their master stop breathing. The plans and the succession plans has not been official or even portrayed, there been rumors of Maj. Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba, those leaks turned into a besieged offices and depleted staff at Daily Monitor, back-in-the-day.

Still, if he is the viable candidate to takeover and the family dynasty that the President tries to create is hard to know. Since none in public can read the mind of the old man with the hat. So that the “news” that NRM Members of Parliament finally planned to talk about the succession seems far-fetched! Should it been done a decade or two ago, if it was a serious attempt?

He is on his unofficially seventh term as President and leader of the NRM. The founder and current leader of it. Not as he has given in without weapons in the past and instead of dialogue, he still sends Special Force Command or the Flying Squad to doze of possible enemies. Not as if it is an open discussion, more like a ruckus of who can get first to the brown envelopes and get the license to blead the state out of more funds.

Therefore, here I am, and not believing one single bit that President Museveni or the NRM NEC or any other parts of the NRM have the slightest care in mind to change him for somebody else. NRM and the NRM elite needs Museveni and his cronies, the crony system is there because of him. No question and no one with a clear mind would not see that. He gives and takes away as he sees fit. When he needs you he pays you and your extended family, but when your aspirations or goals to become bigger than him. Then you securing that you become a fringe candidate.

Museveni and his family, Museveni as his business partners does not need succession. The ones asking for it now will become renegade NRM MPs and could end up independent in the Parliament, as in the past when MPs has taken a stand towards the NRM NEC or the almighty himself. I doubt there will be change of guards, as there have not been for decades upon decades.

What we can be sure of is that President Museveni and President Mugabe are doing the same thing in their nations, holding the power without hesitation of what will happen when they leave and what sort of power vacuum that will be unleashed. What we do know is that the NRM will use all of their tricks and manipulation, all sort of writings and public display to make this sort thing normal. Peace.

Opinion: The #NBSFrontline debate about Succession after President Museveni is premature; no matter whom it is!

nbs-byanyima

#NBSFrontline is wasting all people’s time with discussing the succession of President Museveni and change from the ruling party National Resistance Movement (NRM). Well, even if the wife of Dr. Kizza Besigye is surely a viable candidate; the famous Oxfam leader Winnie Byanyima and her new quest for becoming a Presidential Candidate. That is a noble idea of a genuine and caring individual with an amazing track-record and spokesperson for the oppressed. Still, the talk of succession right now is premature.

The reason for the premature is that the process for anyone taking the reins from President Museveni is a closed door, a barricaded castle and sealed of courthouse. The President who has been in charge since 1986 hasn’t showed any real proof of wanting to stepdown. He has promised it twice, but that hasn’t mattered. Mzee has changed his mind and thought of the idea of not having the reserves of Bank of Uganda and gone back into the race, gone with guns and made sure the campaigns of his competitors has been a living hell. That he do best, also secure that the Electoral Commission is run by loyalist who will deliver the needed numbers to run the Parliament and the mandate to be a strong President.

Mzee hasn’t given any way to anybody you could ask the few left of the bush-war generation, the ones that are left and still around knows this is true. A man who sends army against his own after taking power, you know he isn’t giving up easy.

Museveni-with-a-dummy-map-of-uganda

Mzee himself said this: “You see when you give them (civil population in the North and East) a good beating then those who are using them will no longer use them. Since the month of January (1987), we have given them much beating especially in Lira and Kitgum Districts. And in fact the week I left (for Yugoslavia) we had given them a good blow in Gulu District. So it is going to settle down”. (New Vision, January 19, 1987).

The years of election rigging, paying citizens small fees in the villages while being on the road, the years of promising grand project and not delivering should be reasons for the change of leadership. But the people should have created turmoil as the President has the army and the monies that are forged through his illegitimate government. Instead they let him steal the nation and smile over pennies. Therefore the President fears for his life after the years on the throne as the marble and treasury chest might be looted by the ones that he was in charge of or even the grandchildren of the men who died to get him in power.

