Decentralisation and urban governance in Uganda

Abstract The study examines the nature and context of the debate on state-society relations, focusing on the socio-economic and political reforms that have taken place in the governance of the public realm in the past three decades. It analyses the process and impact of the new governance reforms undertaken in Uganda since the early 1990s on the performance of state institutions. It focuses on the implementation of the programme of state reform through decentralisation; putting in perspective the ramifications of the claim that decentralisation brings about effective, efficient, participatory and citizen-focused service delivery in the management of public organisations, including urban authorities. Drawing from the peculiar failures of state institutions in post-colonial Uganda, the study critiques the theoretical and empirical premise of devolution by attempting to link the process of institutional recovery to experimentation with the “new governance models” as applied to the management of the urbanisation process. It interrogates the claim that decentralisation reforms bring about demand-driven service delivery, democratic discourse and greater organisational performance. Anchored in the premises of good governance theorem, the study questions the realities of decentralisation in engendering a new official behaviour, taming rigid bureaucratic practices, engineering a new service culture and espousing a dictum of statecivil society engagement. These goals raise the key argument, that is, whether the quest for realisation of organisational change in the implementation of urban governance reforms in Uganda has been facilitated by the conscious readiness of the state to realise tangible public goods such as popular accountability, improved livelihoods of the ordinary people and the increased capacity of the state to build sustainable management systems. Furthermore, the study discusses and questions the capacity of decentralisation to adequately address the myriad of urban governance challenges that include explosion of the urban population, high poverty levels, scarcity of employment, poor service delivery, deterioration in urban infrastructure, low management capacities and a poor management culture, raising complex political questions surrounding the decision making process that seem to have undercut the possibility of a new governance model to effectively take root. This study concludes that although decentralisation has improved relations between government officials and the ordinary people, there are still many challenges in the management of Kampala city. The challenges encountered in urban service delivery include the failure of state institutions to perfom their functions, lack of pro-poor policies, demotivated local government officials and prevalence of corruption. The interventions of civil society in service delivery have helped the ordinary people to survive. However, civil society organisations have their own limits and weaknesses. The attempts by government to reform the public sector generally have yielded some positive attitudes but have also lacked commitment and resources to realise tangible benefits to the ordinary urban dweller. Finally, while decentralisation created strong hopes of better service delivery, tangible results in the case of Kampala city have been minimal. The study suggests that successful decentralisation requires a dynamic pro-people urban policy, increased avenues of popular participation; cultivation of trust, horizontal power relations and strong accountability mechanisms in the public domain

Ethnic Party Bans in East Africa from a Comparative Perspective

Since 1990 the banning of ethnic and other identity-based parties has become the norm in sub-Saharan Africa. This article focuses on Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda as three East African countries that have opted for different ways of dealing with such parties. Using case studies, it traces the origins of the party bans in Tanzania and Uganda and explores the reasons for the absence of a ban in Kenya. The analysis shows that the laws on particularistic parties have actually been implemented by the appropriate institutions. However, these laws have only marginally influenced the character of the political parties in the three countries: A comparison of regional voting patterns suggests that bans on particularistic parties have not ensured the emergence of aggregative parties with a national following in Tanzania and Uganda. In Kenya on the other hand, where such a ban was nonexistent until 2008, parties have not proven to be more regional.Das Verbot ethnischer und anderer identitätsbasierter politischer Parteien ist seit Beginn der 1990er Jahre im subsaharischen Afrika zur Norm geworden. Der vorliegende Aufsatz analysiert drei ostafrikanische Länder, die verschiedene Wege im Umgang mit partikularistischen Parteien eingeschlagen haben und untersucht, warum Tansania und Uganda ein Parteienverbot eingeführt haben, Kenia jedoch nicht. Die Untersuchung macht zudem deutlich, dass die zuständigen Institutionen die Gesetze zwar anwenden, dies jedoch nicht zu nationalen Parteien führt: Eine Analyse der Wahlergebnisse auf subnationaler Ebene zeigt, dass insbesondere Oppositionsparteien oft regionale Hochburgen aber keine landesweite Unterstützung haben. Politische Parteien in Kenia sind dabei trotz divergierender Parteiregulierung nicht deutlich weniger national als Parteien in Tansania und Uganda

Deepening democracy through multipartyism: the bumpy road to Uganda's 2011 elections

