“If you want something you’ve never had, you must be willing to do something you’ve never done,” is a famous quotation that is often attributed to Thomas Jefferson. This man was one of America’s founding fathers, Principle authors of the Declaration of Independence (1776) and later the third President of the US. No wonder the US went on to become the nation that it is today
In all of the history of the US, there has been an endeavour to do things differently and this is attested by the great number of innovations and patents that come out of that country.

At 50, Uganda’s biggest problem has been stagnation at the national philosophical level. We seem to do the same thing over and over again expecting different results. We have tried so many things at the political level with all of them aimed at one thing, the perpetuation of selfish leaders.
From dictatorship, to all watered down versions of democracy; no party, one party, multi party, etc. The net result has been failure and frustration for the majority of our citizens who are left to the vagaries of empty hospitals, poor schools, bad roads and poverty. It is obvious that we have been very diligent while doing the wrong thing which has given us the same end result –futility.
One of the greatest mistakes that we have made is to overlook the fact that nation building is all about people more than anything else. The quality of the people when put together is the type of nation you get.

Many have told the people only half the story. That they are entitled to various indelible rights which is the easier part. They have cleverly hidden the harder part which is laying emphasis on the responsibility of the individual in a democracy.
If Uganda is going to amount to anything in the next 50 years and beyond, we have to get down to teaching and demanding from the individual the fulfillment of their responsibility to the State and building a viable democracy.

Leaders are sensitive to the people who finance their governments. That is why for most of the last 50 years in Uganda, donors and of late investors, have been revered by those that run the country.

If individuals do not work and pay their taxes, but demand services from the government, which services are financed by donors, then Uganda at 100 will be no different from Uganda at 50.
Secondly, Uganda needs empathetic people. If you want to live in a clean city, you must be clean to begin with. If you desire an environment that is characterised by law and order, you must be law abiding. Charity begins at home and it all starts with you.

The individual must know and implement their responsibility to others. If you do not respect domestic house help or are violent towards those who are in a weaker position than yourself, asking the governors of the State to respect human rights becomes a tall order.
But then for the individual to be a significant actor of use to the State, there is a need to have considerable levels of awareness.

This means intellectual nourishment and development must be taken seriously. People should take being informed on both global and local issues.
One of the reasons why we have had low quality citizens is that the scope of many of us is so limited. Many know very little about the world and are therefore amazed and grateful for the tokens that come out of mediocre leadership.

A poorly done road or bridge will definitely seem like heaven to those who have not seen construction of greater magnitude in countries and cities beyond their village. People, who do not read, write and yearn to know more will always be limited in what they know and want. Thus such people will never demand better.

We shall waste more time and resources in the next 50 years if this aspect of having quality citizens is not taken seriously. After all, democracy is about people. Poor quality people will definitely lead to a poor quality democracy and that is the stuff Banana Republics and failed States are made of.

Mr Sengoba is a commentator on political and social issues. nicholassengoba@yahoo.com

To fool those who intend to contend with President Museveni that he is in a vulnerable state and that his ‘own people’ are as equally tired of him as they are. This should be enough to motivate them to let their guard down on the pretext that the President will soon be sorted out by his own.

For about 10 years now, there has been a growing trend whereby some young MPs in the ruling NRM party stand up and publicly oppose the party line and the President on almost everything. Hence the sobriquet; ‘rebel MP.’ They promise and threaten to stand firm against intimidation and incentives from the Executive because they were voted by the people and not appointed by the President.

They vow to stand by the wishes of the people, which for some reason are always in conflict with those of the President. Then they threaten that come the next election they will either stand or sponsor someone to stand against President Museveni because he is now beyond his sell-by date. How twenty something years in power is more than enough for one individual that Uganda is not President Museveni’s personal property and that there are other people who can do better than him.

This defiant stance generates a lot of public debate with both the President’s detractors and supporters having their say. It is prominently claimed that the President has come under fire from the fiery rebels, who are suspected to be sponsored by and to speak on behalf of their senior colleagues in the party.

