Source of data: Area from The Districts of Uganda, Kampala.
                           Population from the 2002 Population Census.

NB. The names refer to former districts and should include all subsequent divisions. We believe this is a good tentative proposal with the potential to promote ethnic harmony and unity within the respective 13 Federal units (States or Provinces as shall be determined).

In our view, modernisation theorists will have to re-think their approach. It is our view that political modernity in Uganda does not have to be attained at the expense of ethnicity. Recognising ethnicity has the potential to not only minimise ethnic tensions, but also, create political harmony within diversity in Uganda. We concur too, with those who argue that despite the apparent multiplicity of ethnic groups in Uganda, a political component based on ethnicity could bring together, rather than separate, the constituent members of what now form Uganda.

In our view, this could be attained under real Federalism, where the federal states or provinces may as well be based on ethnicity. Under such a federal arrangement, it is conceivable that ethnic provinces may form a lasting cornerstone of the nation-state. This is appealing because federalism may make it possible for competing ethnic interests to have a fair share of the “national cake”. Moreover, such an arrangement could actually create the environment for political accountability. t may also be the acceptable way forward towards, saving multi-ethnic [cultural] politics from the fearful minority” in Uganda. It may as well be true, that far from being the perennial cause of strife and division, ethnicity forms the basis of the social contract, which could begin to force accountability on state power in Uganda. As Mwayila Tshiyembe has noted, politics in Africa must be based on, rather than avoid the ethnic dimension of the present African nation-state. We agree, hence our suggested federal units outlined above.

With creative constitution making in Uganda, modernity and national cohesion can be achieved without sacrificing ethnicity. We believe that Federalism has the potential and prospect to contribute to such a process. It sets out to accommodate ethnic differences - difference in the essence of true equality, which is the premise on which a new political re-arrangement in Uganda’s political system should be founded if we hope to avoid unnecessary internal wars. It may help to re-affirm the civil and political rights of individuals, in that it recognises and celebrates our rich ethnic diversity. This is more acute now in Uganda where access to the state and its patronage resources remains the key to the accumulation of wealth. We should be broadening, rather than, narrowing the opportunities to gain access to the diverse resources of the state and its agents. We are optimistic that Federalism has the potential to ensure that all regions irrespective of who is in power in Kampala will have their fair share of the national cake.

Rather than continue pretending that ethnicity is a monster that must be tamed at all cost, it is time to recognise the contrary: for the nation-state to survive and thrive, ethnicity must be recognised and accommodated.  This is the most pragmatic way to respond to the questions on ethnicity that revolves around boundaries of politics; the notion of the individual; the issue of political legitimacy; the question of representation and the meaning of political opposition. Ethnicity is, and should not be a hindrance to modernisation, cohesion and national unity in Uganda. It is our contention that it may actually aid modernisation in our multi-ethnic Uganda, given the lack of congruence between political identities and the prevailing model of the modern nation-state.

We recognize that nationalism and ethnicity are intertwined, and that ethnicity is, and has been an unfolding manipulation of social space by both dominators and the dominated in Uganda. This is why, a successive political instance, the colonial state as well as its post-colonial successors have engendered ethnicity, and manipulated it for their personal (political and economic) benefits. It is time to acknowledge that ethnicity serves as a transforming form of identities for individuals, but also as collective strategies for the management of change and order. Ugandans should conceptualize ethnicity as a dynamic, multifaceted and interactive cluster of changeable self-validated attributes of individuals as well as collective identities for the good of our country. We recognise that while ethnicity is a social construction of the colonial period, it is still as relevant now as it was then.

This is why we agree that while civil society as a force for social and political renewal has promise in Uganda; it would be unrealistic if it failed to include the dense networks of indigenous institutions. We recognize that ethnicity pervades all sphere of social, political and economic life, hence our pragmatic recommendation that it ought to be openly accommodated for the sake of democratic renewal; national unity; ethnic harmony; cohesion; political transformation, but above all peace and tranquility so we can get on with the business of economic development in Uganda. This is why we propose thirteen (13) Federal units in the country as the best way forward for our beloved country, Uganda.

Below are some ideas on representation.

Back to Top

Table 2: Majority ethnic groups (number of seats to be determined on a per capita basis)  

# 1 and # 2 could in certain instances be deemed one ethnic group, mostly based in Kisoro

From Table 3, the total number of seats to be occupied by minority tribes/groups/small nations is 15.

Therefore, number of seats to be shared among the majority tribes/groups in Table 2 above on a proportional basis shall be: 157 – 15 = 142 (See table 5 below)

With regards to the 15 minority representation seats, would it be as some kind of gerrymandering that favors small tribes/groups over the majority ethnic/tribes?  Would such representation be deemed unconstitutional in that it violates the principle of population size, and thus equal representation?  Does this proposal favor the small tribes too much?  The moral here is this: should the principle of population size dictate through and through how representation in the Lower House shall be determined in a future federal Uganda?

Back to Top

Table 3: Minority/small/ethnic groups, may have to be accommodated in terms of representation to the Lower House (Representation not to be based on a per capita basis)

#3 and # 6 could be combined to qualify for 2 seats in the lower house

# 4 could be added to the Bakiga or Banyankole total, based on where concentrated since they are found in both Rukingiri and parts of Ankole.

#5 territorial concentration not clear, but may be concentrated in parts of Buganda, Ankole and Toro, thus, their numbers to be added to the totals of wherever they are concentrated for the purposes of determining seats in the Lower House.

Back to Top

Table 4: Groups without specific representation, to be included with groups where they are territorially concentrated

Table 5: Potential make up of both Lower and Upper Houses under Federalism in Uganda

What is the rationale behind our representation? Prior to colonialization, the model of states based on language and ethnicity was applicable, and several mini states existed then. Instead the postcolonial elites asserted the right of the state to make a nation –just the opposite of the 19th century pattern. Hence the use of state machinery that the colonists had established to shape a nation out of tribal groups in Uganda and elsewhere. What emerges is that the same ideology of nationalism came to be used to justify two things that are almost the opposite of each other: does nation make the state or the state makes nation? Our view is the former since nations are also called "imagined communities”, yet the current unitary arrangement in Uganda is too large hence the need to create 13 Federal Units.

Back to Top

Helpful readings for those interested:

1. Berman, B.: “Ethnicity, Patronage and the African State: The Politics on Uncivil Nationalism”
2. Chabal, P. and Deloz, J-P.: “Of Mask and Men: Questions of identity’’
3. Crawford, Y.: “Evolving Modes of Consciousness: Ethnicity and Nationalism”