The 2011 elections will be one of the several elections (and the second-ever multiparty election) organized by the National Resistance Movement (NRM) since it captured power in 1986. Despite the regular elections since the 1990s, the quality and outcomes of these elections have remained subjects of debate. Democracy has remained elusive in Uganda despite the re-introduction of multiparty politics. Incumbency advantages, manipulation and unconstitutional use of state resources and apparatuses, and removal of the constitutional term limits on the presidency have combined to hamper effective growth of multiparty politics and democracy in the country. The question is: Does electioneering necessarily produce democratic governance or does it simply create the conditions and norms necessary for institutionalization of democratic rule? In particular, does the existence of multiparty politics necessarily deepen democratic governance? This paper stresses that despite the return of multiparty politics in Uganda, neither has democracy been consolidated nor have elections acted as effective instruments for advancing democratization in the country.Wie schon mehrfach zuvor werden auch die Wahlen 2011 in Uganda vom regierenden National Resistance Movement (NRM) organisiert werden, das im Jahr 1986 die Macht übernommen hat; es werden die zweiten Mehrparteienwahlen sein, die es in Uganda überhaupt gab. Auch wenn seit den 1990er Jahren regulär Wahlen durchgeführt worden sind, waren doch Ablauf und Ergebnisse dieser Wahlen Gegenstand von Diskussionen. Trotz der Wiedereinführung eines Mehrparteiensystems bleibt die Demokratie in Uganda ein schwer zu fassendes Phänomen. Infolge der Nutzung von Amtsvorteilen, Manipulationen, nichtverfassungsgemäßem Einsatz staatlicher Ressourcen und Einrichtungen sowie der Abschaffung der in der Verfassung vorgesehenen Begrenzung der Amtszeit des Präsidenten konnten sich Demokratie und Mehrparteiensystem im Land nicht entwickeln. Damit steht in Frage, ob Wahlen notwendigerweise zu demokratischem Regieren führen oder ob sie nicht zunächst einmal nur Bedingungen und Normen schaffen, die Voraussetzung für eine Institutionalisierung demokratischer Regierung sind, und insbesondere steht in Frage, ob die Existenz eines Mehrparteiensystems notwendigerweise zur Vertiefung demokratischer Regierungsführung beiträgt. Der Autor stellt fest, dass trotz der Wiedereinführung eines Mehrparteiensystems in Uganda eine Konsolidierung der Demokratie nicht zu beobachten ist und dass die Wahlen sich bisher nicht als effektive Instrumente zur Förderung der Demokratisierung erwiesen haben

Vertiefung der Demokratie durch Parteienpluralismus: Der steinige Weg zu den Wahlen in Uganda 2011

The 2011 elections will be one of the several elections (and the second-ever multiparty election) organized by the National Resistance Movement (NRM) since it captured power in 1986. Despite the regular elections since the 1990s, the quality and outcomes of these elections have remained subjects of debate. Democracy has remained elusive in Uganda despite the re-introduction of multiparty politics. Incumbency advantages, manipulation and unconstitutional use of state resources and apparatuses, and removal of the constitutional term limits on the presidency have combined to hamper effective growth of multiparty politics and democracy in the country. The question is: Does electioneering necessarily produce democratic governance or does it simply create the conditions and norms necessary for institutionalization of democratic rule? In particular, does the existence of multiparty politics necessarily deepen democratic governance? This paper stresses that despite the return of multiparty politics in Uganda, neither has democracy been consolidated nor have elections acted as effective instruments for advancing democratization in the country.Wie schon mehrfach zuvor werden auch die Wahlen 2011 in Uganda vom regierenden National Resistance Movement (NRM) organisiert werden, das im Jahr 1986 die Macht übernommen hat; es werden die zweiten Mehrparteienwahlen sein, die es in Uganda überhaupt gab. Auch wenn seit den 1990er Jahren regulär Wahlen durchgeführt worden sind, waren doch Ablauf und Ergebnisse dieser Wahlen Gegenstand von Diskussionen. Trotz der Wiedereinführung eines Mehrparteiensystems bleibt die Demokratie in Uganda ein schwer zu fassendes Phänomen. Infolge der Nutzung von Amtsvorteilen, Manipulationen, nichtverfassungsgemäßem Einsatz staatlicher Ressourcen und Einrichtungen sowie der Abschaffung der in der Verfassung vorgesehenen Begrenzung der Amtszeit des Präsidenten konnten sich Demokratie und Mehrparteiensystem im Land nicht entwickeln. Damit steht in Frage, ob Wahlen notwendigerweise zu demokratischem Regieren führen oder ob sie nicht zunächst einmal nur Bedingungen und Normen schaffen, die Voraussetzung für eine Institutionalisierung demokratischer Regierung sind, und insbesondere steht in Frage, ob die Existenz eines Mehrparteiensystems notwendigerweise zur Vertiefung demokratischer Regierungsführung beiträgt. Der Autor stellt fest, dass trotz der Wiedereinführung eines Mehrparteiensystems in Uganda eine Konsolidierung der Demokratie nicht zu beobachten ist und dass die Wahlen sich bisher nicht als effektive Instrumente zur Förderung der Demokratisierung erwiesen haben

Making sense of the Uganda-Rwanda armed conflict in the Democractic Republic of Congo (DRC)

At the time Rwanda and Uganda helped President Laurent Kabila come to power in the DRC (then Zaire) in May 1997, any critical observer would have anticipated that Uganda and Rwanda had become formidable allies. And no one, at that time doubted that a big regional force of these two allies had emerged, which force was strong enough to reckon with. It seems, it is the realisation of the existence of this force that prompted the Southern African allies, namely Zimbabwe, Namibia, Angola and others to join the war v the DRC on the side of Kabila. In the minds of the Southern Africa allies, the alliance between Uganda and Rwanda was poised to play a dominant role in the DRC- the third largest country on the African continent, rich in minerals and natural resources and geographically (and strategically) centred in the heart of the Africa