As long as President Museveni is in charge he will not bow-down with grace. There wouldn’t be any mercy he played the rights for the citizens and justice for the people that had been under Dr. Milton Obote and Gen. Idi Amin Dada. Who both had been Presidents for a long time before him; Museveni went to the bush to get rid of them both and just took away the Presidency of Yusuf Lule because he could.

When a man who made relationship with both Libyans and Americans to get weapons and make sure the power got into his hands. Doesn’t really care to what extent he will do to keep it, he will play all sorts of political games and use the tactics of the former leaders, but try to do it better to gain himself. He might give way to somebody, but only so he can destroy their career and silence them.

Uganda Election 2011 P2

So even if Winnie Byanyima decides to run what will be different between the former ones running against President Museveni? Museveni has eaten a spit out Dr. Olara Otunnu, Norbert Mao, Dr. Paul Ssemogerere, Amama Mbabazi and Dr. Kizza Besigye.

They have all run against him and caught his wrath, his tactics and his methods of oppression as he beats the drums at the opposition rallies with bullets, tear-gas and close the venues without any reason. The laws have been changed and amended to make it usually worse for the competition and make sure the President stays the President. Like the time to make a petition for the Presidential Election is really short, while the Presidential Candidate are by law even if struggled to get funds has to visit all district in the campaign. This is while the President takes helicopter and the others stresses through the rainy-season on washed mountain roads and districts. Something that is easily forgotten the laws and procedures are made to secure the President, not make sure the fellow or person that Ugandans want to be President is actually the President.

Bukenya A

Because if the succession had been a thing then there wouldn’t be the idea of if somebody becomes too ambitious in the ruling regime and ruling party than they have been demoted by the President. Museveni has had a few Vice-Presidents, at the first period of his reign he didn’t have any until his first inner-party elections. After that the ones under him has been Hon. Samson Kisekka, Hon. Specioza Kazibwe and Hon. Prof. Gilbert Bukenya. As well as there been changes of Prime Ministers, because at this state the current President has had six of them.

The #NBSFrontline none of this came up in the discussion as the ones discussing it we’re into gender politics and the left-over, left-behind former party officials of the National Resistance Movement. Even the main contenders in the recent presidential race where former loyalist of the President, Besigye and Mbabazi has been vital and key persons in the Movement System as we know it.

We should just know that President Museveni has no plans to let anybody else than him have the throne, no other can rule than him. All of his game is for him to rule the nation and eat of the government plate. Peace.

The ironies of Socialism versus Neo-Liberalism; why I believe in a Keynesian approach instead of the Socialism or the Neo-Liberalism

Socialism churchill

Well, it is about that time, I make mockery of two statues of civilization and ideas that rules the world while not hoping the blindly followers of either comes to attack my person, my thoughts or my widely allegation on the parts. Both of the political views and framework have made a difference and is the reason why we have societies like we have today.

The main parts of socialism is that there is policies and regulations that fit for social and bigger government who cares for the citizens, like subsidized health-care, schools, university, transport and local government. Through taxes and higher fees on produce as the socialism need funding for the ability to make the government organizations and government programs. The Government need more taxes to able to serve the public with what they expect through the socialistic view, while the taxes are set-up in a way that the ones with more income is generating more revenue is supposed to pay more tax; than the ones that are paid less.

So with the big-government and grander government policies comes the address of the public will and citizens loses power, but that for the price of cheaper health-care, schooling and other government institutions. That stops the higher prices and free-market pricing of health care that lets major parts of the society might even be able to pay for the needed operations. So the reasoning and hateful measurement against big-government is wrong in some parts as the people are stronger when we work together and divide the expenditure on the whole society; instead of billing the whole ordeals on the single individual.

free market

Neo-Liberalism is not as straight forward as this is supposed to be measurement to weaken the state, make it liberal and little. Give more power to person instead of the government and give more choices to the citizens of the given country. The issue is that Neo-Liberalism has come with certain ideas and prospects. For instance the New Public Management (NPM) is a Neo-Liberalistic idea. NPM have given the societies and the government who added these policies more watchmen and ombudsmen then before. They have given the power away from the departments and created institutions under the departments with specialist and experts that sets the standard and gives advice to the department. While the departments still need manpower, so need also the lower-expert-institutions. So you have two fronts with specialist working the same field and advising each other. So before NPM most of the experts and brains where at the Department and Local Government that worked with a given subject or the project that needed a specialist; thanks to NPM they have become self-serving and not cut down the amount of bureaucracies have become fluent. As much as the wish for the NPM as parts of the Neo-Liberalism idea, it hasn’t created less government, but more and longer away from the decision making.

