Are army MPs still relevant?

Ugandan army representatives in the 9th Parliament. Questions have been raised over their relevance in a multi-party dispensation. PHOTO | NMG 

By Solomon Arinaitwe The Citizen Correspondent

Posted  Friday, September 20   2013 at  10:16

In Summary

A Daily Monitor study shows that some of the army MPs have not spoken on the floor of Parliament in the last two parliamentary sessions

Kampala. The fact that four out of the 10 Army MPs have not uttered a word in the House in the last two years, raises questions over their relevance in a multi-party dispensation.

Gen Elly Tumwine, who has represented the UPDF since 1996, ranks as the star performer in a legion of silent army representatives the government insists are its “listening posts, eyes and ears in the House.”

A Daily Monitor study of the Hansard, the official record that keeps track of all members’ contributions in the House, shows that Generals Aronda Nyakairima, Katumba Wamala, David Sejusa and Jim Owoyesigire have not spoken on the floor of Parliament in the last two parliamentary sessions.

The study focused on the first and second sessions of the 9th Parliament which ran from May 2011 to May 2013. During that period, budgets, motions, questions for oral answers, petitions and Bills were discussed and passed, without any input from the UPDF.  Opposition politicians, however, fault these Generals for often rushing to the House to vote in favour of government positions when controversial decisions are being forced through, with the most recent being the passing of the controversial Public Order and Management Bill in August.

The sole exception to this narrative was the 2005 abstention of Col Fred Bogere, then Army MP, from a contentious vote that amended the Constitution to remove presidential term limits. He was castigated by the Army leadership and has since been frozen out of the UPDF ranks and put on katebe, a catchword for no formal deployment. 

Army MPs have been in Parliament since the Constitution making process in the Constituent Assembly (CA) session in 1994, as one of the five special interest groups, with Uganda being the only country in the East African region to have military representation in the House.

“There has been anarchy and chaos in countries where politics have been left to only the politicians who have no stake in the history and future of the country. As long as we want stability, the UPDF must be in Parliament to be the guarantor,” Gen Tumwine said, emphasizing that the harmony between the Army and civilians vindicates military representation in Parliament.

Asked why Army MPs rarely contribute to debate, he responded that UPDF positions can be communicated by one officer.

But the peripheral role UPDF MPs play has cast a shadow on their presence in the House, handing cannon fodder to opposition politicians who, in the run-up to the 2011 polls, tabled electoral reforms demanding that Army MPs be done away with. The status of special interest groups is reviewed every 10 years.

Dr Frederick Golooba-Mutebi, a political researcher, says President Museveni wants the army in Parliament to boost the “numbers” of the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM).

“The UPDF is a child of the NRM and the bonds between these institutions cannot be wished away by anyone. President Museveni has overwhelming control over the UPDF and the NRM. The army should have been out of Parliament,” Dr Golooba-Mutebi said.

Dr Mohammed Kulumba, a political scientist at Makerere University, agrees that the history between the UPDF and the NRM means Army MPs have to be in Parliament to safeguard interests of the military.

 “All the other institutions like the Judiciary are just symbolic and are there just to create a semblance of democratic governance but otherwise we have a military government,” Dr Kulumba said.

SOURCE: THE CITIZEN