>
homepage > Uganda - is it good governance?
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
Uganda - Is it a model of Good Governance for Africa? An Essay by Donna Muwonge Introduction Introduction While prosperity remains a mirage for many African countries, over the past decade there has been a ray of hope. Some countries appear to have broken the mould of post-colonial African development. Since 1986, when President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni first came to power with the National Resistance Movement, Uganda, once torn by civil war, has been transformed into a star pupil, in terms of reform for development in Africa, achieving growth rates of, on average, 7.0% GDP between 1990-20001. This year The Republic
of Uganda celebrates 40 years of Independence. It has become an
extraordinary model of what can be achieved through good governance
and commitment. As one of the most well-endowed ex-colonies it has
an extraordinary post-colonial history that has taken it from the
brink of disintegration to one of the continent's success stories.
While Uganda's economic achievements are great, what is even more
remarkable is the almost unswerving commitment of the Government
of Uganda to economic development. However, in order for growth
to be sustainable beyond the utilisation of existing capacity, new
capacity has to be generated. It is in Uganda's ability to ensure
that it facilitates and promotes the new capacity on which its future
development will be based. This, in part, will depend even more
so on the governance of the country. 'Good governance' entered the vocabulary of development in the late 80s under the influence of powerful institutions like the World Bank and bilateral donor agencies such as the UK Department For International Development (DFID). Its emergence followed concern over the poor results of structural adjustment policies expressed by academics and policy makers. The 'Washington Consensus'2 involving market-oriented policy reform, was the undisputed paradigm for development and politics throughout the 1980s. Driving this was an inherent distrust of the state that stemmed from disillusionment with previous development interventions that made the state the focus of development activity. The state was seen as a major obstacle to economic and social development and as such, reform involved rolling back the state, shrinking its scope and size in favour of market mechanisms. These reforms were pursued more often than not in developing countries under pressure from the multilateral financial institutions through the use of conditionalities attached to aid. Following the poor results of these policies the argument that effective and feasible economic reforms require strong institutional foundations emerged - the state and its role could no longer be sidelined. This agenda, focusing on 'good governance', came to be known as the 'Post-Washington Consensus'. Governance is the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented (or not implemented). An analysis of governance focuses on both the formal and informal actors involved in decision-making and implementation and the formal and informal structures that have been set in place to arrive at and implement decisions. It refers to the nature and style of political systems. Nsibambi (Prime Minister of Uganda) has outlined what may be described as a working definition of Good Governance for Uganda consistent with all definitions offered by multi- and bi-lateral institutions. This definition was derived from a strategic conference of ministers and permanent secretaries entitled 'The Quest for Good Governance' and the subsequent working group formed Good Governance is the exercise of politico-administrative and managerial authority and order which is legitimate, accountable, transparent, democratic, efficient and equitable in resource allocation and utilisation, and responsive to the critical needs of promoting human welfare and positive transformation of society. It manifests itself through benchmarks which include a constitution, pillars of the state derived from the constitution, mechanisms for checks and balances on governments, efficient mechanisms of delivery of services by government, security, good leadership, the rule of law, participation by the people, freedom of expression, transparency, accountability, legitimacy, devolution of power, informed citizenry, strong civil society, protection of basic human rights, regular free and fair elections, good international relations, political stability, protection of property and life. It intends to assure that corruption is minimized and the views of minorities and voices of the most vulnerable in society are heard in decision-making. Good Governance remains a contested issue. The debate surrounding good governance, for Africa in particular, revolves around 4 key issues:
All these debates
aside, Uganda has been held up by the World Bank and other western
donors as a model for Africa, mainly based on its economic performance.
It is important to analyse this accolade against the Bank's own
criteria for good governance, however contested these might be,
as it sends powerful messages to other African countries. It is
important that the right messages are being transmitted.
Decentralisation
is often seen as an integral part of the logic of democratisation
- the power of a people to determine their own form of government,
representation, policies and services. Uganda embarked on a process
of decentralisation in 1993 and has dramatically changed the framework
within which local governments operate, giving them more power,
resources, responsibilities and decision-making autonomy. Through
the Resistance Council (later replaced by Local Council) system
of local governance, the National Resistance Movement claim they
have created a different, truly African, path to democracy.
The 'Movement'
system proponents argue it guarantees participation, democracy and
transparency. There appears to be no dispute that this system has
advantages in terms of self-organisation and the development of
participatory structures, even critics have argued the system is
an 'important institution which allows a kind of self administration
at various levels' (Mamdani). This system of governance has been
used by the National Resistance Movement almost as a replacement
for multi-party politics.