The Neo-Liberalism of free-market and starch corporate control have not given added freedom to the consumer. As the markets are controlled by less and less owners and stakeholders; the corporate power have become stronger, but more centralized in conglomerates that issues the policies and secure the profits. The riches of the corporations and the borderlines agreements are built for the corporations not for the welfare for the citizens. The original businesses we’re built for single projects or for fixed procurement that the state and citizens needed like building roads and bridges. Not gaining profits that sky-rocket and then moves away the tax-money into tax-havens. That is the Neo-liberalism ways of economies. In a way the movement of money should happen without government interference or taxation.

The Neo-Liberalism brought also an idea that was worse than the NPM. That was the Structural Adjustment Program (SAP) under the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF). SAP was made in the 1980s to liberate the subsidized agriculture, health-care and other public institutions as government got great loans through the funding of IMF and WB. So they released the governments and free-market ideas that killed the Co-Op’s in the countries that was already lots of them. They had commissions and centralized crop sales through Co-Ops that served the farmers, either they produces cocoa, coffee or tea. This was a standard of fixing training, production and prices to influx together a stronger unity. The ironies of this is that the IMF and WB gave this order through SAP to Low-Developed Countries while the countries that funded this had Co-Ops in agriculture themselves and still have to this day. So with the SAP they made the inside trading before the export more intricate and gave “supposed” more power to the farmer. Instead they became more reluctant and needed more to be careful to whom they offered their crops to. As the traders from capital who went up-country could fix prices and lie about the values to earn more on the trade to export. So the farmer would not get a given price on the world-market because there we’re less voices giving the farmer a hand in the trade of their cash-crops and their goods that they we’re not consuming themselves. So the SAP agreement stalled the government institutions and weakens them together with the trading experience on the ground. The structures we’re given big loans for building up trade-networks and export facilities while dismantling the structures that secured and fueled the industry and agriculture. As the Agriculture and Industry should not get subsidized, but get funding through free-market ideal and that killed the initial funding as the cheaper production came from abroad instead of making it locally. Therefore it is more normal to Chinese, Egypt and Brazilian products than own local products in the supermarkets of Uganda, for instance. Even meat, juice and toilet-paper are imported than produced in the country. That is because of the SAP and the Neo-Liberalism ideas.

zero-hour-contracts

Another important factor of the Neo-Liberalism idea is the abolishing ideas of Workers Unions and trying to ban them. As the Free-Market should fix the pay for the worker and the business it should fix it. That is why there been less strikes and less new Unions in our day. The reason why Unions in our time is important and the socialist idea of them is that the riches of the corporations; does not seem to trickle down to the citizens; it only left back to the stakeholders and owner, not to society or the workers that works for the rich corporations. Settling this is not easy. During the Reagan and Thatcher era tried to kill of the unions for their meddling and dissolve them so to actually centralize power. Instead this killing of mining-unions and other unions in the United Kingdom have weaken the industry and the ability of workers to fix pay while the corporations come with contracts that are good for business, but not good for steady income for proper work. The recent years of cover-ups in Sports Direct that is owned by Newcastle United Mike Ashley that offers their workforce lots of “Zero-Hour Contract”. Zero Hours Contracts work in the way that the employer has more people under their wings without paying extra for them. The Contract gives not benefits or sick-leave. As the Employee is paid by the hours and amount of time they work for the employer and nothing else. So all the benefits is added to the business and none for the worker, who has to fight and bend-over to add hours as the pool of willing workers are there. Even if the Zero-Contracts are bad, the non-Union and not-allowed to unionize work-force cannot go together and fight for their benefits and rights. As the Employer can continue to use and get new workers without having to stand-by them. Sports Direct is just an example of it, there are more business who uses this model and creates massive profits as they don’t have to offer needed benefits or health-care programs to the employees. As Wall-Mart have had low-hourly pay and no health-care benefit while letting their employees sign-up to government funded programs for health-care so that the Wall-Mart employees get little paid and at the same time uses food-stamps and Medicaid instead of Wall-Mart having health-Care benefits. So the business saves the money for salaries and also save the benefits of their employees; this is something you can thank the beautiful neo-liberal ideas.

