UGANDA'S FLAWED ELECTIONS: Ssemogerere grumbling over ‘robbed’ victory 25 years later

In their final report, which we have been serialising in the last one week, the Commonwealth Observers concluded that despite all deficiencies, the 1980 elections reflected "the voice of the people" of Uganda, who had "carried the process to a worthy and valid conclusion."

In this part of the series, the Democratic Party President-General, Dr Paulo Kawanga Ssemogerere, tells Daily Monitor why the Observers should not be taken seriously. He maintains that he was robbed of victory.

On the importance of elections

Democratic elections are a necessary condition for a country particularly as diverse as Uganda. When you have added so many nationalities together to form what I would call a multinational state, you need a formula by which leadership emerges and is generally acceptable to that heterogeneous society. I know of no other formular which would be acceptable other than a democratic election. The democratic aspect is particularly significant because if elections are not democratic, they are illegitimate.

Overview of the 1980 elections

The military factor, more so the role of the Military Commission, was preeminent and it did affect the overall electoral process. There were many administrative measures taken before and during the electoral process that affected the elections. For instance, practically the entire West Nile went to the elections without valid registers.

Secondly many returning officers did not displace any independence as required because they were under the dictates of the Military Commission. As a result, in several places like Teso, Kasese, this led to the cancellation of nominations of certain candidates like Dr [Henry] Bwambale. In many places, the electoral process, including campaigns, was characterised by state inspired violence.

The electoral law was also defective. For instance, the method of polling using multiple ballot boxes provided very many loopholes for tampering with the ballot papers, with claims of some symbols on the ballot boxes being exchanged and thereby reversing the results.

But there was one gain made in those elections — to put in place a requirement for ballots be counted at the polling station immediately after polling and in the presence of polling agents. Where serious civic education had been carried out, particularly for the polling agents, and the above condition or improvement was observed, the process was more transparent in contrast to other places.

There was ample circumstantial evidence to show that the final results were changed or not accounted as they had been counted.

This was the case in Iganga in the elections for the seat contested by Luwuliza Kirunda and Paulo Wangola, in Mubende for the seat contested by Dr Paul Sebuliba, in Kabale Central in the seat contested by Robert Kitariko and Katama, and many others. Francis Bwengye’s book, the Agony of Uganda, has more details.

The reversal of election results, coupled with the proclamation by Paulo Muwanga, the Chairman of the Military Commission — barring the returning officers from announcing the results as and when they were counted but first submitting them to his office — constituted a fatal blow to the transparency and fairness of the elections.

On the Commonwealth Observers’ Report, which appears to suggest that the irregularities were not of a nature that would have changed the final result.

That report is full of contradictions. It shows incompleteness.

On the report’s conclusion that despite the “reservations regarding nominations and a number of unopposed returns,” about “half of the seats involved are likely to have been captured by the UPC in any event, so that despite their effect on the arithmetic, they are unlikely to have affected the outcome.”

How would they know that UPC would have captured half the seats? [Raises his voice for the first time during the interview] On what basis? Prior to the 1980 elections there had been three elections and DP had captured majority seats in West Nile twice. How can one say that UPC would have had half the seats in West Nile in 1980? There were many people in West Nile who had fled into exile and they had said they would not come back if Obote won. But they came back to vote. How could they have supported UPC? There was no love lost between West Nile and UPC.

The opinion of the Commonwealth Report was not based on evidence. It was only meant to rationalise the results of a seriously flawed election. In fact, during the Ben Kiwanuka Memorial Lecture in 1996 or 1997, Jeremy Pope, who was the deputy administrator of the Commonwealth Observer Group said in an apology to Uganda that they were in error. He said they (observers) just looked at the future of Uganda. They now realise that the Military Commission forced the UPC victory. The (observers) thought that for peace in Uganda, it was better to just go along with what the government had announced, although their findings had been different.

On whether he still believes he was denied victory in 1980.

Yes, I do. A source told me the story of the reversal of the results (I can’t disclose his identify because of the confidence we share). But even without that, the circumstantial evidence to me is compelling. The conduct of the military officers, the Military Commission, and then of course the evidence from various constituencies is sufficient for me to draw that conclusion that one, those elections were not free and fair, and two the results were in many places tampered with to deny DP victory.