President Museveni is portrayed as being in a vulnerable and precarious state. It is claimed that there is a pending split in the NRM and stories of who might replace him start to float around. Before long there is either an NRM caucus meeting or a retreat at Kyankwanzi. Alternatively, there are a series of meetings and “consultations” where the rebels meet the President either in groups or as individuals at his country home in Rwakitura.

Stories then “leak” about what transpired in these closed door meetings and things like brown envelopes and promises of Cabinet appointments abound.

Then threats of disciplining and expulsion for the crime of discussing party matters in the wrong forum or going against the official party line, proliferate. Opinion columns are written about the rebels and details of their personal lives are thrown all over the place especially what are described as their “sex secrets”. Slowly, the rebels start to speak in tongues about being misquoted or being misled by those who want to destroy the NRM.

Many make a U-turn and declare their undying support for the President and all he has done for the country and pledge to support him if the people of Uganda still want him. The role of the rebel MP is basically that of a cheap Trojan horse. Their incessant drama is intended to achieve mainly four things besides the President’s ubiquitous brown envelop.

First, to show that there is internal democracy and serious debate within the NRM. This one is intended to disabuse the donor and international community of the notion that President Museveni is a “dictator”. Secondly, to fool those who intend to contend with President Museveni that he is in a vulnerable state and that his “own people” are as equally tired of him as they are. This should be enough to motivate them to let their guard down on the pretext that the President will soon be sorted out by his own.

Thirdly, the rebel MPs help President Museveni identify his real enemies. They act like the man who throws a stone in the bush to see what come out. When the rebels speak it, is the words and actions of those who support their stance against the President that are taken more seriously. They are viewed as the sort of people waiting for a spark to act.

Lastly, these MPs help maintain the image of President Museveni as the man who is larger than life and can weather any storm like he did in the many wars that he fought and conquered his enemies. When the MPs eat humble pie and back down the victor and the vanquished are clear, so are the enemies who stuck out their heads to stand with the rebel MPs.

It would take a genius to see democracy in the actions of the so-called rebel MPs.

Mr Sengoba is a commentator on political and social issues.
nicholassengoba@yahoo.com

It said something about her endeavour to be neutral unlike her predecessor Edward Kiwanuka Ssekandi, who was perceived to be blinded by his support for the NRM party when he chaired the House.