The difference with the neo-liberalistic ideal of work is that the employee would give sufficient pay and have a contract that benefits the company and the workers. As they would have social responsibility for their workers as they have health benefits through the standard with standard payments of salaries together with state fueled community health care. The Neo-Liberal is that personal pay of the health-care instead of tax-payers money. So the health-care will be opened to the once who can have insurance or ability to pay for it. Instead of funded through the tax-payers pockets as solidarity between all citizens as in the socialist idea. That cannot be seen as a problem for a liberal person, to bring solidarity and also a structured health-care that everybody pays their fees into and when needed pay a small personal fee to get access, instead of footing the whole bill on their own.

Text ZHC SportDirect

Let me finish this up with the ideals that are ironic on the matter.

  • Smaller Government under NPM has actually made more Ombudsmen and Expert Organizations. Meaning that the Government didn’t become smaller, just longer away from the Department to the Experts and the Ombudsmen that the Government want to control
  • The SAP in Neo-Liberalistic method didn’t bring wealth to the countries it was applied to. The Farmers, the government institutions got weaken, while the loans got higher and less development as the Free-Market got the resources, but without control of the Co-Ops or other ways of maintaining support of citizens. The economies became more fragile as a result of the Neo-Liberal SAP then under the Co-Ops with the control of selling cash-crops and so on.
  • The Free-Market idea of Neo-Liberalism while destroying Labor-Unions to secure more government control of the market. While deteriorating the labors ability and therefore opening for the “Zero-Hour” Contracts that gives all the advantages to the corporations and none to the employee who only get security for the hourly work and nothing else for the employee. That would not happen with stronger unions and government who could enforce the rules for corporations.

All of these is ideals against each other I myself is not a clear socialist, even if I am raised on socialist country in a social-economic balance system. I myself is a clear Keyenist in the way that I believe in free-market and free-society to an extent. That extent is that the governments automatically bails out the necessary institutions and have a hand into the banks and other needed businesses of a society. That the workers are secured and fixed through strong barriers so that the market is made sure that the governments, and also facilitate the marker for the corporations. So that the market will have input from the government as the eruptions is inevitable and needs a structure to control it.

keynes

This three main components are basic:

  • Aggregate demand is influenced by many economic decisions—public and private.
  • Prices, and especially wages, respond slowly to changes in supply and demand, resulting in periodic shortages and surpluses, especially of labor.
  • Changes in aggregate demand, whether anticipated or unanticipated, have their greatest short-run effect on real output and employment, not on prices. Keynesians believe that, because prices are somewhat rigid, fluctuations in any component of spending—consumption, investment, or government expenditures—cause output to change. If government spending increases, for example, and all other spending components remain constant, then output will increase.

So with that in mind you understand why I am in between of the socialist and the free-market neo-liberalism as the Keynesian ideas that are more subtle and securing society as the mixed of government control and free-market gives sustainable societies. Not only full freedom without security for other than the corporations which is the main mantra of the Neo-Liberalism as the individual freedom usually get used by the legal person the corporations and not coined will by the persons themselves as the belief is under the ideology of liberal ideas. Instead of having total control of the state in the Communism, and strong big-government with socialism; but the Keynesian sees it in middle of that and have a free-market with control of the wages and workers by the government. That gives a steady economy and also a greater stability in the values of inflation and stronger value of the person instead of being a commodity as resources in the free-market thinking of the neo-liberalism that have deteriorated the markets and only winner is the corporations; not the fellow human beings. Peace.

The obvious similarities between the 2016 Elections and the 1980 Elections; President Museveni should be proud!

