The Weekly Observer (Kampala)
James Magode Ikuya
1 October 2008
opinion
South Africa now has Kgalema Motlanthe as its president following the withdrawal of Thabo Mbeki from the high office by the ANC.
The widespread involuntary reaction by many of our pious political commentators is to sigh with euphoria at the peaceful handover of power by Mbeki to his successor, priding at the occasion when Uganda too might experience such a purportedly clock-work democratic transition.
It's Mbeki who's complimented for nursing such a heartening democratic heart which is seen to be rare in the African scene. It means that without the quality of a person like Mbeki, the allegedly peaceful change of leaders even in S. Africa is imminently impossible.
In this, their concerns are not overly misplaced. Leadership wrangles have always played up so much strife in African countries that every appearance of one must presage fears of a similar train of things to come. The examples are numerous.
For some years now Malawi has been teetering on the brink of crisis because President Mutharika who came to power as a protégé of ex-president Muluzi has turned his back against the Muluzi party which put him in office to the chagrin of his backers. He has now estranged his office from his former party and formed his own, clinging dearly to office by the help of a faction of absconders and renegades, despite the clear constitutional stipulation that elected officials who change from the parties in which they were elected lose their seats until re-elected from their new platforms.
In turn, ex-president Muluzi emerged from his retirement to claim back his readiness to contest for the presidency. The matter has characteristically developed into a melodrama. The ex-president has had to undergo arrests, accused of fomenting treason. There is a complete stand off in the governance of the country, the parliament being unable to transact any genuine business because of the crisis between the warring camps.
Similarly in Kenya, Mwai Kibaki first assumed power under a grand coalition called NARC which defeated Moi-supported Uhuru Kenyatta. He soon abandoned NARC and distanced his office from his erstwhile allies, ruling the country single handedly like it had always been his right. In the next elections, he scrambled up a new alliance called PNU which when faced with imminent defeat, blatantly and unconventionally turned the scales. The rest, as they say, is history.
It is legitimate to ask what lessons are truly contained for Africa in general and Uganda in particular, in the events in S. Africa. The answers to this question can be gleaned only by fully understanding the posture and profile of the ANC as a political organisation. The historical significance of the ANC is that it sprung from an organised grass-root political party of the S. African people. It spans over many years of struggle, transcending particular leaders, however outstanding they were. Even when its senior leaders were incarcerated or were living in exile, the ANC remained vibrant in the people with generations of new leaders who were always staking their lives in sacrifice to carry forward the banner of the people's aspirations in the face of repression.
Never was the ANC struggle tied to a particular individual. The ANC was always a collective vision, an irresistibly flowing stream which kept its course even if some of its waters were trapped or slowed down in the meandering marshland or evaporated due to elements of nature.
By this very nature the ANC members and their leaders became highly motivated in spirit and responsibility. Political work was not cantered on the mere urge for office and for oneself, but on carrying out entrusted assignments by each one in accordance with one's own proven ability.
This very principle determines the relationship between the ANC as a ruling party and the state. By law the state is run in accordance with the provisions of the constitution. ANC members in the structures of the state carry out their functions as established by law. But politically they recognise that they are assigned by the ANC whose aims they must pursue. They remain contingent agents of the ANC, subject to its recall.
The difficulty in Africa and Uganda in particular is that the groups we call parties are not structured around any genuine public principles. Usually they are formed by their mentors to pursue their own individual aims, to gain office or positions for accessing easy wealth. This is why some of the people who fail to achieve their individual aims through one party often have no shame to claim to have crossed to rival ones to enable them access what they had failed to have.
In the NRM, this hideous behaviour has reached a debilitating level. Those in government are not answerable to the party; it is the party members who answer to them. In turn, the party members are made to remember the people only because they are counted as voters during election periods.
We who profess to be NRM owe it to Ugandans, more than any other body of politicians, to sculpt our political lives to be models for the people. We must make the NRM to be a mouthpiece for the population, reflecting and expressing their aspirations. Those who become NRM leaders must accept to be the servants of the NRM members.
Such is the challenge of our days.
James Magode Ikuya, The author is a member of NEC (NRM) representing
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 The Weekly Observer. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
