Keep intimidation out of campaigns

Nov 11, 2005

SIR — The return of Dr. Kiiza Besigye has considerably raised the political temperature and rightly so. In his characteristic defiant mood, Besigye has refused to rule out rebellion claiming that factors that can trigger off a rebellion are very much present in Uganda today.

SIR — The return of Dr. Kiiza Besigye has considerably raised the political temperature and rightly so. In his characteristic defiant mood, Besigye has refused to rule out rebellion claiming that factors that can trigger off a rebellion are very much present in Uganda today. There have been allegations by the government that Besigye has a hand in the People’s Redemption Army (PRA), a charge he has vehemently denied. However, his defiant mood continues to trouble many of his supporters. What does all this mean? it essentially means that both the government and the opposition are determined to play the “military card”, come the 2006 presidential campaigns. Here lies the question about the politics of Uganda. Our political leaders on both political divides cannot raise social and economic issues on what to base their political campaigns. This means Uganda still has a long way to go. Perhaps this explains the recent threats by General Aronda Nyakairima and maj. Kakooza Mutale to the opposition. I can see the 2001 political scenario replaying itself in the 2006 presidential campaigns. This will be most unfortunate because Ugandans had expected violence-free campaigns in 2006. Mutale, the presidential adviser on political affairs has now vowed to “crush anyone who opposes his campaign to bring back president Yoweri Museveni to power, he warned pallisa residents recently.

There would be nothing wrong for Mutale’s support for Museveni’s candidature if it did not resurrect the images of violence that marred the 2001 elections. Mutale and his paramilitary Kalangala action plan and some sections of the army are widely believed to have been at the centre of that violence in 2001. Perhaps one would have thought that five years later, Mutale had become wiser and more responsible.

It is not correct for a presidential adviser to use his position and government equipment to harass a section of Ugandans.

Members of the opposition too are taxpayers, who pay his salary and buy the fuel that he uses to hunt them down in their own country.

I keep asking myself why politicians insist on making Uganda look like a lawless country.

What do they fear if their campaigns are not characterised by harassment and intimidation?

Our political leaders may only be thinking of winning the Mach 2006 elections but they need to know about other important issues at play.

Such actions might affect Uganda’s position in the East African Federation process expected to start before the next five years’ presidential term expires. Should the neighbouring countries be made to believe that intimidation of the population is a norm in Uganda?

The most sensible thing in the circumstances is to be decent and scrap intimidation, harassment and persecution from our leaders’ campaign manifestoes. E. F. Kahuma Fort portal
Ends

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});