In his song Osobola Otya (How dare you,) one of the greatest Ugandan musicians, Philly Bongoley Lutaya (RIP), captured the character of the average Ugandan thus;
Kye nonnya kye silabye, ge mazima mu bantu, ba ku yayanila ne bakutiikila engule, mu kibinjya eki goberera, mulimu emitiima egye futwa, enseko zo bulimba, no bunnanfuusi, enjuuba leero ebyasse mu.
Loosely translated, “among these people, I have looked for the truth in vain. They seek after you and crown you with heaps of (empty) praises. Then in times of need, you witness the darkness in their hearts. Their laughter is full of deception, and their hypocrisy is laid bare in broad daylight.”
When the 9th Parliament was sworn in, the current Speaker, Ms Rebecca Kadaga, won accolades for stating clearly that she would not attend her party’s caucus meetings. It said something about her endeavour to be neutral unlike her predecessor Edward Kiwanuka Ssekandi, who was perceived to be blinded by his support for the NRM party when he chaired the House.
Then tributes poured in about the virtues of Kadaga. Calls for her to stand for President became common place whenever she toured the country. She became a darling of the media that interpreted most of her moves as directly opposed to the wishes of the President (and the Prime Minister Amama Mbabazi.) They cast her as a participant in a presidential race that was their own making
When Butaleja Woman MP Cerinah Nebanda died in controversial circumstances, the government claimed she had died of a drug overdose. The Speaker again won over several people for being ‘courageous’ when she openly disputed this at a charged funeral in Butaleja.
MPs attempted to recall the House from recess to discuss what they termed “the President’s contempt of Parliament”. Throughout all this Kadaga was cast in good light as the star standing firmly in the way of the Executive and it appeared like she had the backing of both opposition and NRM MPs.
But the Executive was not sleeping. The President held several meetings, including the NRM caucus meeting in Kyankwanzi. Some MPs apologised and withdrew their signatures. The recall effort fell apart. The MPs apparently shifted allegiance to the President. The Speaker who had hitherto been cast as a heroine became a villain when she ‘understandably’ refused to okay the recall.
She went further and suspended some journalists from The Observer newspaper from the precincts of Parliament because of ‘reporting inaccuracies’ about what transpired before she finally ‘succumbed’ to halting the recall. Now the media is on her case and so are commentators many of whom once heaped praises on her.
What has happened to the Speaker brings out what Philly Lutaya sang. It is an important side of Ugandans, which when well understood may help one to navigate through the murky world of our politics. Ugandans are deceptive, opportunistic and love winners.
They will do everything to associate with winners and it does not matter how the winners win. They will desert you if you show signs of failure whatever the cause or the principle you stand for.
Currently in Ugandan politics, like him or not, President Museveni it still the supreme winner. Museveni has understood the art of war so much so that he will carefully create enemies and choose battles which he eventually wins.
In this he ably employs decoys, makes tactical withdrawals to appear weak and vulnerable to his contenders -many of whom are no match for him in the first place. Then he strikes in his own time. The Speaker is now aware.
To her credit, Kadaga has begun the journey back home to the reality of sitting on the good side of the supreme winner. Time will tell if it is too late.
She must have taken note of the praises heaped on the Deputy Speaker by the President at his wedding a fortnight ago. Expect some adjustments. You have to clear the way as she hurries home lest you get knocked over. The Observer journalists are the first victims. Soon other erstwhile friends may soon follow.

Mr Sengoba is a commentator on political and social issues.
nicholassengoba@yahoo.com

In Museveni’s case, being used to leading from the front, with the vision and the correct line, the thought of other people being in control of the events surrounding the death of the MP, is too hard for him to bear. He views it as taking away his powers and in the worst case undermining him.

Like 2012 ended in controversy and acrimony, so has 2013 begun. The contention being the unresolved death of the MP for Butaleja, Cerinah Nebanda which has seemingly put the Executive read (President Museveni) and Parliament at loggerheads.

Some parliamentarians including the Speaker disagreed with the government position that the legislator had died of a drug overdose. Suspecting foul play, they jumped into the arena in an attempt to establish the real cause of the death of their colleague. They sat in at the autopsy and even appointed ‘their own’ pathologist Dr Sylvester Onzivua who was later arrested with samples of the deceased’s body parts and is currently interdicted from Mulago hospital.

In a rather cantankerous mood, the President came in and accused the legislators of overstepping the boundaries and interfering in the work of the police. He then reserved his choicest invectives for all those including the MPs who accused the government of killing the youthful legislator. He called them fools, idiots and despisable. Some of them have been behind the prison gate on this one, while others have been quizzed by police. A few have been banned from radio talk shows to stop them from ‘inciting the people.’

A section of the parliamentarians, many of them from the ruling NRM party, decided to petition the Speaker of Parliament to recall the House from recess and discuss what they called the President’s contempt of Parliament and other infringements on the rights of legislators. The President swore that this would only go ahead over his dead body.

Many following this latest event of ‘defiance’ by Parliament against the President view it as an issue originating and manifesting itself as a political predicament. Though there is a lot of truth in that, in my opinion, the clash is mainly one of the many that are inevitable as the President in his 27th year in power gets to terms with the aging process.

As the days go by, it is only natural that we shall become less relevant and influential however powerful we might be or assume we are. Others will boldly hold an opinion and liking that is different from ours. New faces shall rise up and for those who are insecure; especially those whose reputation has been built on myths and falsehoods, it will cause many problems as that will see them clashing with all that come in their way.

