By
Jacob Waiswa
Situation Health Analyst
Dishma Inc.
Introduction:
According to the Wikipedia.org (2010), civil society was a composition of totality of voluntary civic and social organizations and institutions that formed a basis of functioning of a society. The idea of ekimeza in Uganda was generated in 1999 by radio one –the countries local English language station. The ekimeza was a roundtable discussion that mainly attracted the urban elites to topical issues of the day. It helped influence government policies and decision making process regarding issues discussed. The ekimeza is appreciated as one of the credible means to voice out local concerns, to influence policy and governance and, ultimately, peace –a condition free of violence and psychological trauma (or psychological peace).
There was need to cause an appreciation of the ekimeza as a clear mean of preventing conflict that lead to demeaning deaths and psychological trauma, and facilitation of psychological healing itself, or peace-building process. It was, thus, important to understand the contribution of ekimeza to good governance, to psychological peace and peaceful human environments through activism of freely expressing views and identifying oneself with others, sharing experiences.
Ekimeza (roundtable discussions) were witnessed and observed from 1999 to last year when such discussions were banned (end of 2009), listening in with groups of friends and experiencing the differences (changes), attending to local media to view ekimeza impact on society, and reading topical books on governance and peace.
Background
A decentralization system of governance in Uganda has been in operation since 1986 when the NRM government took over power. At that time, Uganda had had from a long history to tell of war and mass killings due to dictatorship and military takeovers. Decentralization in Uganda was implemented in two phases; using the RC system (1986-1987) that was given legal stature passed in 1987 and 1988, and October 1992 through an announcement by president Y.K. Museveni (Munawwar A., 2006:164). It, however, became a fully fledged system of governance in 1997 as a Local Government Act aimed at enhancing local participation in the affairs of government through local councils 1 to local council 5 (Nkongi E., 2002).
Only until 2004, when cabinet proposed the region tier arrangement to be granted to districts who desired it (Senyonjo J., 2007). And districts who felt undesirability of the system would through two thirds of the vote come out of it. As opposed to the federal system the regional tier, whereas district in the given region would cooperate to achieve common objectives, they still had to report to the central government. For federal system, both the regions and local government worked autonomously. That is: the central government, the region, and the local councils (Senyonjo J., 2007).
The inadequacy of representative democratic system in so many countries led to international agencies to support the development of civil society organizations as counter-weights to government. There was need to carefully design local level decision making to ensure balance and inclusion (of or with civil society) in an intimate relationship with those elected (Devas N, 2006).
UTS (2001) suggested five (5) performance measurements from the perspective of citizens and government, which included; feedback for decision-making, recognition of the potential impact of local government, the need for efficiency and effectiveness, public accountability, public pressure and the need improve public trust.
Participation and Influence on Decision Making and Peace
Those in power used the forum to explain government positions on different issues of contention, so that they could be understood and be accepted by the people. Equally, the opposition used it to constructively criticize government; reminding them of their failures so that they can correct or adopt new friendlier policies. By helping create a leveled ground for representative of the opposition, government representatives, and supporters, the forum was ensuring the principle of equality among Ugandans, as equal before the law.
In his view about democracy, Ekeh, P. Ed Berman Et al (2004:36), noted that it was a political expression of a relationship between individuals as citizens and the state. The citizen was a major stake in the political process that governed the state, and that he or she (citizen) belonged to the community of fellow citizens –who owned the state. If that relationship was harmonious, that, alone, would be peace experienced, injuries and demeaning deaths prevented, and healing caused.
Individuals who thought could offer better leadership, use the forum to let their ideals known to the population as well as identify themselves with them, such that during elections, chances were higher that they would be voted into power. Even those who lost chance caught up with them when President Y.K. Museveni appointed them Resident District Commissioners (RDCs) or deputies to the position, like Nakawa Assistant RDC, Fred Bamwine, and Tororo RDC Mpimbaza Hashaka, among others. The forum further helped young aspiring politicians to gain confidence and public speaking experience, many of them still pursuing the trade, for example Patrick Aroma (UPC), Moses Nuwagaba (Political Prostitute, Grace Musoke (FDC), among others.
They were an inspiration to many young people, and the immediate communities they came from –to be able to understand issues pertaining to events in their country in a two-sided manner, rather than the one-faced propaganda from government. There was often little by way of manifestos, or information about policy alternatives and little access about the real performance of those in power (Devas N, 2006:35). That facilitated informed decision making on choices about who would lead them. When the people have that freedom, there will be no doubt that they will feel peaceful within themselves in particular and the environment in general.