M7 rescue

There been saying that there are similarities between the 1980s General Election and 2016 General Election when it comes to the Presidency and Parliament. Because of that I have checked and read some reports. Here is stories from the 1980 General Election, as the stories comes out and this here is not from articles from New Vision or Daily Monitor, this here is direct reports or educational-papers, even the international media and some of the people involved in the matter like Yusuf Lule and Paolo Muwanga. But there are lots of questions still, but the certainty of British involvement in the result and the outcome has surely come to mind. Here is some information and not just mere speculation to how the General Election went.

Background to the General Election 1980:

“Thus assured of support, Obote now moved in fact to destabilize the UNLF Government in Uganda. In this he found an ally in the Military Commission of the UNLF, whose Chairman Paulo Muwanga and Vice-Chairman, Yoweri Museveni, joined hands to stage a coup against the UNLF in May 1980. But Museveni was out maneuvered by the Obote-Muwanga clique. The latter rigged the December 1980 elections in their favor” (…)”Britain, in tum, manipulated the Commonwealth to send an “Observer Group” to witness the elections – a ploy that served to “legitimize” Obote’s victory, and thus secure the official suppon of all members of the United Nations and the OAU. Needless to add, Britain was the first country to recognize Obote’s fraudulent victory. Margaret Thatcher convinced the Americans to back the regime and to give the green light for IMF stand-by credits. The full regalia of a neo-colonial restructuring of Uganda was opened in front of all eyes to see. Obote was “the man of the hour”. Whilst Britain played a key role in legitimising Obote (through the mediation of the Commonwealth Secretariat), and later in providing him with assistance to train his army, the role other imperialists played must also be mentioned. The Germans, and in particular the Christian Democratic Party and its foundation the Konrad Adenaur Foundation, all linked with German monopolies, have had an historical interest in Uganda, and close ties with the mainly Catholic Party, the DP. They decided that in the interest of protecting broader Western interests in Uganda, Obote’s election “victory”, though fraudulent, must be recognized. The CDU played a significant role in convincing the DP to accept Obote on the grounds that since Obote had offered to “respect” a “multi-party system”, the DP still had a chance in the future” (Tandon, 1987).

Muwanga

From the 11th December 1980 Proclamation:

“The Chairman of the Military Commission, Mr. Paolo Muwanga, has issued a declaration regarding the confirmation of who shall be considered as having been elected a member of Parliament following the end of the 1980 General Elections” (…)”Any results declared otherwise than in compliance with the provision of the declaration shall not be valid or binding in any publication or such purported result by any means whatsoever” (…)”For the purpose of the 1980 elections to the National Assembly, section 47 of the National Assembly (Elections) Act shall be substituted by the following: “47A(a) when the result of the poll of a constituency has been ascertained, the returning officer shall make no public declaration of the finding but forthwith communicate it to the Chairman of the Military Commission with a confidential report on various aspects of the conduct of the election” (Muwanga, 1980).

The official Results:

1980s Election Results

Yusef Lule claims this:

“I accepted the cabinet on an interim basis. Once I got to Uganda. I shuffled my cabinet and brought in better people. In the 69 days, I tried to rectify the mistakes. For example, one of the roots of troubles in Uganda has been the recruitment of the army from only a few ethnic groups. The British had started this for their own reasons. But as soon as I was President in Uganda, I ordered the recruitment of soldiers from all elements of the population to make it a national army. Nyerere and Obote immediately saw their plan to sieze power after a year might be thwarted. From the moment on Nyerere withdrew from me the support of the Tanzanian troops that controlled the country” (…)”Nyerere insisted that Lule must resign even though the Consultative Council had no legislative powers. (Indeed, the Ugandan High Court ruled, in October 1980, that Lule’s removal had been unconstitutional)” (…)”Since then have come the Uganda elections of December 1980 and much fighting. Lule is highly critical of the Commonwealth Observer Group (COG) because they issued their much-publicized interim report stating the voting had been relatively free and open, before the results of the polls had been announced” (…)”After the Commonwealth statement, Muwanga, contrary to his supposedly neutral role, intervened in the electoral affairs by suspending the announcement of growing victory of anti-Obote forces, and declaring victory for Obote. Muwanga became Obote’s Vice President and Defence Minister” (…)”After the ballots had been counted in Gulu, the permanent secretary – a close friend – called up  Mrs. Aliker in Nairobi to congratulate her on her husband’s victory by 40,000 votes against 3,000 for his opponent. The tide was running heavily toward the anti-Obote forces. Then Paulo Muwanga announced suspension of the results. There was immediate tension. When Radio Uganda came on air the next day, they first announcement was that in Gulu, Dr. Martin Aliker had been defeated by 40,000 to 3,000. The candidate falsely announced as the winner refused to believe the result” (Munger – Lule, 1983).

