The National Federo Movement
The Democratic Party
Uganda Peoples Congress
Reform Agenda
National Resistance Movement
National Democrats Forum (NDF)
Justice Forum
The Free Movement
FeParty
Justice Party
The National Federo Movement (NFM)
The National Federo Movement (NFM) is a pressure group formed in 1997 to champion for the restoration of the federal system of government.
The group's national mobilizer is Saddam Abdu Gaira.
The DP advocates for a Federal Uganda; and this is the position the Democratic Party took in the Constituent Assembly. My manifesto and all my speeches and statements during the 1996 Presidential Campaign and ever since have unambiguously called for a federal Uganda. More is to follow on this. (Paul K. Ssemogerere, President, Democratic Party)
The DP policy has supported true federalism since the London conferences (Prof. A M Lugira, DP Chapter Coordinator, USA).
DP supports Buganda on Federo
By Kennedy Lule
The Democratic Party (DP) has extended its support to Buganda’s quest for a federal form of government (federo).DP President General Paul K. Ssemogerere in a statement released Friday commended Buganda’s Katikkiro Joseph Mulwanyamuli Ssemwogerere for his preparation to present the Kingdom’s position pushing for a federal system of government before the Constitution Review Commission slated for Tuesday, Feb. 28.
“We encourage members of the DP to join hands with others and associate themselves with the scheduled events of the day (Tuesday), ” Ssemogerere said.
The DP chief said the issue of federalism and the land tenure question, together with the issue of the political systems for Uganda were left unresolved by the Constituent Assembly (CA).
Ssemogerere said DP maintains its unequivocal support for federalism as spelt out in their contributions to the CA (1994-1995) and Ssemogerere’s manifesto for the 1996 presidential election.
“We believe federalism is the most appropriate form of government for promoting harmony, equitable development and cultural diversity in Uganda,” Ssemogerere added.
The Monitor, January 26, 2003 04:04:01
Federalism means an agreed sharing of power and responsibilities between the central government and the constituent units. It also addresses the question of cultural identity, concerns, aspirations and development. This sharing of power should be entrenched in the constitution. The sharing of power gives the constituent units a measure of autonomy and self determination. By definition, this is more fundamental and is different from the decentralization policy whereby the central government dictates what it retains and what it delegates to the constituent units; and also retains the power to withdraw powers without the consent of the local governments.
Federalism is the best form of empowerment of local government. A federal constitution guarantees certainty of source of income and funding for the local government. Consequently, local government planning and development become easy and realizable because the people are certain about the minimum expected funding. Local government becomes real as it does not depend on the dictates of the president or Minister of Local Government. Besides; the Central Government and local government become partners in the enterprise of governance and not master and servant [slave] or benefactor and ward. Each respects and recognizes the other's authority. Under federalism social tensions are considerably minimized.
During the constitution making process, the strongest voice for federalism came from Buganda. But, it must be remembered that as soon as the name Buganda was mentioned in the constitution, although merely as a token, pressure mounted from other "nationalities" that their original names be constitutionalized. So, Acholi, Ankole, Bunyoro, Busoga, Lango and Toro, were added. These constitute a majority of all the districts and most of the population of Uganda. The fact that the constitution makers were forced to provide for cooperation among districts is a clear testimony of the people's desire for federalism.
I undertake:
To revisit the Constitution with a view to ensuring that a viable and well coordinated form of federalism is established; promote unity in diversity, in accordance with the wishes and aspirations of the people concerned; and guarantee the minimum but meaningful income and sources of funding for local governments.
Excerpt from the UPC Position on the Form of Government and Local Administrationsduring the drafting of the Uganda Constitution 1995 by the Constituent Assembly CA
Regional Administration: 1. During the debates and discussions which led to the anonymous agreement by the Delegates to the 1962 London Conference on the Constitution of Uganda, there were difficult and intricate issues. It was the UPC which, having considered and articulated possible solutions to the issues, engaged the different Delegations in heart to heart discussions of the possible solutions.2. Uganda seems to be now in the same situation as in the period which preceded the 1962 London Conference. This is in regard (amongst other matters) to the form of Administrations to be provided in the new Constitution for the component parts of Uganda. The matter is generating and causing unnecessary ill feelings and bitterness. The draft of the new Constitution contains very serious flaws which unless corrected, will make the Constitution a charter for oppression and repression.
3. On the individual rights and freedoms of the citizen, for example, the draft of the new Constitution seeks to curtail those rights and freedoms. Two very serious cases may be cited.First, the draft makes provision for the freedom of expression without addressing its substance or heart. The "freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference" is the cardinal principle in the concept of freedom of expression. It is ludicrous that the Constitution Commission and supporters of the Movement System of rule find that an alleged majority of the people of Uganda agree that this noble principle be omitted from the new Constitution.
