New laws lock out poor political aspirants

The demeanour of outlandishly rich politicians in 9th Parliament can be disrupting. Selfishness and greed are now normal in our increasingly “money-centric” society, one in which money is at the centre of virtually all thoughts, decisions and activities.
Awkwardly, when the hustling begins, politicians cajole and coax the voters with new sets of promises and others heavily induce the process with sweeteners.
The voters, in the process, lose all their interest in the elections as they either abstain from voting or cast their votes only as a matter of ritual.
On Wednesday, Parliament increased nomination fees for presidential aspirants by 150 per cent (from Shs8 million to Shs20 million) and scraped Electoral Commission funding to nominated candidates. They have also increased nomination fees for Parliamentary aspirants by 1,400 per cent (from Shs200,000 to Shs3 million) technically locking out deprived competitors.
In less than 24 hours, the President had assented to the two Bills passed by Parliament. The President signed the Bills on Wednesday morning, closing the last window of opportunity for the deprived aspirants to contest in the 2016 polls without any hustle. Some Ugandans complained that the disputed amendments were moved “in bad faith” and seek to help incumbent MPs arm-twist their competitors without any regard to anti-discriminatory provisions in the 1995 Constitution.
The House Committee on Legal Parliamentary Affairs had recommended in its report that the contribution to presidential aspirants be increased by 150 per cent (from Shs50 million instead of Shs20 million) in order to finance their campaigns. However, this proposal was rejected after Aruu MP Odonga Otto moved to scrap the contribution to candidates, citing devious jokers who might take advantage of the public money to do business.

Dissenting voices
Mr Patrick Amuriat (Kumi), Mr Nandala Mafabi (Budadiri West), Mr Wafula Oguttu (Leader of Opposition and Bukhooli Central); Mr Vincent Kyamadidi (Rwampara) and Ms Aol Ochan (Gulu Woman) opposed the proposal to lock out the poor contestants. They accused colleagues of being selfish and insisted that politics should not be a preserve of the rich. The amendments to Presidential Elections Act 2015 and the Parliamentary Elections Act 2015 are likely to lock out the poor Ugandans aspiring to join Parliament.
Mr Oguttu had moved that “whoever gets at least 5 per cent of the votes, his or her nomination money should be refunded” However, AG rejected the proposal, saying, “It is not well articulated” and that “It’s an ambush”. When Deputy Speaker Jacob Oulanyah put the matter to vote, majority said “No”. But Mr Vincent Kyamadidi (Rwampara) said: “It’s unconstitutional and unfair for us as Parliament to come here and legislate for ourselves because we can afford.”

Poorest president
Citing the example of Uruguay’s Jose Mujica, known to be the “world’s poorest president before he passed on the presidential torch in March, Mr Oguttu said, increasing the nomination fees would be discriminating the poor Ugandans, who might want to contest for presidency in future. He also accused MPs of being selfish and legislating for themselves.
Mr Mujica, 79, garnered international fame for his humble lifestyle: He donated 90 per cent of his annual salary, eschewed the formalities of a suit and tie, drove a 1987 blue Volkswagen Beetle, and lived in a small country house with his wife and a three-legged dog.
Oguttu also reminded MPs that if they were asked to pay Shs3m before they came to Parliament, they wouldn’t have made it. “We should not make a law that disadvantages other people. We should not discriminate against others. We were sent here to represent Ugandans not to represent ourselves.”

Call for better politics
It’s luckless that the President dashed to assent to the Bills when the opponents are complaining. There is need for better politics to bring back huge swathes of an alienated population-the poor Ugandans who were locked out of our political process through the game of thrones. Political participation must be a right of all in this country.
By increasing nomination fees for presidential aspirants, the MPs have unnecessarily warped our politics. And the selfishness of legislators is likely to skew our politics. This is bad news for democracy, accountability and good governance. The unprecedented influx of big money in our politics is going to undermine the credibility of our elected officials and turn the House into a hunting ground for greedy politicians.
While the proposed amendment favours affluent aspirants, especially the incumbents who pocketed Shs5m each from government after passing the disputed amendments, some MPs and civil society activists yesterday expressed fears some aspirants are likely to quit the race on account of lack of funds. The Attorney General, Mr Fred Ruhindi, had appealed for “a modest contribution” to a national cause but the House rejected it.

Selfish MPs
Ms Anifa Kawooya (Ssembabule) had proposed Shs5m and Mr Otto proposed Shs10m even after government proposed Shs1m in the draft Bill. However, Attorney General Fred Ruhindi made a U-turn and supported the Shs3m proposed by the committee. Even though, the MPs increased nomination fees to weed out “jokers” and “comedians”, it’s not clear whether increasing nomination fees for Parliament was also intended to kick out poor Ugandans from Parliament.

Relief for special interest groups

On Wednesday, the Deputy Speaker, Mr Jacob Oulanyah (right) and Deputy Attorney General, Mwesigwa Rukutana (below), clarified that the Constitutional Court did not annul the election of MPs representing special interest groups. “It is not true that the Constitutional Court ruled that MPs for army, youth and workers are in Parliament illegally. The ruling does not affect existing MPs,” Mr Rukutana said. The principals were responding to a concern raised by Mr Milton Muwuma (Kigulu South). On Tuesday the Constitutional Court declared as unconstitutional the laws used for the election of the army, youth and workers MPs. The ruling does not affect representatives of Persons with Disabilities.
Deputy Speaker Oulanyah, however, explained that the court had granted an injunction against the respondents who included the Electoral Commission using the current laws to carry out future elections for interest groups. “There is no order directing sitting MPs (for special interest groups) to vacate their seats.” Mr Oulanyah said, the court’s ruling does not affect internal processes by political parties intending to field candidates for the said positions in next year’s elections.

[email protected]