That is my considered opinion. The whole behavior subsequent to the election suggests the results were tampered with. There is no other explanation for the conduct of the Military Commission and even the UNLA other than to prevent a DP victory or to contain and legitimise the reversal of the results.

On claims by the Commonwealth Observers that both during the poll and at the counting, DP was publicly claiming to have won seats which it had almost certainly lost and that at no point had they “lent credence to the claims made by DP that hey had won a clear majority.”

The results were reversed. There is circumstantial evidence to show that. [E.] Rukyalekere (Hoima West) was executed when he tried to contest the results. Paul Sebuliba was filing a petition through the DP chairman of Mubende disputing the claim that he had lost. In the process of filing the petition, he was forced to flee for his life.

On the view that DP was misled by the results from Buganda and Busoga which were nearest Kampala and voted overwhelmingly for the party, although the rest of the country appeared to have voted for UPC….
It is true that DP’s following was much bigger in Buganda and Busoga. We did not need as many seats from Gulu and other parts of the country given what we had already secured.

On which aspects of the election had the biggest flaws (the nomination, polling or announcement?)

The whole process failed the conditions of a free and fair election. We have several people who were shot at, and some who were killed during the campaigns. The military in the north unleashed terror. Why would there have been such violence if UPC was sure of victory? That is why I refer to circumstantial evidence [that suggests DP was denied victory].

Some of our people felt so aggrieved that they decided to disagree with me. You know that some of our people took to the bush. This was not a DP policy. But some members who were aggrieved decided to go and pick up arms. There was disagreement over whether they should go as individuals or in the name of the party. I said they could not go in the name of DP, which remained a peaceful party. For somebody to go to the bush, he must be generally aggrieved. Even if you may not agree with that approach, you can say, “I understand.”

On why he decided to lead the opposition in Parliament, thus giving legitimacy to the UPC government (DP National Chairman Boniface Byanyima claims the party executive had resolved not to go to Parliament).
You have got to take his word against mine.

The final decision on this matter was taken by the National Council meeting which was well attended by DP leaders from all over the country. Both views (staying away and going to Parliament) were presented and the final decision was taken in favour of participating. That is a statement of fact.

Secondly, it cannot be said that I alone dictated that members who had been elected should go to Parliament and that they went there against their consciences or the decision of the party. All of them went to Parliament. It is not possible that they could have gone on orders of somebody called Paul Ssemogerere.

But I spoke for going to Parliament. The final decision of the party was that it was in the interest of the party and country that we go to and take up our seats and become an active opposition and bridge the past and the future of Uganda and oversee what the government was doing. I feel that was a moment of triumph for DP to pass through that stage. Since 1962, there had been no elections.

Therefore for 18 years the political opposition had an unknown quantity. Had it been killed by the repression in those 18 years? By 1980 who knew what was left of the Democratic Party. It was the elections and the participation of the Democratic Party in Parliament that showed that DP was a serious actor in the politics of Uganda. It rose to greater heights than ever before. The reputation of the Democratic Party assumed greater proportions nationally and internationally and up to today, it is a party that is respected.

On the situation today

It is a pity that the President and the Movement leadership do not appear to have learnt the lessons from past elections regarding particular concerns on the legal framework. A legal regime that does not offer a level playing field for the Movement—under whatever designation (NRM, NRMO) and the rest of the political parties is a recipe for disaster.

Even after the registration of the NRM (as a political party) they don’t want to concede that the Movement as it was before is no more. The Movement Commissar is a state official. The Movement Secretariat is still funded by the State. The brief of the RDCs is to mobilise for the NRM. The fragmentation of districts is partly to increase the patronage system and to consolidate support for the Movement.

These kinds of measures are to ensure that the Movement will always have special advantage. If this attitude is not abandoned, I have fears for the future. It can lead to frustrations as in the past but also it can lead to impediments in our political and economic development.

The violation of human rights and reneging on democracy in this country to me explains Uganda’s turbulence and economic backwardness. People have no faith in our political system. People see no peaceful way of changing the government so they go to the bush. Why don’t we have enough good quality investors? It is because they are not confident about the future.