Will LCI election be a referendum on removing age limit?

Kyadondo East MP Robert Kyagulanyi (left) and Kawempe South MP Mubarak Munyagwa (right) address a rally Kireka last week. PHOTO BY A. LUBOWA

MPs are out to supposedly consult their constituents about the proposed removal of the presidential age limit. But could the Local Council elections, slated for next month, turn out to be a more accurate barometer of whether majority of Ugandans want the age limit removed to enable President Museveni to continue in power?
Will people, in a protest vote, vote against the ruling National Resistance Movement party? Would a massive triumph for NRM signal that majority of Ugandans want Museveni to continue?

Currently, Uganda’s political scene is shrouded in debate and mess caused by the issue of whether to remove the presidential age limit from the Constitution and allow President Museveni to contest forever or, as many have opined, to cement a second life presidency in Uganda’s Constitution.

It is no longer a rumour that the Bill by Igara West MP Raphael Magyezi is mooted and backed by the incumbent who last week came out to declare his unequivocal support for it. The Bill was singularly packaged with him in mind and the actions of State institutions, particularly the police, in apprehending those against the Bill have only re-enforced this notion.
Just to jog your memory, the first attempt at a life presidency in Uganda happened in June 1976 when then president Idi Amin was proclaimed president for life by Uganda’s Defence Council which was the ruling body of the military government at the time.

Three years later, the declaration, which was made after Amin’s narrow escape from assassination when three hand grenades were thrown at his jeep, came to an end after he was overthrown. Amin ruled for only eight years and President Museveni, who took more than 10 years after the declaration, has been at it for an uninterrupted 31 years.
To put it the other way, in the current context Ugandans are faced with the question former prime minister Amama Mbabazi posed to them during his failed bid to become president, “do you want change or more of the same?”

Legal arguments have since been advanced for the amendment of Article 102(b) of the 1995 Constitution to remove the age limits (35 – 75) for presidential candidates, including that the said provision is in conflict of Article 21 and Article 32 of the same Constitution.
Article 21 provides for equality of all Ugandans regardless of age, Article 32 talks about affirmative action. The centre of focus, however, is and will likely be at Parliament which has the power to amend the Article 102(b).

The article is not included in Article 260 among the amendments that require a referendum. Even with seemingly public outcry, the ruling NRM with overwhelming majority in Parliament is likely, through its chairperson, President Museveni, to take the day in case the matter is put to a vote in Parliament.
The calls for the matter to be put to a referendum were first eloquently mooted by religious leaders under the Inter-Religious Council of Uganda but these received lukewarm support from the public given Uganda’s history of not having free and fair elections.
Even if there was consensus for the matter to be put to a public vote, the cost of the same would come to play. Why, for example, should the taxpayer be burdened with shouldering a very expensive election on a matter that is already decided in the Constitution and to whose benefit?
Already caught up in the pro and anti-age limit drama, the forthcoming Local Council elections if held in a free and fair manner could send the message on whether Ugandans want Mr Museveni to rule without any limit or want an end to his rule after 2021.

The 2001, 2006, 2011 and 2016 general elections in which the Electoral Commission announced President Museveni as the winner left more questions than answers. Not even the Supreme Court verdicts in the case of 2001, 2006 and 2016 conclusively gave the answers.
Without intimidation, bribery, fear of the unknown, like has already been reported; the manner in which the Local Council elections are scheduled to be held provides hope for a free, fair and credible process but most importantly an undisputed process.
The survival of the current Local Council leadership, declared illegal in 2006 after a successful petition Maj (rtd) Rubaramira Ruranga remain to date the biggest surviving legacy of the defunct Movement system. The ruling NRM party assumed the LC structures as constituted and has to date continued to enjoy them at an almost solo level despite the country having transitioned into a multiparty dispensation more than 10 years ago.
The biggest rallying point the Opposition and other players outside the group that backs the removal of the age limit have to sell to the masses is what has since been dubbed “togikwatako or kogikwatako” and like it already has, the issue is envisaged to take centre stage in next month’s elections.
A loss or a narrow victory in the same elections by the pro-age limit removal campaigners will be a strong message from the electorate. If the Local Council elections’ process is free, fair and credible, the same will apply to the Togikwatako campaigners.