Civil servants were right to attend
Nov 14, 2004
SIR— I wish to present my understanding of the role of civil servants in politics and my considered views on the direction of the political order in Uganda.
SIR— I wish to present my understanding of the role of civil servants in politics and my considered views on the direction of the political order in Uganda.
I read two articles which appeared in some sections of the press last week. One was on November 7, entitled, “Top government officials attend NRM meetingâ€. The other was an editorial on November 8, entitled, “Keep civil servants outâ€.
Both articles virtually castigated the civil servants for attending the National Resistance Movement Organisation (NRM-O) meetings at No. 10 Kyaddondo Road, Kampala, the temporary headquarters of the NRM-O.
Political discussions in some of the media in Uganda generally give the impression that the sky is about to fall on earth, a misplaced conception indeed.
The two articles gave the impression that the NRM-O is a new invention without solid background and political obligation to the people of Uganda. Granted, NRM-O is recently registered in accordance with the current law on the transition to multiparty democracy.
Semantic legalities aside, NRM-O is a de facto continuation of the NRM. It is not a new invention like FDC, for instance. Unlike the other parties in Uganda, it has ongoing programmes mandated by the people of Uganda.
The forthcoming decision to open political space for multiparty politics will be to enable those not comfortable with the Movement to belong to parties or other organisations of their choice.
This is what the opposition within has been fighting for; and the right to associate will be granted in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Constitution. The opposition should therefore be celebrating.
On its part, the Movement, which is the choice of the majority on account of previous documented endorsements, will move on with its contract with the people of Uganda. Whatever name is given to it by legal experts, one only needs to grasp this reality by reading the NRM-O constitution.
Simply put, the struggle continues, for the total political and socio-economic emancipation of the country by those who desire to continue subscribing to the Movement philosophy introduced in 1986.
Regarding the role of civil servants in relation to politics, there seems to be misunderstanding on the issue.
The role of civil servants is to implement government policies and programmes. That is why they are employed and paid by the Government. They are therefore accountable to the Government as far as those policies and programmes are concerned.
Right now, the Government in power now is the Movement. The policies and programmes endorsed by the majority of Ugandans in 2001 are in President Museveni’s election manifesto of that year. This Government owes it to Ugandans to implement the contents of that manifesto.
Therefore, when the Movement convenes at 10 Kyaddondo Road, it is to see to the status of the manifesto.
Those civil servants, therefore, had the obligation to answer to the summons to explain the progress of the implementation of the President’s 2001 manifesto.
Nothing else. To say that the head of the Civil Service should reprimand them is to misunderstand the issue.
Instead, the head of the Civil Service should reprimand those who did not respond to the summons, if there were any. Would civil servants have obligation to respond to similar summons by other political parties or organisations? No. Because those parties or organisations have no mandate by the people of Uganda. The obligation for civil servants to be apolitical is only in three respects.
(1) To implement government policies and programmes irrespective of their own persuasions. (2) To be impartial and not exhibit bias over other persuasions. (3) Not to engage in active politics. That “civil servants are by law not supposed to belong to political parties.†is not true.
There is no such law against freedom of association.
Mull S. Katende
Uganda’s Ambassador to Sudan
I read two articles which appeared in some sections of the press last week. One was on November 7, entitled, “Top government officials attend NRM meetingâ€. The other was an editorial on November 8, entitled, “Keep civil servants outâ€.
Both articles virtually castigated the civil servants for attending the National Resistance Movement Organisation (NRM-O) meetings at No. 10 Kyaddondo Road, Kampala, the temporary headquarters of the NRM-O.
Political discussions in some of the media in Uganda generally give the impression that the sky is about to fall on earth, a misplaced conception indeed.
The two articles gave the impression that the NRM-O is a new invention without solid background and political obligation to the people of Uganda. Granted, NRM-O is recently registered in accordance with the current law on the transition to multiparty democracy.
Semantic legalities aside, NRM-O is a de facto continuation of the NRM. It is not a new invention like FDC, for instance. Unlike the other parties in Uganda, it has ongoing programmes mandated by the people of Uganda.
The forthcoming decision to open political space for multiparty politics will be to enable those not comfortable with the Movement to belong to parties or other organisations of their choice.
This is what the opposition within has been fighting for; and the right to associate will be granted in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Constitution. The opposition should therefore be celebrating.
On its part, the Movement, which is the choice of the majority on account of previous documented endorsements, will move on with its contract with the people of Uganda. Whatever name is given to it by legal experts, one only needs to grasp this reality by reading the NRM-O constitution.
Simply put, the struggle continues, for the total political and socio-economic emancipation of the country by those who desire to continue subscribing to the Movement philosophy introduced in 1986.
Regarding the role of civil servants in relation to politics, there seems to be misunderstanding on the issue.
The role of civil servants is to implement government policies and programmes. That is why they are employed and paid by the Government. They are therefore accountable to the Government as far as those policies and programmes are concerned.
Right now, the Government in power now is the Movement. The policies and programmes endorsed by the majority of Ugandans in 2001 are in President Museveni’s election manifesto of that year. This Government owes it to Ugandans to implement the contents of that manifesto.
Therefore, when the Movement convenes at 10 Kyaddondo Road, it is to see to the status of the manifesto.
Those civil servants, therefore, had the obligation to answer to the summons to explain the progress of the implementation of the President’s 2001 manifesto.
Nothing else. To say that the head of the Civil Service should reprimand them is to misunderstand the issue.
Instead, the head of the Civil Service should reprimand those who did not respond to the summons, if there were any. Would civil servants have obligation to respond to similar summons by other political parties or organisations? No. Because those parties or organisations have no mandate by the people of Uganda. The obligation for civil servants to be apolitical is only in three respects.
(1) To implement government policies and programmes irrespective of their own persuasions. (2) To be impartial and not exhibit bias over other persuasions. (3) Not to engage in active politics. That “civil servants are by law not supposed to belong to political parties.†is not true.
There is no such law against freedom of association.
Mull S. Katende
Uganda’s Ambassador to Sudan