By Oweyegha-Afunaduula and the Center for Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis
1. Defining the Contested Terrain: Public Interest vs. Presidential “Interests”
Public interest is a multidimensional, holistic concept encompassing the collective well-being of society. It includes:
· Political Goods: Democracy, freedom, justice, security, and peace.
· Social Goods: Quality education, accessible healthcare, passable roads, and cultural integrity.
· Ecological & Existential Goods: Natural belonging, ecological sustainability, and a healthy environment.
· Developmental Goods: Sustainable development, equitable progress, shared prosperity, and an enhanced quality of life for all citizens.
In stark contrast, President Yoweri Tibuhaburwa Museveni has consistently framed politics as a matter of “interests,” which in practice align with a narrower set of objectives: the consolidation of wealth, power, glory, control over resources, and regime perpetuity. This fundamental divergence sets the stage for institutional conflict, where mechanisms of the state are often tuned to the latter, at the expense of the former.
2. The Architecture of Subservience: Parliament’s Structural Failings
The Ugandan Parliament is structurally designed to prioritize presidential “interests” over the public good.
· NRM Caucus Dominance: The overwhelming numerical superiority of the NRM Caucus, coupled with the fact that the Speaker and Deputy Speaker are leading members, ensures that legislative and budgetary outcomes are predetermined by caucus decisions. This system operates on groupthink and absolute loyalty to the President, not on open, critical debate.
· The Militarized Legislature: The constitutionally embedded presence of 10 UPDF representatives, while historically justified as “neutral,” effectively injects a permanent executive influence. Past episodes of military and police invasions of Parliament (e.g., during the 2017 age-limit amendment debates) have shown that force is used to ensure compliance with the President’s wishes, legislating under an atmosphere of fear.
· The Corruption of Consent: There is a documented history of MPs, from both the NRM and opposition, being bribed with money (e.g., “handshake” scandals for votes on term limits or other contentious bills) to support presidential preferences. This transactional politics eviscerates representation.
· Deliberative Collapse: The ever-increasing number of MPs—driven by the bantustanisation of the country into smaller districts and constituencies—makes effective debate impossible. Critical issues of public interest are drowned in a sea of voices, with many MPs financially indebted from expensive campaigns and thus easily manipulated. The institution becomes unwieldy and ineffective by design.
3. A Historical Retrospective: Parliament as an Executive Tool
Since President Tibuhaburwa Museveni fully entered electoral politics in 1996, Parliament has progressively shed its independence.
· Legislating Presidential Wishes: Key legislation, from the UPDF Act amendments to the Coffee Act, has been pushed through to fulfill specific presidential directives, often against regional or sectoral public interest. The Speaker’s recorded ethnic bias during the coffee debates illustrated this clearly.
· Sovereignty for Sale? The approval of special economic privileges for individuals like Enrica Pinetti (the Italian-Arab businesswoman linked to the Gaddafi family and historic support for the NRA rebellion) against expert and public opinion shows Parliament ratifying opaque presidential commitments.
· The Five-Year Cycle of Disconnection: Parliament remains a centrally isolated, urban institution. Unlike the judiciary, it has failed to decentralize its ethos. MPs interact more with each other and the executive in Kampala than with their constituents. This explains the high turnover every election: citizens, feeling abandoned, vote out incumbents, only to elect new, inexperienced legislators who are immediately vulnerable to executive manipulation. The people, in effect, elect MPs for the President to use.
4. The Future Beyond 2026: A Parliament of Fear and Hereditary Transition?
The trajectory suggests further erosion of public interest representation.
· Deepening Militarization: With politics already over-militarized, parliamentary processes are likely to see even greater security service influence, ensuring all “sensitive” legislation aligns with regime security interests.
· The Hereditary Presidency Blueprint? Persistent rumors of a transition to a hereditary or “representative electoral college” system—where MPs, not the public, elect the president—are telling. The government’s silence on this specific concern, contrasted with its swift denials on other issues, is ominous. The post-2026 Parliament could be the vehicle to legalize such a fundamental reversal of democratic suffrage.
· The Inevitability of Groupthink: As long as the current political architecture remains, the Parliament will continue to be a rubber-stamp, not a deliberative assembly. It will work to insulate the President’s interests from public demand, not to bridge them.
5. Reclaiming Parliament for the Public: A Pathway to Transformation
For Parliament to become a prized tool for transforming Ugandan livelihoods in this century of knowledge and information, a foundational reset is required:
1. Constitutional & Electoral Reformation:
· Abolish the institutional representation of the army in Parliament.
· Introduce a mixed electoral system with proportional representation to break regional strongholds and foster issue-based politics.
· Firmly cap the number of constituencies to halt politicized fragmentation.
2. Strengthening Institutional Autonomy:
· The offices of Speaker and Deputy must be held by individuals who renounce membership in the ruling party caucus to ensure neutrality.
· Empower committees with independent subpoena and investigative authority, protected from executive interference.
3. Building a Citizen-Parliament Nexus:
· Mandate and fund constituency offices with permanent staff to maintain continuous dialogue between MPs and citizens.
· Implement robust, publicly accessible recall mechanisms so constituents can hold non-performing MPs accountable before the five-year cycle ends.
4. Demilitarizing Politics:
· Legislate clear boundaries against security force intrusion into parliamentary premises and proceedings.
· Foster a culture where debate, not decree or fear, settles national issues.
5. Cultivating a New Political Ethos:
· Support civic education to elevate the electorate’s demand for issue-based representation.
· Encourage the rise of a new generation of legislators whose loyalty is to a multidimensional public interest, not to a person or a narrow set of survivalist interests.
Conclusion
The Parliament of Uganda stands at a precipice. Its current design and practice make it an instrument for managing a regime’s interests, not for championing the public’s. Beyond 2026, without deliberate, courageous, and structural change, it will continue to fail the people of Uganda.
The transformation required is monumental, but the alternative—a legislature that is a mere echo chamber for a single, perennial “interest”—is a guaranteed path to national stagnation and deepening conflict. The Parliament can yet be reclaimed, but only if the public interest is redefined as the non-negotiable core of politics, and the institution is rebuilt to serve that master alone.
For God and My Country
