The Observer (Kampala)
James Magode Ikuya
12 November 2008
opinion
It is a trite belief amongst most of our schooled and sophisticated gentry of today that the clan organization of our ancestors which is still lingering in our rural life is basically the indulgence in primitive ethnic fetishes by the largely ignorant and backward peasantry.
Clan organization derived its roots from the most intrinsic interest in the further existence of society. Individual human beings are mortal. The continued life of the human race is possible only through constant procreation of new persons and their being instilled with the language, skills and legacy of the society of their parents to enable them forge life for themselves into the future.
The conjugal relationship between a husband and wife has always been the basis for production of children and their biological progression. It was also a kernel of the very first relations tying humans together as a society bonding brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles, parents and grandparents, and all the distant relatives in society in which we also see the engagement in economic and other social activities.
This is why, from ancient times, the management of kinship and family matters were crucial to society as a whole. From this, there developed a clan system wherein the most experienced and stable segments of each society were sifted to head the management of clan issues in accordance with recognized tenets and principles. Clan rule was, therefore, not arbitrary or subject to the mere vagary of individuals.
It was only when the British colonialists carved this part of Africa as their possession that the previous clan management institutions were replaced with a single state which created a new apparatus manned by its appointed officials and chiefs to enforce servitude to colonial masters. They related to the colonial officialdom only because they had to, but for the most part, they settled their mutual affairs by resorting to their trusted old clan institutions which they kept silently in reserve.
Our NRM MPs are now finding that they ought to have learnt and borrowed from this peasant age old wisdom in dealing with the recent saga of the NSSF Parliamentary probe. They had been assured that when the report of the probe would be ready, the NRM Parliamentary Caucus would be convened to make decisions on the matter.
Under multiparty politics, every party with a contingent in Parliament engages in deliberation with its representatives before important Parliamentary debates. The purpose usually is to align the party representatives with party stipulations so that in the ensuing proceedings the party position may be brought to bear.
But in the NRM where the party organs are in abeyance due in part to the preoccupation of key officials with personal deals, there is virtually no party position which would require the attention of its Parliamentary representatives. So, when the NRM Parliamentarians were summoned to the NRM Party Caucus to express views on the report, many were dismayed to discover that the supposed NRM caucus had been incongruously warped into an NRM circus.
The NRM MPs became peasants before a chief's baraza. In the end, they resigned themselves to instructions which they received to be taken back to Parliament as the position of the NRM.
The absolving of the ministers of any wrong-doing is not the most outrageous contention as it is the prerogative of Parliament, but the method that was adopted to achieve this objective has left a very bitter after-taste in the country. Nobody seems to have bothered about the absolute awkwardness that the NRM MPs who investigated and compiled the report were put to. By a mystical wand of the hand, their Committee Report that had been officially tabled to the Speaker dissolved into thin air as none of the NRM members who had produced it could themselves speak for it.
By out rightly torpedoing the genuine discussion of the reports, the acclaimed NRM caucus undermined Parliamentary procedures and brought the NRM name as a Party into public ridicule. Many will ask whether it is useful anymore to occupy MPs in any committee work, when the consideration of their findings can be nullified at a stroke by instructions from above.
Why should Parliament ever receive the Auditor General's report if it is not intended for any action by it? Why ought the people of Uganda undertake the upkeep of such a huge number of honourable MPs when they have nothing to honour? Why not accede and surrender powers of Parliament to be exercised directly by only those in the niche of the NRM caucus?
The NRM MPs are now deeply divided and nursing grudges. Parliament is demeaned. The spirit of NRM has been violated. The people of Uganda as a whole feel belittled. It is a recipe for new tensions in the country.
This is all the more reason to repeat to all NRM members to wake up and restore the name of our party to its previous glory.
James Magode Ikuya, The author is a member of NEC (NRM) representing historicals.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 The 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.