It is hard to accept and believe the claims of the Constitutional Commission and advocates of the Movement System that the principle of freedom of expression is harmful to the citizen and society and must therefore not be provided for in the Constitution ..." Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression". The omissions for the draft of the rights and freedom of "own consent" are being blatantly made for nefarious reasons.Second, unlike in the existing Constitution, the Draft while purporting to outlaw discrimination on grounds of race, tribe, place of origin, POLITICAL OPINIONS, colour or creed, actually provides for discrimination especially against citizens who hold different political opinions and do not support the movement and the movement system of rule.
Contrary to the provision in the existing Constitution citizens who, on conscience, want to belong to political Parties and want to protect their interests in the governance of Uganda through their respective political Parties have been and are to be under the new Constitution subject to disabilities and restrictions to which citizens who support the movement have not been made subject and under the new Constitution are not to be made subject.In addition, supporters of the Movement have been accorded privileges and advantages and are, under the new Constitution, to continue to be accorded privileges and advantages which have not been and are not to be made subject. The new Constitution is also designed to debar the political Parties from contesting elections to public institutions and offices with their own candidates and on their respective distinctive policies and platforms.
4. The suppression of the rights and freedoms of the citizen, in various forms and disguises, which has been since 1986 and is in practice is to continue either as a constitutional provision or as a feature of rule under the new Constitution to be extended and cunningly made to appear as a temporary or transitional feature when in fact the practice it to continue indefinitely through revolving terms to be disguised as the will of the people expressed in referenda. Any referendum in which only the supporters of the Movement are free to express their views on a subject or subjects at issue and citizens who hold contrary views are not free to express their views would be bogus and fraudulent but will still be presented as the free will of the people.5. The continuance of the suppression of the rights and freedoms of the citizen and the entrenchment of the rule of the NRM/NRA are therefore the twin core and objective of the new Constitution.
6. Had the first, the suppression of the rights and freedoms, not been the case, the debate outside the Constituent Assembly, at public meetings, seminars and workshops on such a legitimate matter as whether or not the new Constitution should provide for some kind of federal (Federo) arrangements, would not have been prohibited and suppressed.7. There are citizens who support the Movement and the Movement System of rule but also hold opinions that the new Constitution should provide for federal arrangements. When such citizens hold public meetings, seminars and workshops in order to endorse the suppression of the rights and freedoms of the citizens who belong to political Parties, they are praised and exalted by the rulers. However, when the same citizens want to hold seminars; public meetings and workshops in order to impart and disseminate their opinions of Federo arrangements, their rights and freedoms to do so are suppressed. This is discrimination and oppression.
8. Uganda is not composed of robots but has, in abundance men and women of brain power, abilities to think and articulate ideas and capacities to know what they want and what is good or bad for them and for their country. Any notion that it is only the military rulers who are capable to think for all the people of Uganda or who alone know what is good and bad is a most inimical insult to all the people of Uganda.9. There are two matters of principle regarding what the new Constitution would provide in respect to the form of Administrations in the component parts of Uganda. The first is that the new Constitution either of itself or in its effect make provision which is discriminatory in the treatment of the component parts of Uganda, large or small, wealthy or lean. The second principle arises directly from the first namely, the Constitution should not afford different treatment to different component parts of the country.
10. On the basis of the two principles, the alternatives are only two. The first is the unitary state as provided in the 1967 Constitution and has not been altered by the NRM regime or proposed in the draft of the new Constitution to be altered. Opposition to this alternative has grown and is growing. A return to the arrangements in the 1962 and 1966 Constitutions has the demerit of discrimination in that the arrangements afforded different treatment to different component parts of the country. Incidentally not many people are aware that the so-called pigeon-hole Constitution of 1966 actually left intact the federal arrangements of the 1962 Constitution and altered only the provision of the Head of State to make the offices of the President executive and not titular as was agreed in the 1962 London Conference. The election in 1963 of the first Ugandan as Head of State was a wholly UPC programme which was accepted by the whole country.11. Having considered the matter in depth and having examines afresh and again, as in 1966, found that the arrangements in the 1962 crisis which enabled the then UPC government to provide for the continuance of those arrangements in the 1966 Constitution: and having further studied the nefarious designs by some politicians to involve the then titular Head of State who was also the Kabaka of Buganda in plots to remove the government of Uganda by unconstitutional means, designs which led the Lukiiko of Buganda to wittingly or unwittingly pass a resolution which caused insecurity and led to the abolition in the 1967 of the arrangements in 1962 and 1966 Constitutions: and taking into account the meaningless and hollow restoration of the Traditional Rulers by the NRM regime and further restoration has generated and which could lead to serious bitterness and insecurity, the UPC makes the following proposals for their entrenchment in the new Constitution:-
(i) That the Constitution by itself or in its effect no provision which is discriminatory in respect to relation between the government of Uganda and the Administration in any of the component parts of Uganda.(ii) That each and every component part of Uganda, as a unit, be afforded the same treatment, rights and freedoms.
