Give White Paper thorough attention
Oct 13, 2004
SIR— I wish to express my views about the first-ever White Paper on the Constitution of Uganda. <br>The document contains proposals which, when passed, will determine whether Uganda’s future will be stable or unstable.
SIR— I wish to express my views about the first-ever White Paper on the Constitution of Uganda.
The document contains proposals which, when passed, will determine whether Uganda’s future will be stable or unstable. It will determine whether our grand children will peacefully, comfortably and proudly live in this great Pearl of Africa. It is therefore crucial that great care, objectivity, sobriety and ample time should be given to the discussions on this fundamental document, if it is to yield a blessing, not a curse, to Uganda. The White Paper contains many proposals ranging from politics, economics to culture, both from the Government and the citizenry of Uganda. Disappointingly, the debates have narrowed down the White Paper to only two issues, amendment of article 105 (2) and federo. This has deprived attention to other cardinal issues like the compulsory acquisition of land by Government for investment (which touches everybody because most Ugandans own land), the dissolution of Parliament by the President, the holding of parliamentary and presidential elections on the same day, and whether one can stand for both presidency and Parliament at the same time.
All the issues in the White Paper deserve enough time and thorough debate if we are to come up with a good and respected Constitution. However, time is not on our side, considering that these issues affect the 2006 elections, which are around the corner. If we are to do justice to this country and ourselves, the debate on the White Paper should be stretched beyond 2006, especially for issues that do not directly affect the transition and 2006 elections. It is better to move as carefully and systematically as possible than rush and lead the country along a shortcut to chaos. Let the Government sort out the issues in the White Paper, that directly affect the transition and 2006 elections and be discussed by Parliament. Let it then differ the rest that do not directly affect the transition to the next Parliament after 2006 because the time is short, yet we have to discuss all the issues in the White Paper.
Issues like dual citizenship, compulsory acquisition of land for investment by government, the autonomy of the Bank of Uganda, etc, can be discussed by the 8th Parliament after 2006 so that ample time is given to these issues for thorough, comprehensive debate.
The White Paper touches the marrow of Uganda’s future. The issues in it must be given the equal and optimum attention they deserve for a better future.
Edson Oyera
Kampala
The document contains proposals which, when passed, will determine whether Uganda’s future will be stable or unstable. It will determine whether our grand children will peacefully, comfortably and proudly live in this great Pearl of Africa. It is therefore crucial that great care, objectivity, sobriety and ample time should be given to the discussions on this fundamental document, if it is to yield a blessing, not a curse, to Uganda. The White Paper contains many proposals ranging from politics, economics to culture, both from the Government and the citizenry of Uganda. Disappointingly, the debates have narrowed down the White Paper to only two issues, amendment of article 105 (2) and federo. This has deprived attention to other cardinal issues like the compulsory acquisition of land by Government for investment (which touches everybody because most Ugandans own land), the dissolution of Parliament by the President, the holding of parliamentary and presidential elections on the same day, and whether one can stand for both presidency and Parliament at the same time.
All the issues in the White Paper deserve enough time and thorough debate if we are to come up with a good and respected Constitution. However, time is not on our side, considering that these issues affect the 2006 elections, which are around the corner. If we are to do justice to this country and ourselves, the debate on the White Paper should be stretched beyond 2006, especially for issues that do not directly affect the transition and 2006 elections. It is better to move as carefully and systematically as possible than rush and lead the country along a shortcut to chaos. Let the Government sort out the issues in the White Paper, that directly affect the transition and 2006 elections and be discussed by Parliament. Let it then differ the rest that do not directly affect the transition to the next Parliament after 2006 because the time is short, yet we have to discuss all the issues in the White Paper.
Issues like dual citizenship, compulsory acquisition of land for investment by government, the autonomy of the Bank of Uganda, etc, can be discussed by the 8th Parliament after 2006 so that ample time is given to these issues for thorough, comprehensive debate.
The White Paper touches the marrow of Uganda’s future. The issues in it must be given the equal and optimum attention they deserve for a better future.
Edson Oyera
Kampala