Why shouldn’t the army be represented in Parliament?
Jun 27, 2005
There are many reasons why the army should be represented in Parliament even under multiparty democracy.
Capt Steven Basaliza
There are many reasons why the army should be represented in Parliament even under multiparty democracy.
This is why the Constitution, under Article 78, clearly shows the composition of Parliament as:
- Members directly elected to present constituencies.
- One-woman representative for every district.
- Such numbers of representatives of the army, youth, workers, persons with disabilities and other groups as parliament may determine and the vice president and ministers, who, if not already elected members of parliament shall be ex-officio members of parliament without the right to vote on any issue requiring a vote in Parliament.
Upon expiration 10 years after the commencement of this constitution and there after every five years, Parliament shall view the representation under (b) and (c) for the purpose of retaining, increasing or abolishing any such representation and any other matter incidental to it.
The fact that we may go multiparty should not bar representation of the army in Parliament. As in other parliaments of democracies in the world, non-partisan representation can exist in a multiparty system.
Look at our 4th Parliament under Obote II, which was a multiparty democracy.
This parliament had:
- Maj. F. Agwar, F
- Lt Col Bazaraki
- Col. Z. Maruru
- Lt R.K Namiti R.K t.
- Lt Col S. J. Namyumba
- Lt Col W.A. Nyero
- Lt Col W. A.Okello
- Maj. Gen. T. Okello
- Brig. D. Oyitte-Ojok
- Maj. J.J.Upor-Ukwonga, as army representatives in Parliament
These MPs represents the institutional views of the army on matters of great national importance. As the single most important factor in the stability of the country, the army is entitled to be heard. It is the NRA/UPDF that, through armed struggle, brought the democratic political dispensation Uganda is enjoying today. Why would any one have doubts about their democratic credentials? NRA/UPDF has been in the Ugandan legislature for the last 16 years since 1989. Do they have such a bad record that anyone should ask for their exclusion from Parliament?
On the question of voting by army MPs, it would be according to institutional positions. Civilians authority will be in control of the military. That is well catered for and should not stop their representation.
So, I fully support retention of army representation in parliament.
The write is the Member of Parliament for Burahya County, and vice-chairperson of the defence and internal affairs committee
There are many reasons why the army should be represented in Parliament even under multiparty democracy.
This is why the Constitution, under Article 78, clearly shows the composition of Parliament as:
- Members directly elected to present constituencies.
- One-woman representative for every district.
- Such numbers of representatives of the army, youth, workers, persons with disabilities and other groups as parliament may determine and the vice president and ministers, who, if not already elected members of parliament shall be ex-officio members of parliament without the right to vote on any issue requiring a vote in Parliament.
Upon expiration 10 years after the commencement of this constitution and there after every five years, Parliament shall view the representation under (b) and (c) for the purpose of retaining, increasing or abolishing any such representation and any other matter incidental to it.
The fact that we may go multiparty should not bar representation of the army in Parliament. As in other parliaments of democracies in the world, non-partisan representation can exist in a multiparty system.
Look at our 4th Parliament under Obote II, which was a multiparty democracy.
This parliament had:
- Maj. F. Agwar, F
- Lt Col Bazaraki
- Col. Z. Maruru
- Lt R.K Namiti R.K t.
- Lt Col S. J. Namyumba
- Lt Col W.A. Nyero
- Lt Col W. A.Okello
- Maj. Gen. T. Okello
- Brig. D. Oyitte-Ojok
- Maj. J.J.Upor-Ukwonga, as army representatives in Parliament
These MPs represents the institutional views of the army on matters of great national importance. As the single most important factor in the stability of the country, the army is entitled to be heard. It is the NRA/UPDF that, through armed struggle, brought the democratic political dispensation Uganda is enjoying today. Why would any one have doubts about their democratic credentials? NRA/UPDF has been in the Ugandan legislature for the last 16 years since 1989. Do they have such a bad record that anyone should ask for their exclusion from Parliament?
On the question of voting by army MPs, it would be according to institutional positions. Civilians authority will be in control of the military. That is well catered for and should not stop their representation.
So, I fully support retention of army representation in parliament.
The write is the Member of Parliament for Burahya County, and vice-chairperson of the defence and internal affairs committee