Vertiefung der Demokratie durch Parteienpluralismus: Der steinige Weg zu den Wahlen in Uganda 2011

The 2011 elections will be one of the several elections (and the second-ever multiparty election) organized by the National Resistance Movement (NRM) since it captured power in 1986. Despite the regular elections since the 1990s, the quality and outcomes of these elections have remained subjects of debate. Democracy has remained elusive in Uganda despite the re-introduction of multiparty politics. Incumbency advantages, manipulation and unconstitutional use of state resources and apparatuses, and removal of the constitutional term limits on the presidency have combined to hamper effective growth of multiparty politics and democracy in the country. The question is: Does electioneering necessarily produce democratic governance or does it simply create the conditions and norms necessary for institutionalization of democratic rule? In particular, does the existence of multiparty politics necessarily deepen democratic governance? This paper stresses that despite the return of multiparty politics in Uganda, neither has democracy been consolidated nor have elections acted as effective instruments for advancing democratization in the country.Wie schon mehrfach zuvor werden auch die Wahlen 2011 in Uganda vom regierenden National Resistance Movement (NRM) organisiert werden, das im Jahr 1986 die Macht übernommen hat; es werden die zweiten Mehrparteienwahlen sein, die es in Uganda überhaupt gab. Auch wenn seit den 1990er Jahren regulär Wahlen durchgeführt worden sind, waren doch Ablauf und Ergebnisse dieser Wahlen Gegenstand von Diskussionen. Trotz der Wiedereinführung eines Mehrparteiensystems bleibt die Demokratie in Uganda ein schwer zu fassendes Phänomen. Infolge der Nutzung von Amtsvorteilen, Manipulationen, nichtverfassungsgemäßem Einsatz staatlicher Ressourcen und Einrichtungen sowie der Abschaffung der in der Verfassung vorgesehenen Begrenzung der Amtszeit des Präsidenten konnten sich Demokratie und Mehrparteiensystem im Land nicht entwickeln. Damit steht in Frage, ob Wahlen notwendigerweise zu demokratischem Regieren führen oder ob sie nicht zunächst einmal nur Bedingungen und Normen schaffen, die Voraussetzung für eine Institutionalisierung demokratischer Regierung sind, und insbesondere steht in Frage, ob die Existenz eines Mehrparteiensystems notwendigerweise zur Vertiefung demokratischer Regierungsführung beiträgt. Der Autor stellt fest, dass trotz der Wiedereinführung eines Mehrparteiensystems in Uganda eine Konsolidierung der Demokratie nicht zu beobachten ist und dass die Wahlen sich bisher nicht als effektive Instrumente zur Förderung der Demokratisierung erwiesen haben

Deepening Democracy through Multipartyism: The Bumpy road to Uganda‟s 2011 elections', Africa Spectrum 45

ABSTRACT The 2011 elections will be one of the several elections and the second multiparty election organized by the National Resistance Movement (NRM) since it captured power in 1986. Despite the regular elections since the 1990s, the quality and outcomes of these elections have remained a subject of debate. Democracy has remained elusive in Uganda inspite of elections being conducted at regular intervals. The question is: does electioneering necessarily produce democratic governance ? Or does it create conditions and norms necessary for institutionalization of democratic rule? In particular, does the existence multiparty politics translate into democratic governance

Looking back at the 2011 Multiparty Elections in Uganda

[Book abstract] How different were the 2011 elections? Did the political environment in the run-up to the elections restrict the capacity of political organizations to "organize and express themselves"? Could the relative restriction of civil and political freedoms affect the pattern of voting and electoral outcomes? Do the election outcomes represent the people's view? To answer these questions, this new book edited by Sandrine Perrot, Sabiti Makara, Jérôme Lafargue and Marie-Aude Fouéré applies a multidisciplinary approach to conducting a multifaceted analysis of the 2011 elections in Uganda. Geographers, demographers, political scientists and anthropologists contribute different in-depth political analyses, rather than partisan opinions and emotional reactions. The book assesses Uganda's evolving electoral democracy and provides field-based insights into critical, often underappreciated, aspects of the electoral process. (Publisher's abstract

Administering Uganda's 2006 Multiparty Elections: The Role of the Electoral Commission

On 23 February, 2006, Ugandan voters could for the first time since 1980 choose a party of their choice rather than select individual candidates within the Nation Resistance Movement (NRM) system. This paper focuses on the role of the Uganda Electoral Commission in administering the 2006 presidential and parliamentary elections. Following international established standards for election monitoring, we asses the administration of the elections through the pre-election, election and post-election stages of the 2006 elections. We also compare the conduct of the 2006 elections to the 2001 elections. Finally, based on observations and key informant interviews, we analyse the perceptions of stakeholders in the electoral process. We find that the current Uganda Electoral Commission improved election management compared to previous elections, but also experienced considerable shortcomings linked to inadequate voter education, significant incumbency advantages and breaches of electoral rules and regulations