Do we still need special interest MPs?

As the 9th Parliament marked the third session in 2013, analysis of the Hansard, the official record that tracks members’ contributions in the House, revealed that MPs on the special interest seats of the army and women were among the worst performers.

In 2013, four out of the 10 Army MPs had not uttered a word in the House in two years while only 50 out of the 112 Women MPs had contributed to parliamentary processes five times in two years. At least 34 women MPs had contributed less than 15 times, by the time of analysis of the first and second sessions of Parliament in 2013.

Other MPs representing special interest groups, like the youth, workers and PWDs, introduced by the 1995 Constitution as affirmative action to turn around the fortunes of such groups, were also equally unexceptional in their contributions in the House.

As these MPs were faltering; budgets, motions, reports, questions for oral answers, petitions and Bills – which form the core of parliamentary work – were discussed and passed, largely without any substantial input from the special interest group MPs.

With special interest groups MPs gobbling up salaries of more than Shs20 million per month and their lukewarm contribution to Parliamentary business, questions over whether the Ugandan taxpayers still need to dig deep into their pockets to facilitate them remain.

Looking at the origins of special interest representation in Uganda, a 2010 paper titled: The Youth, Politics of Interest Groups and Influencing National Policy Processes in Uganda, indicated that such groups were introduced by the NRM government to “respond to special needs of some social groupings”.

Researchers Arthur Larok, Helena Okiring and Justice Mayambala explained that the arguments of including special seats in Parliament for the youth, women and PWDs was “largely [because of] their rather marginalised posture in society”.

For the army and workers, the rationale “was [largely because of] the historical role they played in Uganda’s political trajectory”, the paper noted.

However, with their below average contributions, questions can be asked on whether they are efficiently representing the “marginalised” groups they were elected to represent.

Army MPs
Making a case for the inclusion of the army in Parliament as Uganda shifted from the Movement system to a multi-party dispensation, Arthur Bainomugisha and Elijah Mushemeza argued that “phasing out army representation at the commencement of a multiparty system would be interpreted as political exclusion by the military who may become hostile to it”.
They, however, recommended that the Army MPs should be reduced from 10 to five with a plan of eventually phasing them out.
Army MPs remain largely “listening posts” of the government in the House and its eyes and ears, but are at times accused of not making enough contributions and often rushing to the House to vote in favour of government positions when controversial decisions are being passed. Uganda remains the only country in the East African region to have military representation in the House.
Mr Bainomugisha, who co-authored the paper on special interest representation, says the framers of the 1995 Constitution thought that with the history of negative involvement of the army in Uganda [and Africa’s] politics, it was essential in allowing the military a foot in Parliament.

He still thinks that Army MPs should be maintained in Parliament.

“We are still in the woods, with a lot of political immaturity. That is why you see that even after the elections, people were calling for civil disobedience and in such a situation, the army would troop out of the barracks and take over government. Until we have fully immunised the military against coups, they should be in Parliament,” Mr Bainomugisha says.

Youth MPs
For the youth, represented by five MPs, their effectiveness has also been questioned. A performance audit of the Youth MPs in the 9th Parliament by the Uganda Youth Network (Uyonet), a youth organisation, discovered that Youth MPs’ constituencies are too big for effective representation.

“For example, eastern region has about 34 districts. The Youth MP for the northern region covers about 28 districts and the national Youth MP covers 112 districts. Under such geographical scope of coverage, they [Youth MPs] cannot adequately consult and give feedback to the youth in the regions of representation,” the report indicated.

These large constituencies have affected the effectiveness of Youth MPs, with that report noting that “the participatory quality of the process leading to laws and rules as ensured by the Youth MPs is still very low”.

A 2001 survey by Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES) quoted in the paper: At Crossroads? The Youth, Politics of Interest Groups and Influencing National Policy Processes in Uganda showed that despite youth having representation in Parliament and local government, this was not translating into meaningful gains for young people.

But it was not all doom and gloom for the Youth MPs in the 9th Parliament. In the 9th Parliament, youth MPs spearheaded the formation and approval of the new Shs265 billion Youth Livelihood Programme – a five-year development programme that seeks to turn around the fortunes of the youth.

Youth MPs also led efforts for the private member’s Bill titled the National Youth Enterprise Bill which will simplify the process of how youth can access money.

Women MPs
Women MPs are also an unpredictable affair. The major proponents of the inclusion of women will attract more interest to the affairs of women like the formulation of gender-sensitive laws.

However, a study titled: Mapping the Substantive Representation of Women in the Ugandan Parliament, indicated that though there were more women in the 9th Parliament than the 8th Parliament, the former passed more gender specific Bills than the later.

“One of the reasons for this shift was because while the 8th Parliament dealt with women in need of protection (victims of trafficking, domestic violence, FGM), the 9th Parliament tackled issues of marriage and divorce in which women were portrayed as equals and which often pitted the interests of women against the interests of men, ”the study noted.

However, Ms Miria Matembe, one of the brains behind the 1995 Constitution, says though the original intentions of special representation were “well intentioned” and even as affirmative action for women is still relevant, the idea is now abused by the regime and should be scrapped.

“Because of the politics of militarised patronage characterised by corruption, bribery and greed for power, the principle has been abused to serve the interests of the regime. Any strong woman who comes out to champion gender equality is forced out by the regime,” Ms Matembe says.

Ms Matembe’s sentiments are shared by a paper that noted that “the care for interest groups is part of a calculated scheme to patronise groups often looked at as ‘block’ voters.”

Though the Constitution provides for a review of special interest seats after every 10 years, the evaluation has never been anywhere near firm, allowing these affirmative action seats the chance to escape scrutiny.