Disunity will erode Trade Union power
Feb 15, 2006
SIR – I looked at the Solicitor General Lucian Tibaruha’s letter to the Secretary Electoral Commission dated 19/01/2002, giving his proposal and guidelines on the election of Workers’ MPs given the fact that apparently there are two national centres – National Organisation of Trade Unions (N
SIR – I looked at the Solicitor General Lucian Tibaruha’s letter to the Secretary Electoral Commission dated 19/01/2002, giving his proposal and guidelines on the election of Workers’ MPs given the fact that apparently there are two national centres – National Organisation of Trade Unions (NOTU) and Central Organisation of Free Trade Unions (COFTU).
He advises and directs that NOTU, with 17 trade union affiliates, elects three MPs, COFTU one MP (in this case Dr. Sam Lyomoki) and one seat left for a woman MP, who should be jointly elected.
The Solicitor General bases his opinion on the judgment of the constitutional petition No. 08 of 2004 of Dr. Sam Lyomoki and five others Vs Attorney General that challenged the recognition of NOTU as the sole national centre (according to the Trade Union Decree 1973), which was contradicting Articles 29 and 40 of the national Constitution.
Lyomoki and others won the case. It is also based on two letters dated January 9 and 11, 2006, both written to the Attorney General by Dr. Lyomoki and the Labour Commissioner Dr. David Ogaram respectively. In Dr. Lyomoki’s letter he raises a number of issues including the demand to be rewarded for “COFTU’s contributions….. (in) …… the transfer of NSSF away from the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development†and their “intervention that ….. saved Uganda from the hands of economic saboteurs who had wanted Uganda off the AGOA facility …..†It is unfortunate at this level for the Solicitor General to give a directive to have the election of workers’ MPs under two national centres, implying that the workers have been polarised along COFTU and NOTU lines, thereby missing one of the greatest tenets of a trade union, unity. Once this succeeds, it may create confusion among other interest groups with some of their members/leaders.
The Solicitor General has failed to provide proper explanation and guidance as to why not all the 21 unions would come together as per statutory instruments 2001 No. 31 (Parliamentary Elections Special Interest Groups part V) to elect all their five workers’ MPs. He has not explained why he has allowed COFTU to elect one MP (in this case Lyomoki), NOTU to elect the three and a joint electoral college to elect a woman workers’ MP. If this is going to happen, a precedent is likely to be set under the various interest groups whereby we anticipate to have two or three groups demanding representation.
The Solicitor General should be reminded that in 1994, Uganda signed the International Labour Organisation Convention 144 which promotes tripartism and also compels governments to work with the most representative and in this case, it is NOTU.
I appeal to all workers to avoid being used by a few disgruntled individuals who desire to achieve their long-term political objectives using trade unions as their platform.
John Kasigazi Okello
Chief of research desk
Uganda Public Employees Union
He advises and directs that NOTU, with 17 trade union affiliates, elects three MPs, COFTU one MP (in this case Dr. Sam Lyomoki) and one seat left for a woman MP, who should be jointly elected.
The Solicitor General bases his opinion on the judgment of the constitutional petition No. 08 of 2004 of Dr. Sam Lyomoki and five others Vs Attorney General that challenged the recognition of NOTU as the sole national centre (according to the Trade Union Decree 1973), which was contradicting Articles 29 and 40 of the national Constitution.
Lyomoki and others won the case. It is also based on two letters dated January 9 and 11, 2006, both written to the Attorney General by Dr. Lyomoki and the Labour Commissioner Dr. David Ogaram respectively. In Dr. Lyomoki’s letter he raises a number of issues including the demand to be rewarded for “COFTU’s contributions….. (in) …… the transfer of NSSF away from the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development†and their “intervention that ….. saved Uganda from the hands of economic saboteurs who had wanted Uganda off the AGOA facility …..†It is unfortunate at this level for the Solicitor General to give a directive to have the election of workers’ MPs under two national centres, implying that the workers have been polarised along COFTU and NOTU lines, thereby missing one of the greatest tenets of a trade union, unity. Once this succeeds, it may create confusion among other interest groups with some of their members/leaders.
The Solicitor General has failed to provide proper explanation and guidance as to why not all the 21 unions would come together as per statutory instruments 2001 No. 31 (Parliamentary Elections Special Interest Groups part V) to elect all their five workers’ MPs. He has not explained why he has allowed COFTU to elect one MP (in this case Lyomoki), NOTU to elect the three and a joint electoral college to elect a woman workers’ MP. If this is going to happen, a precedent is likely to be set under the various interest groups whereby we anticipate to have two or three groups demanding representation.
The Solicitor General should be reminded that in 1994, Uganda signed the International Labour Organisation Convention 144 which promotes tripartism and also compels governments to work with the most representative and in this case, it is NOTU.
I appeal to all workers to avoid being used by a few disgruntled individuals who desire to achieve their long-term political objectives using trade unions as their platform.
John Kasigazi Okello
Chief of research desk
Uganda Public Employees Union