Authoritarian Legalism: A Chomskyan perspective

Noam Chomsky’s concept of “authoritarian legalism” describes how regimes manipulate legal frameworks to maintain power while projecting a facade of democracy. In Uganda, under President Museveni, this strategy is evident in the treatment of Opposition figures such as Dr Kizza Besigye and human rights lawyer Eron Kiiza.

Dr Kizza Besigye, a four-time presidential candidate and long-standing critic of Mr Museveni, has faced numerous arrests over the years. In November 2024, while scheduled to attend a book launch in Nairobi, Kenya, Dr Besigye was forcibly brought back to Uganda by security operatives—a move his wife, Ms Winnie Byanyima, described as an abduction. He was subsequently charged in a military court with illegal possession of firearms and treachery, the latter carrying a potential death sentence. Despite a Supreme Court ruling on January 31 declaring the trial of civilians in military courts unconstitutional, the military insists on continuing his prosecution. In protest, Dr Besigye initiated a hunger strike on February 11, leading to a significant deterioration in his health.

Mr Eron Kiiza, one of Dr Besigye’s legal counsel and a prominent human rights advocate, has also been targeted. On January 7, during a court session at the General Court Martial in Kampala, Mr Kiiza was physically prevented by soldiers from accessing the defence section. When he protested, he was assaulted, arrested, and summarily sentenced to nine months in prison for “contempt of court,” without a fair trial. This incident underscores the regime’s use of legal instruments to intimidate and suppress those who challenge its authority.

Chomsky’s critique extends to the manipulation of judicial systems by authoritarian states. In Uganda, the Judiciary’s independence is deemed as compromised, with courts often serving as tools to legitimise the suppression of dissent. 

The continued detention and military trial of Dr Besigye, despite the Supreme Court's directive, exemplifies this subversion of justice. President Museveni’s dismissal of the Supreme Court's ruling, asserting that “the country is not governed by the judges,” further highlights the Executive’s dominance over the Judiciary.

The regime’s control over public discourse is another facet of authoritarian legalism. State-controlled media in Uganda often downplays human rights violations and vilifies opposition figures, shaping public perception to align with government narratives. Independent journalists and media outlets face censorship, harassment, and legal challenges, particularly under laws like the Computer Misuse Act, which are employed to stifle dissenting voices.

The government’s justification for repressive actions often hinges on national security concerns. The arrest of Dr Besigye in Kenya and his subsequent charges were framed as necessary for national security, despite the lack of transparent legal processes. Such actions not only violate international legal standards but also serve to intimidate political opponents and deter activism.

Despite these challenges, Uganda’s civil society and Opposition figures continue resisting authoritarian legalism. 

The resilience of individuals like Dr Besigye and Mr Kiiza, who endure personal risk to advocate for democratic principles, exemplifies this defiance. Their efforts, alongside those of other activists and legal professionals, aim to uphold the rule of law and challenge the misuse of legal frameworks for political repression.

In conclusion, the Ugandan government's manipulation of legal systems to suppress opposition aligns with Chomsky's notion of authoritarian legalism. The cases of Dr Besigye and lawyer Kiiza highlight the regime’s strategy of using legal instruments to maintain control while projecting a veneer of legality. However, the persistent efforts of civil society and Opposition figures offer hope for a future where justice and genuine democratic principles prevail.

Dean Natukunda. [email protected]