In Museveni’s case, being used to leading from the front, with the vision and the correct line, the thought of other people being in control of the events surrounding the death of the MP, is too hard for him to bear. He views it as taking away his powers and in the worst case undermining him.
That is why during such times when he is challenged, he falls back into his rich history of wars and conquests that he achieved years before some of the legislators were even born.

It’s the same option that many of the veterans of the World Wars take. They tell the embellished stories of their exploits in Burma many of them full of conjecture and outright dishonesty to disarm those that were not part of this history.

Increasingly, Museveni is going to have to fight for the limelight even in ‘his’ party NRM as other people naturally rise up. Progressively, it will not be in his control to overshadow them and manage all the political activities that have made him look larger than life and other people.
He will have to re-invent himself to stay with the times, but there are only so many times that you can do that before you appear ridiculous and your impregnable aura wears away.

Many of Museveni’s peers on the continent like Robert Mugabe have picked themselves younger women to show that they are ‘still strong’ despite their age and dyed their hair. Museveni to the best of my knowledge has not done these yet but he has on many a political rally gone on all fours and done a few press ups to prove that he is still strong to counter the voices in his mind that tell him the people think he is weak.

Mr Sengoba is a commentator on political and social issues.

nicholassengoba@yahoo.com

Looking back at many of the Ugandan newspapers, it is apparent that 2013 is going to be a very challenging year. Not because of an intolerant political environment that is capable of reining in media houses and closing them down, but because of the general mode of gathering news and most of what ends up being printed.

Most of the stories that made the headlines and endured for days and a few weeks as is the wont with Ugandan news stories, were not the type that are independently investigated and originated by journalists. They were either sourced from reports authored by one government agency or another like the Auditor General or by international organisations such as the World Bank, the UN reports on the state of the world’s health, population, war, crime etc.

There is a particularly popular form of journalism which I will call ‘press conference journalism’ where anyone, especially politicians, call the media in a room and tell them what they think. The next day most certainly the politician will be on the front page.

The bad side to this is that it has become easy for most people to make it into the newspaper and keep themselves relevant even when what they are saying or doing is irrelevant.

Secondly, it has made politics the main issue in our newspapers even when the type of politics is of little or no significance to society like the ranting and petty clashes between rivaling politicians. As a consequence, we have neglected the social aspects of society that challenge the majority of the people.

From concerns of agriculture and commerce to healthcare and nutrition, to education and housing plus transport and communication, there is so much failure that needs attention but does not find space or prominent space in the press. It is important at this point to commend The Daily Monitor’s photo story of the non-functional ambulances rotting away at health centers and other locations countrywide which was one of the brilliant reports of the last year in an otherwise lackluster media atmosphere. Yet the stale political debates endure and overshadow all else.

The greatest trouble that lies ahead is that the media appear to be a consumer of news that it simply dilutes, spices up and regurgitates to suit what is thought to be the needs of the readers.
In this vein, newspapers will cease to be authoritative leaders and agenda setters on issues that affect society and seem to be just another part of the crowd that is moving with the flow.

If things continue in the same way, then it will be even harder for newspapers to sale in 2013 as social media taps from the very sources that newspapers quire their stories.

Granted, good journalism is very expensive and that is very important to note at a time when the economy both domestically and internationally is not doing well. It takes a lot of good money and facilitation to do research and travel the length and breadth of the country and the world looking for well corroborated stories, especially about real people who may apparently not have good faces to grace the front pages.

But that is the business journalists have chosen and the calling that they have answered to. Most of the journalists you meet are very smart people who have insight and fore knowledge on most of the issues that affect society. They risk wasting away if this trend of seemingly lazy journalism that is ever alert waiting for the next politician to open his mouth, does not come to an end.