Obote

Another story of the 1980 elections:

“Meanwhile, in Uganda, controversy raged over the electoral arrangements, amid an increasingly febrile and violent atmosphere. While under the supervision of the Electoral Commission, the actual mechanics of the election were largely in the hands of the administration – in a continuation from late colonial practice, each district commissioner was the returning officer for all constituencies in his district, and was in effect in control of the hiring and supervision of electoral staff. Just over a month before the election, 14 of Uganda’s 33 district commissioners were dismissed and replaced by men appointed directly by the Military Commission; soon afterwards, Obote publicly warned civil servants to ‘stop frustrating the UPC election efforts’.  One man who was a young UPM activist at the time recalled that in his constituency, the district commissioner set about ensuring that all polling staff were UPC supporters” (…)”well over 80% of the registered voters in most places, which meant that rather more than one quarter of the total population voted. This a remarkable number in a country where slightly more than half the population were under 18, while one constituency saw a 103% turnout. Such figures might seem to suggest wholesale ballot-stuffing, and it seems likely that there was some local malpractice involving multiple voting and/or stuffing. But if there was manipulation, it appears to have balanced out, because turnout levels were generally consistent across UPC and DP strongholds.In Buganda, where the UPC suffered more or less complete electoral annihilation, the turnout was as high as it was in the UPC heartlands in the north(the 103% came here). Tito Okello, the commander of the UNLA, ‘praised Ugandans for their peaceful attitude and love for political progress’ and called the election ‘a day of rebirth when Uganda will once more have its rightful place in Africa and the world community’” (…)”The Electoral Commission had, however, fallen silent; its secretary had gone into hiding (and fled the country two nights later) and the rest of its members temporarily vanished from the office.  When it resumed the announcement of results, these showed a very substantial UPC victory. In the end, UPC secured 74 seats, against 51 for DP and 1 for UPM; though in terms of the overall vote, the DP secured more votes overall. The process of tallying at a constituency level had been largely unobserved, since the Observer Group had returned to Kampala on 11 December and – following an outbreak of shooting around their hotel that evening – were largely withdrawn on 12 December” (…)”In his memoirs, the senior British member of the Observer Group, Robert Wainwright, comforted himself that Obote would have won anyway, even had he not cheated in the nominations. Obote’s biographer, citing the Observer Group report, insisted that Obote had won the election simply because of its ‘superior organization’, and dismissed accusations of malpractice as unfounded”  (Willis).

In 1981:

Mr. Obote’s party gerrymandered voting districts, delayed opposition candidates past deadlines for qualifying and in the end shut down a public tally of votes to simply announce victory over national radio. In the last two weeks, the Obote administration also has closed five opposition newspapers” (…)”We are going back on a course we thought we had left, just as things were under Amin,” said Paul Ssemogerere, leader of the opposition Democratic Party. A Democratic Party member of Parliament, John Magezi, said in an interview this week that: ”I’m not sure I understand what’s happening myself. This isn’t even third world politics; this is fourth world.” (…)”The most serious threat to the Obote regime is thought to be a rebel force led by Yoweri Mseveni, who was a member of the six-member military commission that ruled Uganda until the election. Making War From the Bush” (…)”Mr. Mseveni was the only man on the board who did not support Mr. Obote. He formed a political party, but he was trounced in the election that he is convinced was stolen by Milton Obote. Now he is in the bush – with a force of five thousand, he claims – preparing for a major offensive unless the Obote administration steps down” (Jaynes, 1981).