And psychologically, the ekimeza offered an opportunity for frustrated and disappointed citizens to vent such psychopathological conditions off –which alone was therapeutic as affected participants will leave the forum calmer and feeling better than they came –having ‘blown’ out the toxicity of anger on those leaders that betray their people. In the same way as earlier noted above, the need for identification can have significant influence on stability of the state once that state fails to respect such a need. But according Whitman J. (2005:2), the objective of policy was to preserve and increase the relations (like ekimeza) we value and to exclude or reduce the relations we hated. Preserving hate feelings only generated conditions for conflict rather than peace.
Truly, The People’s Parliament
With a huge membership to parliament, representation of electorates is poor. Ekimeza was thus a credible way for commoners to form civilian parliament and let themselves heard by both policy makers and their lazy MPs (member of parliaments). It was a sure way local participation and representation was ensured, helping to fill gaps left behind by the legislature.
It further filled the gap left behind by the representative democratic system –in which most MPs did not live up to the people’s wishes, instead represented their stomachs. The ekimeza was alternative to ineffective and bribery-prone parliament, such that with it (ekimeza), they could advocate balanced regional representation and development, improved infrastructure and services (e.g. better transportation system, equipped hospitals, quality education and health services, critical observance of human rights and freedoms (e.g. right to information, freedom of speech and assembly).
Individuals, who spoke at ekimeza did not only represent personal views but for their reference groups as well. Berman Et al (2004) argued that democracy was integral part of development. It is in democracy that we find a package of people participation in the affairs of their country and decisions based on the common good of such people.
When people are provided with a platform to identify with others, feel accepted, share information about their needs, acknowledge and solve problem them in a trust-worthy relationship with government or its representative, sustainable peace will be registered within themselves and society they come from. And having met their needs, the potential evil or criminal mind would have been prevented from developing into one.
The Famous Ekimeza Scene at Club Obligatto, Kampala-Uganda
Capacity Building, Problem-solving and Accountability under Decentralization Policy
Governance involved understanding systems, through consensus based on shared fates and common histories, possession of information and knowledge, the pressure of action or mobilization of publics and the use of careful planning, good timing and clever manipulation and hard bargaining either separately or in a combination to foster control mechanism that sustain governance without government [P.60,61]. The ekimeza provided for all that –where if government was idle, life went on peacefully as people or civil society took on mobilization and influence of outcomes.
An empowered citizenship was in position to make informed decisions and pressure government to pass people-friendly policies in line with decisions reached at personal and group level, and to further evaluate leadership performance (accountability). Like ekimeza, part of the common wealth secretariat objectives was to support decentralization through financial capacity, capacity building, and strengthening public management, provision of technical assistance and region symposia (Munawwar A. (2006:2). Decentralization of government functions has been a major theme pursued in both developing and transitional economies as well as in much developed world. At the same time there has been significant shift from the direct provision of services by government to more indirect approaches in partnership with the private sector, that is; the non-government organizations and the community organizations Munawwar A. (2006:6).
The ekimeza further aroused political consciousness of mainly educated youth –who either joined the discussions or began to view affairs of their country in a two-faced manner –and make informed decisions –accordingly. It showed relevancy to vernacular-speaking radios and to Ugandans in the countryside; together invoked a new radio programs –the ekimeza brand. These included simbawo akati (Radio Simba), mambo baado (CBS), among others.
Events following the September 11th, 2009 protests evolved out of the ekimeza fame –accused by government of inciting violence; the final assault being the closer of radio stations namely; Suubi Fm, Akaboozi kubiri (Radio), and CBS. Until now CBS remains closed. Agreeable, however, was that the ekimeza helped to empower citizens with knowledge about their human-rights including cultural ones. If government had listened and respected them as people who voted it into power, in the true spirit of democracy, violence would not have ensued. This follows Article 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda (1995) that power belonged to the people.
On the eve and after national or international holidays, the ekimeza discussed significances of such days to Ugandans. In that way it was helping to educate the masses on relevance and challenges to such days, for example; the 8th March (women’s day), the 9th June (heroes’ day), the 26th January (Teresita day), 9th October (Independence Day) and the mid-year Budget reading days as well as the hot topics in parliament.
It not only helped to bridge the gap between those in government and its people, the ekimeza too acted as an empowering tool for Ugandans. According to Whitman J., (2005) governance was a social function (like ekimeza) centered on making collective choices regarding matters of common concern to the members of human groups (civil society one like ekimeza).
