In Africa, people keep a respectable distance from ghosts

Ofwono-Opondo's OpinionIT is hard to find any valid reason for the jubilations that Mayor Sebaana Kizito was re-elected in Kampala. For those watching Uganda's politics since independence it is a fact that Kampala has always been a DP stronghold until 1986, when NRM's Bidandi Ssali edged out Sam Kutesa and Joseph Mulenga both then DP-leaning politicians. Unless of course DP leaders are forgetful of their own past, the celebrations may be irrelevant. For a start, the 1980 elections masterminded and won by the Uganda Peoples' Congress (UPC), DP swept Kampala clean. In Kampala east constituency Ojok Mulozi elbowed out UPC's flamboyant Aggrey Awori.During the expanded NRC, DP's Hajji Ali Serunjogi, Ssebaana Kizito, Damiano Lubega, Wasswa Ziritwawula, and Dr Specioza Kazibwe then of DP women wing took Kampala. Now for a national party founded nearly fifty years ago to celebrate for being reduced to Kampala enclave, is ridiculous but not surprising. To the contrary, the DP leaders should be examining how their national support has been narrowed to Kampala alone. It ought to be remembered also that since the advent of the Movement, all elected Kampala mayors have been DP people starting with Ziritwawula in 1987, Christopher Iga, Nasser Ssebaggala and now Ssebaana Kizito. So in effect Ssebaana's victory should be seen as the norm rather than the exception, as they would wish the public to believe.And this is not the first time DP leaders celebrated about false election victory because they did so in 1980, then in 1985 under Gen Tito Okello's junta, and again in the expanded NRC and RC elections of 1989. Alongside the celebrations of a multiparty "victory" in Kampala there have been criticisms of the Movement political system, first as one that solely or mainly relies on the state apparatus especially the army to live and thrive. This charge is being raised on the false assumption that the Movement began in 1986 when a team led by Yoweri Museveni captured state power. Be reminded that the Movement was founded and built much earlier from the ashes of the flawed electoral process of 1980, which gave UPC false victory. From 1980 to January 1986 the Movement relied on its capacity to make clandestine political and military mobilisation of the population mainly the peasants to oppose the Milton Obote UPC regime.Without reliance on the popular will of the people in the immediate areas of military operation, the guerrilla war would have collapsed just like the one of Awori's FOBA, Alice Lakwena's Holy Spirit Movement, Joseph Kony's LRA, Yusuf Kabanda's ADF, and Peter Otai's UPA. Therefore it is not entirely accurate to predict that without the state support the Movement would collapse. Similarly, the Movement struggled and triumphed due to powerful ideological commitment and policy alternatives rather than the money politics. Secondly, criticism has been raised that the Movement is weak at grassroot mobilisation and hence afraid of open, free and fair competition alongside groups such as UPC and DP.If the Movement were unable to mobilise, it would not have won the war against the "mighty" UPC regime then in control of all the state machinery, which it manipulated to its advantage. Also it would not have survived in power for 16 years now, while simultaneously conducting extensive democratisation reforms through popular participation and under universal adult suffrage.It is further attacked as a monolithic system or organisation run on the dictates of a single person, Museveni, without whom its future is doomed. However, while these criticisms are made, it would be prudent to acknowledge that for the first time many democratic and constitutional power centres have been established at the lowest levels possible. The ubiquitous presidential powers enjoyed by UPC have greatly been trimmed to the bare minimum and there are threats to cut them even further.These included power to appoint party and army faithfuls to parliament, dissolving parliament and unilateral declaration of state of emergence in case of a political dispute.It should be recalled that under UPC administration the mayor of Kampala and other municipalities were appointed by the local government minister.And for sometime now it has become a trademark at political discussions that the Movement should open up for the revival of multpartyism.This view presupposes that the political space is closed merely because some party activities have been at abeyance for some time now. Even in a home one does not just open their doors even to thugs to rob and rape, as has been the case with some political actors here. So when people argue for "opening up," they should also find out political and economic luggage the parties are carrying to deliver to Ugandans, which they failed to do when they were in charge.And that if the Movement has been a success then it has valid reason to fear competition with the "ghosts," in the parties particularly UPC and DP.As for the achievements it is certain that few people would want a successful marriage ruined for the simple case of experimentation. Also, like in soccer, a good coach would be ill-advised to change either his team or captain merely because there is someone on the bench waiting to be substitute in case of injuries.And back to the ghost question, as in an African setting ghosts are very much feared by the living, even by those who previously loved the dead person. It is mainly because of this fear that we tend to do all the best things to dead bodies so they do not haunt us, the living.