Why UPC left the Inter-Party Cooperation
Sep 02, 2010
THE Uganda People’s Congress (UPC) withdrew from the Inter-Party Cooperation (IPC) on Monday and the UPC president, Dr Olara Otunnu, raised many fundamental issues.
THE Uganda People’s Congress (UPC) withdrew from the Inter-Party Cooperation (IPC) on Monday and the UPC president, Dr Olara Otunnu, raised many fundamental issues.
The reason for the breakaway was on free and fair elections. It is a demand UPC will not negotiate about. After all it was the main thrust behind the formation of IPC.
It was a collective position that any attempt to back track on it would obviously raise eyebrows.
The opposition also believe the Electoral Commission may not be fair in the 2011 elections. Some members of the public feel that the current electoral commission, just like in the past, cannot organise credible elections.
How then can the UPC be accountable to all those we have, in the past, rallied with against the current EC? And what shall we tell the population after the 2011 elections are not conducted to our expectations?
Our preoccupation should be on how to engage all democratic loving Ugandans to demand for electoral reforms.
But if the opposition sends mixed signals, then we stand to lose in the coming elections. This loophole is what UPC wants to seal.
As UPC, therefore, two choices lay before us; participating in an election that we know cannot be free and fair or participating in genuinely free and fair elections.
We have chosen the latter because we have not lost hope. We are confident that with a change in the Electoral Commission, Ugandans will have the opportunity to take charge of their national affairs. The UPC does not believe in the option of boycott.
We will struggle for electoral reforms and come 2011, Ugandans, if they choose so, will participate in a free and fair election.
The reason for the breakaway was on free and fair elections. It is a demand UPC will not negotiate about. After all it was the main thrust behind the formation of IPC.
It was a collective position that any attempt to back track on it would obviously raise eyebrows.
The opposition also believe the Electoral Commission may not be fair in the 2011 elections. Some members of the public feel that the current electoral commission, just like in the past, cannot organise credible elections.
How then can the UPC be accountable to all those we have, in the past, rallied with against the current EC? And what shall we tell the population after the 2011 elections are not conducted to our expectations?
Our preoccupation should be on how to engage all democratic loving Ugandans to demand for electoral reforms.
But if the opposition sends mixed signals, then we stand to lose in the coming elections. This loophole is what UPC wants to seal.
As UPC, therefore, two choices lay before us; participating in an election that we know cannot be free and fair or participating in genuinely free and fair elections.
We have chosen the latter because we have not lost hope. We are confident that with a change in the Electoral Commission, Ugandans will have the opportunity to take charge of their national affairs. The UPC does not believe in the option of boycott.
We will struggle for electoral reforms and come 2011, Ugandans, if they choose so, will participate in a free and fair election.