Open primaries good for parties

The National Resistance Movement (NRM) voters turned up by the thousands-- if you go by official election results-- to vote in the party’s primaries. Sixteen cabinet ministers and scores of sitting MPs did not make it past the first universal adult suffrage primaries in Uganda. There are a number of remarkable observations from these results.

Uganda’s population data sets continue to trend very strongly younger. The country’s senior citizens may have more representation in the next Parliament but these are more of an anomaly. If Moses Ali, the Moyo East NRM flag bearer, goes ahead to win the parliamentary seat at 71, he will be in the company of Henry Kajura, 75 and Namirembe Bitamazire, 69.

Several political machines went into the election as a whole and returned nearly disintegrated. The Sam Kutesa machine in Sembabule is unlikely to retain as much grease going forward even though on paper, the entire Theodore Ssekikubo camp was obliterated. You are also not likely to hear much from greater Bushenyi whose political influence was anchored by a strong contingent led by Kahinda Otafiire. Members of this syndicate fell by the wayside, some at the hands of Hassan Basajjabalaba, including Health State Minister Richard Nduhura, a past beneficiary of stolen elections.

NRM’s machine politics comprises three tiers: the core who control power and its resources and their principal assistants, a second tier of appointees with some merit to give the government technocratic competencies led by individuals like the Prime Minister and a third tier of appointees whose offices even the President does not seem to be familiar with.

This tier includes all sorts of names: Simon Ejua, Jennifer Namuyangu-Byakatonda, Ruth Nakadama, Vincent Nyanzi etc. The second and third tiers suffered a lot of casualties led by faces like Tarsis Kabwegyere. At these levels the ability to influence resources, patronage is minimal- something the voters seem to have held against the hapless incumbents who cannot even influence the appointment of a muluka chief.

It is also surprising that many politicians who retired in 2006 after losing elections were quick to offer themselves for election again. Francis Babu, Matia Baguma Isoke and Moses Ali have all had considerable lengths of service accumulated in government and do not have much more to prove. This shows something disturbing about NRM’s political class and its insecurity in retirement.

Part of NRM’s legacy has been to punish the taxpayer with costly patronage schemes by appointing every election loser to a ‘consolation prize’ position funded by the taxpayer. These appeasement schemes are only likely to multiply after 2010.

In fact, the list of returnees goes even further in Museveni’s personal history books to pick out individuals like Betty Bigombe who has been steadily rehabilitated first as chairperson of National Information Technology Authority and now potentially returning as a minister from the political north should she win the election in Amuru.

The complaints about rigging will deafen most people’s ears but attract little sympathy from the ordinary public. NRM’s brand is sustained by muscular and patronage politics. Cries against ballot box stuffing, hooliganism, absence or manipulation of the voters’ register from defeated candidates are cries of the wolf.

It goes without saying that in spite of using God’s name at each turn, NRM’s primary election officials are not the Mother Teresa type. One of the individuals accused of stuffing ballot boxes in Greater Tororo ran to Facebook thanking the ‘Almighty’ for his ‘victory’ a day before the defeated candidates went to the press with a catalogue of his electoral misdeeds.

Mr Museveni expressed ‘surprise’ at this state of affairs and continues to express consternation at indiscipline in his army of supporters. The Red Pepper, cynical to the marrow, declared NRM the National Rigging Movement. With so much at stake, these internal disputes will be resolved.
It would be unfair to attack NRM’s process as an entire failure. Open primaries are good.

In fact, the election laws should move towards institutionalising primaries as part and parcel of the electoral calendar even though it may be difficult for the smaller parties to publish and maintain voters’ registers. In the United States, parties register their party affiliation or choose to remain independent.

In states with open primaries, all voters can turn up to vote, while in closed primaries, only registered party members vote. This does not mean these party members are dues-paying members. This, actually, is only a preference because some voters may express a number of voting intentions by election day.

In fact, it will be very difficult for the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) and the rest of the opposition working with them to sustain an undemocratic process of choosing candidates behind closed doors or granting “tickets” without some form of voting. FDC’s folly to disrupt similar processes in parties like the Democratic Party further strips them of the credentials as vanguards of democracy in the country.

After the Inter-Party Cooperation (IPC) presidential convention sham, where equal weight members chose the IPC candidate by consensus, it becomes more difficult to attack NRM’s vote rigging and ballot stuffing ways which are an article of faith very similar to the syndicates of yesterday.