NRA marching to Kampala 1986

In 1982:

Without the investment budget, the economist said, Uganda’s chances of economic revival look slim. But frequent reports of violence, perpetrated particularly by Government troops, may make potential investors wary. And thus a vicious circle could be created with economic discontent fueling the problems that block economic revival. Many Ugandans still live in poverty. Dispute Over 1980 Election” (…)”Neither do the insurgents seem to offer an immediate alternative to the present Government. The guerrillas undoubtedly have considerable support among the Baganda people around Kampala, who form the nation’s largest single ethnic group. The Baganda have been opposed to President Obote since he banished their king during his first term of office, from independence in 1962 until his overthrow by Idi Amin in 1971. Mr. Obote returned to power in elections in December 1980, which the Baganda opposition charges were rigged, and which Mr. Obote says vehemently were free and fair”  (…)”The President himself asserts that, were the guerrillas to achieve their aims and install a Baganda leader, then the rest of the country – which, he says, voted solidly for him in the 1980 election – would rise up in revolt” (Cowell, 1982).

Certain Acholi feelings about the 1980s:

“This was followed by several short lived junta administration (governments) till the 1980 general election that was generally disputed by the majority of Ugandan political parties that participated. They claimed that the election was “not free and fair”. This led to a re-organization once more into another liberation movement that struggled till 1986 when they finally succeeded in capturing political power by force of arms. In this struggle, some members of the then defeated army were either taken as prisoners of war or voluntarily joined liberation movement or settled back home while a section regrouped in the north in order to launch a counter offensive to gain political power. It is generally accepted that this was the starting point of the Northern Uganda conflict that has changed faces of struggle which adversely affected the people of the greater North” (ARLPI, 2007).

Uganda 1980 Election UPM UPC

Here we see the British position to the matter and verifying the results and the way the rigging is open and blatant happening, even with witnesses and wife’s getting information about the victory by phone and the day after on the radio hearing and announced that the person didn’t get their seat in parliament after all.

The 1980s elections seem by many means rigged and the reports validate that sense. As some have question if that is true or something Uganda Patriotic Movement used to defend their rebellion towards the state, as the opposition does now; the FDC claims as the predecessor UPM did at one point. The worrying point about the whole election at that time is how the Commonwealth Observers is being used by British Officials, as the Dr. Milton Obote got the verifying force and the international credibility to stop the nuance of asking to accepted. While the Parliament and members was more selected than elected. Just as it seems as after 18th February as the Electoral Commission under Eng. Dr. Badru Kiggundu, put all the eggs in the basket of President Museveni and avoided lots of polling stations to benefit the ruling regime. The way the ruling regime of Uganda People’s Congress did their job and their Paolo Muwanga made the cake for Dr. Obote and his second term in office.

The way Obote told Civil Servants to serve UPC and not work against them, the same way Museveni today tells that everybody should stay behind NRM; they use other words, but initially mean the same. The same is also that Museveni says the election happen in a free and fair fashion as did Obote on the 1980s. They actually could be saying the same words or as similar as can be. They could be like brothers today and President Museveni did everything in his power in the beginning to demolish the legacy of Obote. So that he could be seen as the essential leader of the nation.

Today we see the ways that the army and police are used as tool of oppression as it was done during the Obote area as well. The determination of oppressing the opposition and making life hard for anybody who is not NRM is shown through the pre-election period and now after the polls as evidence today and the recent days where the Police have gone after the opposition with vigor and power. Jailed and detained FDC Mobilisers, Officials and others for affiliations or having the original declarations forms that the Electoral Commission have rigged, so to get rid of evidence.

So there is so many of the same traits that it is staggering… and the ways they are conducting the elections and polls; are nothing difference than from Obote, the man he fought for 5 years in a Bush-War to free the peasants, making himself to be like him. That is impressive as he was supposed to be an intellectual and a wise-guy who could make Uganda democratic, what that has happen is that President have made government of Uganda now acting the same ways as the ones he ousted. That is ironic and sad at the same time. Wished for the people Uganda another President who respect rule of law, the role of the executive and the true power of transparency and accountability, but that will not occur under President Museveni as he now will only seek his own gain and not care about the general state of Uganda; as his power and keeping that is main objective, everything else is secondary. Peace.