(iii) That in the light of experience, development and the need for harmony, the devolution of powers Buganda, Bushenyi, Nebbi, Mbale etc. be made applicable equally to each and every component unit of the country.(iv) That Kampala and Entebbe be provided for the Constitution as one component unit, and room be provided for their expansion and eventual merger as the National Capital.
(v) That each component unit with its boundaries be designated and be recognised by name in the Constitution.(v) That the Council, by whatever name called, of each component part and its executive Head shall be elected in free and fair multiparty elections.
CONCLUSION: It will be recalled that UPC did not send delegates to the Constituent Assembly, and the reasons for that have been addressed in earlier Press Statements. Suffice to say that UPC promised to accept and respect a Constitution that will guarantee rights and freedoms of all the people of Uganda, and a Constitution that will usher in peace and development of its peoples. But it must be recalled that UPC in its Pronouncement of 25 March 1994 stated that should the Constitution enacted by the current Constituent Assembly, considering the manner in which it was constituted, falls short of the above objectives, UPC will reserve the rights to reject and dishonour that Constitution. 3.0.1 On Federalism Before the 1995 Constitution was drawn up, the Odoki Commission traversed the country and received numerous memoranda from all across the country in order to ascertain the views of the people on what they wanted in the Constitution. It is a matter of record that the majority of views from Buganda and the rest of Uganda submitted to the Odoki Commission, recommended that a Federal system of government be put in place. It has already been recommended in this document that the Constitutional Review Commission reverts to the Odoki report in which the people’s views were expressed. The debate should not be about WHETHER to have federalism. It should be about HOW to structure and implement federalism. Recommendation* The Constitution should provide for the establishment of Federal government in response to the views collected by the Odoki commission about the subject.
- A Commission on Federalism should be set up by an Act of Parliament (not a Commission of inquiry), with terms of reference to gather views regarding the definition of a federal type of government, what is involved in running one, the relationship between the federal government and the state/regional/local governments, sharing/separation of powers and resources and civic education on the subject. The Commission would then make a comprehensive report to parliament with recommendations for the necessary constitutional reforms.
- With the completion of the constitutional reforms, those communities that wish to adopt a federal arrangement should go ahead and do so .
Excerpts from Dr. Besigye's Submission to the Ssempebwa Constitutional Review Commission, in August of 2001.
Back to Top Whenever the NRM is confronted with Federo, it counters with having empowered local governments. The ministry of local government understands its mission thus: “It is the mandate of the Ministry to establish, develop and facilitate the management of a self-sustaining, efficient and effective decentralized Local Government Systems capable of delivering the required services to the people in order to foster good democratic governance and integrated social and economic development.” Thereby it seeks to improve “service delivery by shifting policy implementation away from an aloof, inefficient centre to the actual point of delivery; to promote good governance by emphasising transparency and accountability in the management of public affairs; to democratise society through promotion of inclusive, representative decision-making; and to alleviate poverty through collaborative efforts between Central and Local Governments, donors, non-Governmental organisations (NGOs), the private sector and other stakeholders.” Here is the structure of local governments in Uganda:45 District councils including Kampala
897 Sub-counties
1 City council
5 City divisions (equivalent to a Sub-county)
13 Municipal councils
34 Municipal divisions
Unknown number of Town councils
It is alleged, “Local Governments have been given extensive political, executive and administrative powers”. Their functions and responsibilities include the exercising of political and executive powers, providing services, protecting the constitution, and ensuring the implementation and compliance with government policy.
The NRM government ensured that Parliament promulgates “the Local Governments Act, 1997 in which the roles, functions and powers of Central and Local Governments were extensively detailed to facilitate a smooth and synchronised implementation process.” The decentralisation policy was incorporated into the 1995 Constitution and its reversal can only be effected through a constitutional revision. This is how the NRM is camouflaging her thirst for power. The initiatives of the local government do not go further enough as to ensure a genuine separation of powers in a true political sense. I miss a number of things such as the independent legislative and policy-making institutions in the local governments. The common institutions have their own independent legislative process, which is distinct from those of the member councils. Their laws do not require ratification in the councils of its member governments. Another thing that I miss is Law enforcement body, such as an Executive and Courts, which have independent law-enforcement powers and responsibilities.Federo must wait until Jesus comes back, so said one NRM supporter.
Movement Wants Federo System Discussed
National Democrats Forum (NDF)
JEEMA stands for Justice Education Economy Morality African unity.
The Federal Question: As a matter of priority, JEEMA intends to re-address the problem of concentrating too much power in the centre, which has led past leaders to abuse it. JEEMA proposes to divide Uganda into semi-autonomous units of various sizes and degree of autonomy, which will federate to make the whole. The process of federating will be democratic and consultative, and will take into account traditional leadership sensibilities. If the people so decide, traditional leaders can be heads of a unit, but within a democratic framework, whose details will be laid out by an act of Parliament that will also define the powers of the units.
This party is headed by Nelson Umah Tete and advocates for Federalism.
The Justice Party supports Federalism as the form of government in Uganda.
