|
The Federo proposal in Uganda is not tenable. The Ugandan experience of federalist arrangement has clearly shown that it is always designed to address selfish political motives. Federal arrangements in countries like US have been very successful in as far as achieving the twin objectives of the promotion of local autonomy whilst bolstering national unity and sovereignty.
![]() |
|
FOR FEDERO: Lukyamuzi |
The US constitution guarantees the rights of states. Unlike in unitary setups where these rights are delegated, under federalism, they are entrenched in the constitution. Powers and functions are duly shared between the federal government and the states. This federalist model is uniformly applied across the USA.
The US federal arrangement operates against the backdrop of a presidential model underpinned by the twin principles of separation of powers and checks and balances. The two systems constitute a biumvirate of governance models which has yielded very strong and durable institutions like the presidency, a bi-cameral Congress consisting of the Senate which guarantees and safeguards the equality and rights of states and a House of Representatives whose membership is constituted through the election of representatives from constituencies demarcated on the basis of population size. There is also an independent Judiciary with the Supreme Court of the US acting as final arbiter in matters of national dispute.
With power at multiple centres, the temptation to stage coups, the bloating of the cabinet size with its attendant extensive networks of political patronage with their accompanying administrative costs, are averted. Federalism saves this revenue for other development purposes.
The Lancaster Constitution of 1962 ushered political expediency to the heart of the Ugandan federalist settlement. The delegates that promulgated this act of political settlement adopted a dual system that incorporated both federalist and unitarist aspects into Uganda’s unique governance model.
There was a confluence of political interests that ultimately pushed for the adoption of this model. Both UPC and KY shared the burning desire to neutralize DP, which won the self-government elections of 1961. This was possible if the number of DP MPs was curtailed through a system of indirect elections in Buganda where parliamentarians were elected by a KY controlled Lukiiko.
The Lancaster federalist settlement held Uganda at constitutional ransom in the sense that the principles that defined her federal relationship with Buganda were over entrenched to the extent that it was virtually difficult to change the status quo. By virtue of the principle of concurrent powers, an amendment to the law defining the Buganda- Uganda relationship required the institution of simultaneous legislation in both the Lukiiko and Parliament with the requirement that it had to take a two thirds majority vote in both legislatures for a provision relating to the same to be repealed.
In one of his treatises on the untenability of America’s loose confederation model, Alexander Hamilton, one of the architects of the US constitution argued that government could only be effective if it had a direct link with the citizenry at the grass roots level. The system of indirect elections in Buganda constituted the Lukiiko into a tier of obstruction against the realisation of this link between the national government in Kampala and Ugandan citizens in Buganda. In effect, Ugandan citizens resident in Buganda were disenfranchised.
The latest episode in the federalisation of Uganda’s governance landscape neither delivers federo at the doorstep of Buganda nor federalism to the rest of Uganda. It is yet another chapter in the employment of federalism as a trump card in the deadly game of political expediency whose past adverse repercussions are bound to recur.
Hon. John Ken Lukyamuzi says that the federo that Buganda is demanding encompasses 4 aspects: Kabakaship, Land, Taxation and Kampala. According to Lukyamuzi, Buganda wants Article 246 which designates the Kabaka as Cultural Head of the Baganda to be revisited with a view to him ( Kabaka) becoming a fully fledged constitutional monarch. Lukyamuzi says Buganda wants the Central Government of Uganda to surrender the 9,000 square miles of land she seized by virtue of Central Government Decree Number 5 of 1975. Also at the centre of Buganda’s federo demands is her right to independent sources of revenue and the designation of Kampala as a constituent part of Buganda.
In the form in which Buganda wants federo to be delivered, the proposed governance model does not live up to her demands. The only gain for Buganda in the proposed arrangement is that the Kabaka will actually become a
constitutional monarch, head of the Buganda regional government and will open and close debate in the Lukiiko .
Otherwise, Uganda is not intent on surrendering Kampala as she considers it to be her indivisible capital.
However, under the proposed arrangement, Mengo Municipality will be curved off Kampala to provide Buganda with a capital within Wakiso district. The settlement of the land question does not meet Buganda’s federo demands. By virtue of the Land Act of 1998, all squatters who have spent more than 12 years on pieces of land are guaranteed bona fide occupancy and only required to pay a nominal fee of Shs1,000 to their respective landlords or landladies. Besides, by virtue of this act, land is now under the jurisdiction of District Land Boards.
The proposed arrangement does not also permit Buganda independent sources of revenue! Instead, the Ministry of Local Government, that of Finance and other stakeholders will ostensibly arrive at a formula for financial allocation
The assumption that horizontal cooperation by districts is a prerequisite to vertical federation goes against the very principle underpinning federalism. To federate means to relate to.
The relationship is between the centre and the peripheral unit. Therefore, units do not need to first consent to cooperation before relating with the centre. Population size is not an essential factor in the constitution of a federal state. In the US, Rhode Island of 2 million people is as much a federal state as California with a population of 40 million.
The proposed arrangement places obstacles towards the realisation of regional government. A resolution to federate will have to be passed by two thirds of the councillors in the districts intent on cooperation. This resolution will in turn have to be ratified by two thirds of the LC3 councils in each of the federating districts.
In Tooro, the federalist project is seen as an attempt to reincarnate greater Kabarole. Kamwenge and Kyenjojo, which were curved off Kabarole, see recent moves towards federation as an attempt to draw them back under the suzerainty of Fort Portal.
Arising from the aforesaid therefore, the current federal proposals, which have been concluded in secrecy, are diversionary and escapist! And given the lukewarm response from the rest of the country who see them as a matter between the NRM and the Mengo establishment, these proposals are not likely to generate the necessary national consensus required for their implementation and durability.
The writers, John Butime, Tom Mboijana, and Solomon Jubilee, are members of the Independent Political thinkers [IPT]- Fort Portal | 