It (governance) comprised partners that emerged from governing activities of social, political and administrative actors; therefore, modes of sociopolitical governance were always outcomes of public and private deliberations [P.17]. Such gave participants eventful opportunities to comment on administrative corruption, the too many small and under funded districts, lack of patriotism and unbalanced distribution of the national cake –which if not addressed, could potentially lead to instability, notwithstanding that such structure of society, itself, amounted to absence of peace.
It was obvious that government would be put to task to explain ventures in foreign wars, expensive military expenditures, missing funds, marginalization, inefficiencies, and performance of key development sectors like agriculture, economic protection, under funding, and insecurity. Nickson A (2006:25) observed factors driving government reforms as external and internal. Internally, if there was a strong coalitions for reform of the fiscal policies to rid country of administrative corruption, overstaffing (the case of Uganda parliament with over 300 MPs), low productivity, absence of culture of service, inefficiency and inequitable resources distribution.
The ekimeza acted as a formidable force that put government to task to account for the mess in the country, like Khisa I. (2010:3) reported in the Saturday Vision that nine million Ugandans were facing hunger, 15% of the population was malnourished, and 40% of the child deaths recorded in the country were due to malnutrition. If such structural problems were taken into account after putting government on the right path and direction due to pressure, and addressed those, certainly, peace would prevail.
Human Rights Issues and the Rule of Law in Governance
At ekimeza participants were sure they were exercising their freedoms of association and expression –stipulates in Article 19 one of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ( 1948) that people had a right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas without hindrance, and Article 29 of the constitution of the Republic of Uganda (2005) which provides for freedoms of association, and that every person shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, which shall include freedom of the press and other media. Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights 1981 provides for the right to receive information and right to disseminate information according to the law. Berman Et al (2004) noted that multiparty politics shaped the context of the struggle among elites seeking to defend or challenge the distribution of state power and resources.
The long time of inadequate and corrupt judicial wing of government characterized by bribery, using it as a tool of oppression by the rich against the unprotected poor, they (the people) were forced to assume the power to defend themselves within their rights. Soon, mob justice replaced the weak and un-trusted judicial system upon conceding defeat to the concept of the rule of law. The new definition according to the “common man’s law” or mob justice seen by the same architects of failure as itself an act of lawlessness became a fairer deal to the people, very relieving of insecurity and rewarding in terms of peace.
A police report (2009) in Saturday Vision news article by Odong C., (2010), revealed 332 people killed out of mob justice –a figure said to be the highest in Africa. The police put the figure of the backlog cases at 103, 592 that year. Such was the temptation to police to think of wrongful means to stop additions of suspects to already congested prisons. So they could think of bribery as a way to send away suspects –which in another way was bringing injustice to the oppressed. Luckily, recent reforms in the judicial systems propose community service, recruitment of more judges and effective monitoring of decentralization of judicial services by the office of the inspector of government (IGG), and some of them like increment of staff and improved IGG actions are already underway. Once all those are dealt with, conflict resolution and peace will prevail.
The ekimeza only invoked the freedoms of expression and rights to assemble that, truly, were functional and a sign that government had a duty recognize such freedoms. Article 1 of the African Charter stated that:
“Freedom of expression and information, including the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other form of communication, including across frontiers, is a fundamental and inalienable human right and an indispensable component of democracy. Everyone shall have an equal opportunity to exercise the right to freedom of expression and to access information without discrimination.”
(AU, 2002)
The Declaration of the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights –a body that monitors compliance to its provisions declare in Article II that: “No one shall be subject to arbitrary interference with his or her freedom of expression; and Any restrictions on freedom of expression shall be provided by law, serve a legitimate interest and be necessary in a democratic society.” Famous themes of the ekimeza over years was advocacy of federal system of governance to suit the diversity in cultures, promote true patriotism that naturally eliminates the cancer of corruption, and for effective utilization of local resources –noting that the ekimeza, from its composition was true manifestation of unity in diversity of ideologies and cultures. And it was argued following article 1 (i) of the constitution that people had the power to choose the system of governance under which they should be led.
Linking Ekimeza to Good Governance and Peace
Fig.1.
 |
| Disjointed Relationship, Bad Governance and Disharmony (or Instability) |
 |
| Healthy Relationship, Good Governance and Peace |
Challenges and Situation Analysis
Censorship of information and closure of radio stations are concerns can be traced as far back as the revolutionary years of France, but now is here (in Uganda). Whereas development gradually transforms society from worse to better, recent history proves otherwise that an individual or a few of them can undermine press liberty and intellectual freedom.