If 2013 will be better than the last few years, the challenge will be for journalists to convince owners who are looking at the bottom line, that it pays to invest in, especially research and deep investigations, where journalists are facilitated to lead the news agenda.

Anything short of this will turn newspapers into glorified social media. And if that does not hurt, then the next thing will be for the cherished advertisers to seek other alternatives because fewer people will be buying and reading newspapers at this rate.

Mr Sengoba is a commentator
on political and social issues.
nicholassengoba@yahoo.com

We might lynch a thief who takes off with our phone or side mirror but not one who siphons billions meant for a health project that is supposed to benefit us. This is because we attach more ownership to what is bought out of our pocket and not that given to us by some kind foreigners.

In the late 1980’s and most of the 1990’s there was a strange common argument about foreign aid. Ugandan politicians would tell the critics of the Movement system of government that Uganda, being the number one recipient of foreign aid in sub-Saharan Africa, meant that donors considered it a well-governed country. In other words, whatever other people thought, including Ugandans, was not relevant.

Then a time came when that assistance was not as forthcoming. A humanitarian situation caused by flooding led a Minister for Disaster Preparedness to cry out loud in an interview on BBC that if those affected died, the ‘international community’ would be held responsible! Put differently, we were not expected to cater for our own children.

This tells us how foreign aid has affected our thinking and behaviour as a country. We have become like helpless destitute children looking up to a guardian for everything to keep our skins together and alive.

Politicians give the excuse that the road or bridge in the constituency has not been repaired because the donors have been too slow to deliver on their promise to provide the funds. And this attitude is in almost all the spheres of life. There was a popular institution called the Uganda Society, which used to organise meetings at the Uganda Museum on the country’s history, culture and other matters pertinent to Ugandan society. Ironically, many of the faces there were of White people.

The same applies to most of the health, conservation, and most philanthropic efforts. You find the most successful and passionate attempts being funded and staffed by white people, yet they are on matters concerning indigenous Ugandans.

Our children are immunised courtesy of Unicef/WHO. Most of the HIV/Aids programmes are from out of this country. The heritage sites and national parks are where they are because of, you guessed right, the donors. All the way to agriculture, the main stay of our economy, the foreign element is very prominent and outshines the domestic effort.

Foreign aid has bestowed upon us an overwhelming feeling of impotence and a misguided sense of entitlement. We are sitting in the middle of a great, rich and well-endowed land. But here we are concentrating on receiving free things from the so-called donors. We complain when they are not forthcoming. This feeling and thinking is what has contributed to the ‘I don’t care’ attitude towards the abuse of public finances.

Both the government and the public know deep down that the money is ‘not our money.’
We might lynch a thief who takes off with our phone or side mirror but not one who siphons billions of shillings meant for a health project that is supposed to benefit us. This is because we attach more ownership to what is bought out of our pocket and not that given to us by some kind foreigners.

In the end analysis, we generally attach little or no value to what belongs to the public for it appears not to belong to us. That is what determines the low civic awareness towards public matters.

The government similarly listens more seriously to the complaints of donors over misuse of aid than to the cries of the citizens over the same because they know who owns the money.

Unfortunately, the State also becomes of secondary importance, especially in the rural areas where the most visible providers of social services are the NGO/donor community. People do not take the State or government seriously anymore for it appears as a compliment to the donors.

That is where Uganda finds itself after being on a fat donor diet for over 26 years. We are weaker as a nation. We are ever under threats of withdrawal of donor funds if we do not behave ourselves as the donors want us to.

We cannot decide on most matters independently before we get the approval of the donors. The opposition that is supposed to counter the excesses of the ruling government is funded by the donors. Their effort is then guided by the wishes of donors and appears like is part of a foreign agenda.

That is the bane of depending heavily on the donors. It spoils nations into becoming impotent and childish. That is where Uganda finds itself 50 years after independence.

Mr Sengoba is a commentator on political and social issues.
nicholassengoba@yahoo.com