Some might argue
that the characteristics of good governance derive in large measure
from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) adopted by
the United Nations in 1948 to which Uganda is a signatory. The political
rulers and government officials are both held accountable to the
ruled for their actions through clearly formulated and transparent
process, more particularly the legitimacy of a government is regularly
established through some well-defined open process of public choice
such as elections, referendum and so on. It was by way
of the Political Organisations and Parties Bill (POB) that the National
Resistance Movement has effectively removed any possibility of any
political party from mounting an effective campaign against it,
by law, turning Uganda into a one party state. Despite expressly
stating in the constitution that there would never be a one-party
state in Uganda, the Museveni government has sidestepped this issue
by claiming contrary to being a political party it is in fact a
'Movement' for change, and as such Uganda is a no-party state. The
Constitution had provided that a law that regulated the conduct
of parties would be written ahead of a referendum held in 2000,
which would allow them freedom to campaign freely before the country
decides whether to remain with the ruling quasi-one-party arrangement
called 'The Movement'. That law was never passed and the parties
went into the June 2000 election with restrictions in their activities.
Removing any threat of being beaten in any election, it has been
argued that this also removes the incentive for the government to
act in a totally accountable and honest way.
This bill was
widely criticised by foreign donors and adds a concern to a short
but growing list, with regard to governance in Uganda, that is causing
a shift in aid donor attitudes to Uganda. Debt relief has not reduced
despite Uganda being the first country to receive debt relief under
the HIPC agreement. In fact the Ugandan government managed to upset
the World Bank by pushing ahead with the purchase of a new presidential
jet at the same time that it was negotiating debt relief. DANIDA3
has already reduced its support for development activities in Uganda
following a number of cases of poor governance, the last involving
a high-ranking official in one of the local governments. These are
recent reports of corruption that are marring what was widely touted
as a success in the decentralisation programme that they helped
to fund. There is also growing concern about the presence of Ugandan
troops in Congo as well as the ongoing war at the Northern border
with Sudan which has been allowed to continue for over 10 years,
not to mention the corruption and blatant cronyism that has accompanied
its privatisation process, and that is claimed to be behind the
banking crisis of 1998-1999 all of which is sullying the reputation
of the Ugandan government.
The government
of Uganda, the media and the public have certainly not been idle
in the fight against corruption and for good governance. The Government
of Uganda has actively promoted free press. Even the government-owned
newspaper, The New Vision has been known to be quite critical of
the government.
Point No. 7
of the 10-point Programme introduced by the National Resistance
Movement Government in 1986 is about the elimination of corruption
and the misuse of power (Tumwesigye 1998). It has introduced a number
of initiatives to fight corruption. One tool adopted most recently
by the government in the fight for good governance has been the
adoption of the Leadership Code, which is supposed to ensure that
public officials and politicians are made to account for how they
got their wealth. Two key points to highlight, however, are that
the declarations are not made public and therefore are unlikely
to be contested and the code has no punishment for failure to comply.
It has been argued that as with some of the other measures it is
a code without clout.
Unless Uganda
begins to address some of these issues, perhaps these shortcomings,
it stands the risk of spoiling all that the country has achieved
so far. Similarly the World Bank's stance may ignore one of the
greatest threats to Uganda's economic recovery, namely corruption.
Corruption in the words of Aggrey Awori, an opposition Member of
Parliament, is a symptom 'of an unaccountable government. If there
was an effective opposition based on party lines, that would hold
them accountable and threaten their tenure as government' (Human
Rights Watch, 1998). As HRW points out 'by publicly ignoring the
abuses of civil and political rights associated with the movement
system in Uganda, the international community undermines the effectiveness
of its work on human rights and democracy elsewhere on the continent'.
A message is being sent that the international community will be
willing to tolerate poor governance as long as it maintains some
surface acceptability.
Useful
links and References
Government
of Uganda website
Human Rights Watch
website
The New Vision
- Uganda daily newspaper
World
Development Indicators 2002
Human Rights
Watch (1999), Hostile
to Democracy: The Movement System and Political Repression in Uganda,
Human Rights Watch website.
Mamdani, M (1997)
cited in Ruffert, M Model with Blemishes: Uganda's peculiar Form
of Democracy. Development and Cooperation No. 4, July-August 1997
pp 14-15
Tumwesigye (1998)
The Role of the Inspector General of Government, in Fighting
Corruption in Uganda: The process of building a National Integrity
System, in Ruzindana, Langseth and Gakwandi, Fighting Corruption
in Uganda: The process of building a National Integrity System.
Williamson,
J (1990). What Washington Means by Policy Reform in John Williamson
ed. Latin American Adjustment: How Much Has Happened? Washington
D.C.: Institute for International Economics |