Threats to close radio stations and intimidation which began way back in 2003 when government started crackdowns on live outside radio broadcasts (ebimeza). According to Basoga Nsadhu (RIP) radio stations were by law supposed to broadcast from within their studios (Reporters Without Boarders, 2003). Such actions only undermined government, de-nationalized Ugandans, and generated even stronger condition for internal violence and wars.
However, the ekimeza on most occasions was accused of intent to blow discussions out of proportion by personally insulting and sending abusive messages to those in power which culturally was grave –which tantamount to disrespect of elders. It was argued that the September 11th Baganda protest –in which over 30 people were reported killed by state security agencies, was an outcome of forum (ekimeza) activities.
Unfortunately, the people in power failed to understand the root causes of personal insults being targeted to the president, not at all understand that some speakers came from deprived areas of the country –with poor health services, poor roads, poor drainage systems, poor representation to parliament and above all; unemployment.
For the elite speakers their cries were on corruption, lack of political will to end it, insecurity, marginalization of certain areas of the country like northern Uganda, wrongful execution of war there and lost or no explanations for the Barlonyo, Atiak and Karamoja killings.
In dealing with the Buganda issues, government insensitive of the cultural rights of the Baganda went on to limit Kabaka Ronald Mutebi II’s peaceful movement in his Kingdom. Such an act was simply a provocation, a show of arrogance and contempt of the people it governed –which without question had to light up violence. It was, thus, wrong for government to interfere with the peace of movement of the Kabaka acted within his cultural and institutional rights and with ease shooting 30 unarmed people dead.
Good governance catered for citizens’ cultural (leadership), political (decision making), economic rights (access to development opportunities) and safety concerns –which if the government of Uganda had valued as one way to grant peace to a society that deserved such rights, violence would not have occurred. Indeed, the cultural-led violence was merely a spark that triggered the silence conflicts of economic deprivation, ineffective representation, and hopelessness of life under the sets of political, economic and security rights or concerns of the people of Uganda. And with the repeal of the law of sedition on August 25th 2010 by the constitutional court of the Republic of Uganda, there are even greater signs of a peaceful Uganda (Jurist.org, 2010).
As if happy with strangling the most reliable link (media) between government and its people, President Y.K. Museveni, at a dinner hosted by the Uganda National Association of Broadcasters, angrily said, “You rarely inform. You rarely educate. You entertain, yes. But you mostly lie and incite. I have so much evidence to prove all this.” But he was also able to prove himself right that government had failed to deliver services to its people effectively and efficiently when he said, “Ever since we started decentralization, we have been sending massive amounts of money to the districts. A lot of this money suffered ‘nyam nyam’. Very soon you will hear some stories.” Yet, as Devas (2006:35) put it, “…there was need to supplement local elections with opportunities for more direct citizen participation in decision making and by greater information availability and use of resources."
The ekimeza approach was very significant at bringing the picture mass discontent of the masses to the sitting rooms of policy makers through listening in –so as to adopt new policies, strengthen existing ones or filling in the missing gaps in services delivery and representation. It was one approach that brought together people from various walks of life together to meet and deliberate issues of national concern peacefully. By so doing it built relationships among participants and represented agencies like government or its opposition. In such a good, trustworthy relationship, harmony and peaceful situations were imminent.
At most times, government representatives were present to listen and explain incidents of inefficiency in its fiscal policies, and the existing repressive schemes by government on opposition leaders and their followers. If the days’ leaders could pick one or two concerns from every discussion, a lot of ‘wounds’ could be healed, and society emancipated economically, politically and in expression their inalienable rights of assembly and speech –among others. They, themselves, would change morally and ethically as much of the criticisms were on political corruption and socio-cultural immorality. And once that exists, there would be perceived fairness and predictable peace.
Government stability was determined by its own actions –where if such actions were in the best interest of the people, security and peace would be guaranteed. And so long as such actions worked that way, then political paranoia would be replaced with psychological peace on the part of the political leadership, insecurity would be replaced by sustainable peace, as greed and mass discontent and contempt for government are diffused in favor of trust, tolerance, acceptance and love among Ugandans –all of which are strong predictors of peace and tranquility.
Conclusion and Recommendations
It can be submitted that there is need to let ebimeeza (plural) flourish at all leaves as forums to brainstorm societal problems, for problem-solving, for venting and psychological healing or peace and for enabling policy reform and formulation for the benefit of the common man, and for healthy relationship building as meaningful avenues for good governance and peace-building and prevention of psychologically traumatizing condition of war. However, more research is needed to define and set limits of the ekimeza so that, while it assumes the rights and freedoms of assembly, information and expression, and appreciative of its responsibilities to society and governance, it knows it limits for orderliness Uganda and common good of its people.
