Tolerance of opposition still eludes our politics
<b>By Crispy Kaheru</b><br><br>The heat is on again as we move closer to the polling day in February 2006.
By Crispy Kaheru
The heat is on again as we move closer to the polling day in February 2006.
Political parties that had been kept in limbo since 1986 are now free to mobilise their supporters.
However, we seem not to have made a big step forward. As it was 20 years ago, political life is still characterised by intolerance of divergent political views. This remains an obstacle to democracy.
Intolerance is precisely the direct opposite of tolerance. Tolerance means that our opponents have the opportunity to express their views or participate in politics without hindrance.
This also involves guaranteeing constitutional rights to individuals, making sure that they have the right to speak in public freely, associate freely for political purposes, publish works relevant to their ideas and run for political office.
Recent government actions against its political opponents point to an attempt to gain unfair advantage over its competitors. Since 1986 when it declared its commitment to restoration of democratic rule, the government has been reluctant to allow fair competition and has consistently adopted rules that do not favour its opponents.
In the end what we have always had on the political scene are not contests in the strict sense of the word. In the last 20 years we have seen state agencies like the police and army disperse rallies of opposition groups with unreasonable force. The result is a firmer grip of the ruling group on power.
One only hopes that things continue getting better. Serious incidents of intolerance to dissenting political belief have have been in form of intimidation and harassment of opposition politicians. This threatens the enjoyment of human rights, including freedom to associate for political purposes.
The violent clashes of March 8, 2005 between Uganda Young Democrats (UYD) supporters and the National Resistance Movement (NRM) fans at the International Women’s Day celebrations in Mpigi district was a sign that 2005 was not going to be a peaceful year.
The continued threats to journalists and opposition members are another sign of a culture of intolerance that seems to be taking root in our society at a time when we all ought to appreciate the need for having divergent political, economic and social ideals.
It has been fashionable for President Museveni to refer to past leaders and opposition party leaders in the most derogatory language. The recent arrest of FDC leader Dr. Kizza Besigye, though within the law, could have been avoided.
As we move into the new year, let us understand that at the core of pluralism, there should be eagerness to open our ears to many voices regardless of whether we agree with them or not. This should be coupled with the willingness to embrace diversity of views.
If we fail to accept that society can not be homogeneous, we shall have only ourselves to blame when the consequences of intolerance turn sour. Intolerance breeds divisions in society as people begin to look at themselves in terms of their political, religious and ethnic backgrounds. We need to look at ourselves as Ugandans first and accept the fact that we have equal claims and stakes in our country.
Unity in diversity is the best thing that can happen to our countries.
Had this spirit taken root in Rwanda, the DRC or Sudan, those countries would not have experienced the problems they have had.
Tolerance of dissenting ideas is fertile ground for peace and development. Every citizen has a responsibility to ensure protection of fundamental rights through engaging the state constructively.
The heat is on again as we move closer to the polling day in February 2006.
Political parties that had been kept in limbo since 1986 are now free to mobilise their supporters.
However, we seem not to have made a big step forward. As it was 20 years ago, political life is still characterised by intolerance of divergent political views. This remains an obstacle to democracy.
Intolerance is precisely the direct opposite of tolerance. Tolerance means that our opponents have the opportunity to express their views or participate in politics without hindrance.
This also involves guaranteeing constitutional rights to individuals, making sure that they have the right to speak in public freely, associate freely for political purposes, publish works relevant to their ideas and run for political office.
Recent government actions against its political opponents point to an attempt to gain unfair advantage over its competitors. Since 1986 when it declared its commitment to restoration of democratic rule, the government has been reluctant to allow fair competition and has consistently adopted rules that do not favour its opponents.
In the end what we have always had on the political scene are not contests in the strict sense of the word. In the last 20 years we have seen state agencies like the police and army disperse rallies of opposition groups with unreasonable force. The result is a firmer grip of the ruling group on power.
One only hopes that things continue getting better. Serious incidents of intolerance to dissenting political belief have have been in form of intimidation and harassment of opposition politicians. This threatens the enjoyment of human rights, including freedom to associate for political purposes.
The violent clashes of March 8, 2005 between Uganda Young Democrats (UYD) supporters and the National Resistance Movement (NRM) fans at the International Women’s Day celebrations in Mpigi district was a sign that 2005 was not going to be a peaceful year.
The continued threats to journalists and opposition members are another sign of a culture of intolerance that seems to be taking root in our society at a time when we all ought to appreciate the need for having divergent political, economic and social ideals.
It has been fashionable for President Museveni to refer to past leaders and opposition party leaders in the most derogatory language. The recent arrest of FDC leader Dr. Kizza Besigye, though within the law, could have been avoided.
As we move into the new year, let us understand that at the core of pluralism, there should be eagerness to open our ears to many voices regardless of whether we agree with them or not. This should be coupled with the willingness to embrace diversity of views.
If we fail to accept that society can not be homogeneous, we shall have only ourselves to blame when the consequences of intolerance turn sour. Intolerance breeds divisions in society as people begin to look at themselves in terms of their political, religious and ethnic backgrounds. We need to look at ourselves as Ugandans first and accept the fact that we have equal claims and stakes in our country.
Unity in diversity is the best thing that can happen to our countries.
Had this spirit taken root in Rwanda, the DRC or Sudan, those countries would not have experienced the problems they have had.
Tolerance of dissenting ideas is fertile ground for peace and development. Every citizen has a responsibility to ensure protection of fundamental rights through engaging the state constructively.