Will restoration of Presidential term limits save Uganda?

By Elias Bwambale

Uganda will hold elections in early 2016 in what will be the incumbent President’s 30th year in power. These elections have generated several provocative, yet fruitful discussions amongst Ugandans and if you ask me why, well, your guess is as good as mine.

Consequently, I feel constrained to add my voice to the ongoing debate on the restoration of presidential term limits that is steamrolling throughout Uganda. Will the restoration of these term limits do any good to Ugandans?

It is important to note that a presidential term limit is a legal restriction that limits the number of terms a president may serve in office. In Uganda, a president was initially restricted to only two terms prior to the 2005 Constitutional amendment which ushered in a limitless tenure in his office.

Given the ongoing debate on presidential term limits, it is not surprising that those who profess to favour them argue that term limits would not only check corruption and promote political accountability but they would also provide an important check on the concentration of power and strengthen democracy. They contend that the longer a president holds power, the more likely it is that he/she would stop serving the public and begin serving his/her own interests. They go ahead to state that this erodes the balance of power and weakens the authority of autonomous legislatures, independent judiciaries, neutral electoral authorities and competitive political parties.

It is, however, equally important to note the limitations of term limits. Term limits would hardly check corruption or promote political accountability, let alone strengthen democracy in Uganda and I will tell you why. I was initially in favor of term limits, but having now bothered to stop and actually think about the issue, I have changed my mind.

First and foremost, term limits instill in the incumbents a lack of fear for losing their offices since they don't face the wrath of the electorate in the future. As a result, they cease to be concerned with the needs of their electorate. This mindset would in itself breed tendencies of corruption and also dilute political accountability. Such incumbents would also be more likely to ignore the will and consent of the people upon which they are supposed to be governed.

By the same token, term limits are undemocratic in the sense that they take away the right of voters to be represented by the politician of their choice yet democracy entails election of leaders by choice. It follows therefore that if the public wish to re-elect their politician, it is exceedingly undemocratic to prevent them from doing so.

Certainly, term limits do lock out experienced leaders who have done great things for their country and are otherwise exemplary servants of the public trust. Such leaders are forced to step down and new, inexperienced individuals take on their role. Crude as this may sound, it wouldn’t say much for the office of the presidency to throw open its doors to all inexperienced persons who fancy it.

Furthermore, much as some people might argue that restoring presidential term limits is worth a try, I am skeptical it would make much difference, bearing in mind that the same support staff would still be employed. The new president would by all means seek guidance from them and resultantly dance to their tunes.

I am therefore of the opinion that term limits would simply be as useless as a fifth wheel, bearing in mind that any president would be in position to remove them as and when they so desire. Since Ugandans can express their will and consent on who can govern them and how they should be governed, through regular, free and fair elections, I think that the only thing that will create real change is an educated electorate that can vote out politicians that stray.

The writer is a lawyer