By Michael Dalali
What has been going on in Uganda in the realm of politics in the past few weeks is not a new thing in the East African countries. However, the beatings and destruction of property meted out to opposition leaders by the Ugandan government state apparatus has certainly shocked other members in the region. As already noted, anti-opposition stance in the region appears to have come here to stay.
Indeed, there is no single country in the region that has never harassed opposition parties. The only difference is perhaps the scale of such harassment that puts such events in the Pearl of Africa to a level that could be compared to what is done by occupants of Mirembe or Butabika hospitals in Tanzania and Uganda, respectively. And when one critically looks at what has been going on in Uganda, one thing comes into mind; namely sharing of practices between state apparatus in the region!
For instance, is there any difference between the smashing of window screens of cars owned by members of parliament from Chadema (an opposition party) in Arusha on the 5th January 2011 during a peaceful demonstration, and on the car of Ugandan opposition leader, Dr. Kizza Besisgye, during his walk-to-work campaign? Perhaps a new thing, a creation by Uganda if you like, may be the claimed art of spraying expired tear gas after smashing Dr. Besigye’s window.
Experts have it that expired tear gas is poisonous and kills its victim slowly! Therefore, those who have had expired tear gas sprayed on them, have their lives shortened. The expired-tear-gas saga raises questions over similar events of tear gas spraying to demonstrators in other parts of the region. We should not forget what transpired on 5th January this year in Arusha that left three people dead, scores injured and many damages. A Kenyan lost his life among the three dead in Arusha, and the outcome that needs a serious discussion on how best governments need to handle opposition across the region. I will not speak of Kenyan oppositions, they have come a long way to be a good teacher on the East African mockery of democracy.
All the countries’ constitutions admit to respect human rights, which among many other things address the freedom of expression. I understand well the aspect of national security that seems to be a good excuse used by the governments in power; but the million dollar question is, how far national security doesn’t breach human rights?
Forgetting the land of Kagame will be unjust on looking at how oppositions are viewed and handled across the region. What faced Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, the chairperson of the United Democratic Forces (UDF), who announced to challenge Kagame on presidency — and ended up under arrest with charges of terrorism and threatening national — security has a good message.
Patrick Karegeya, an émigré Rwanda colonel, can add up a story on the treatments from the country’s CEO. As quoted on an interview with Robert Mukombozi: “Even the army wasn’t sure about which charges they should prefer against me, and where I should be jailed. For all the jail terms I served in Rwanda, the army, under orders of the commander-in-chief, detained me in solitary confinement, not allowing any family members or friends to visit me, which is an extreme psychological torture going by the international human rights conventions.” He blamed Kagame’s hand in all that he went through as he puts it: “All the orders were coming direct from Kagame. All these are political tools that Kagame uses to silence his opponents.” He even spoke of the death occurring mysteriously to protect the so called “political dominance”.
“It is not only Col. Alex Rezinde and Seth Sendashonga (former Internal Security Minister) who died mysteriously around that time. Many people, especially politicians, have died under mysterious circumstances. I can’t say I don’t have information regarding those cases, but Kagame is the boss, so he is in a better position to explain those assassinations and mysterious disappearances of people.”
All the practices against the opposition across the region impose a thought that they — opposition political parties — are not part of the same society; they don’t have any good wishes for the respective countries. The thoughts that are too soon to be admitted, especially as they haven’t been given a chance to reveal their true colors. One thing we can be sure of is that the same opposition politicians are coming from our families. They are part of our society. We too are part of them in its all sense of meaning. Are the claims presented at opposition demonstrations, such as the rise in the costs of living, not felt by the society? On the other hand, one should question herself/himself why, for instance, the recent Chadema public rally had a large mass support. Are the masses attracted to the issues advocated by Chadema, or is it just a matter of partisan fanaticism? What is known is, every government that claims to be democratic has to respect the rights of individuals like that of allowing to vote, and to be voted to. They can be led, as well as have rights to lead.
Psychologists advise on the need of individuals to allow themselves to talk over things in their hearts — a medicine to stress and sometimes a useful exercise that can make one avoid going mental. There is a need for the governments to offer more platforms to its people, whether oppositions or from the party in power to express their feelings. And important suggestions found in their thoughts, when incorporated in actions it won’t be a failure to the government in power but a respect act of collective governance.
We have seen a lot of the tortures, harassments, mistreatment to oppositions. It is high time to see also the other side of Africans, the tolerance abilities to the differences we have, and even going extra miles of offering enough platforms and also receive feedback which might include criticism from all citizens including politicians, activists and journalists.
Michael Dalali is an activist, analyst, and a social development consultant based in Dar-Es-Salaam, Tanzania.
Email address: michael(at)michaeldalali(dot)com
Thanks for making this point Michael, and for following up from a recent article on Uganda.
I agree that it is time to give legitimate space on the E. African political stage to opposition parties, instead of just theorizing about their space.
The conversation about opposition parties is slightly different from the conversation about freedom of speech. Freedom of speech should apply to everyone in the country; while opposition parties directly concern those only involved with politics.
Similar to what you have pointed out here, I think that in Tanzania specifically, talking about the legitimacy of opposition parties is likely to lead us down a less violent road than everyone fighting for their freedom of speech. As we have seen in some MENA countries, most notably Egypt, forcing the incumbent out does not guarantee any political – albeit social – stability thereafter. What counts once the incumbent has stepped down is that there is a ready, willing and able party/group/individual who is ready to take office with the most urgent needs of the people being attended to first.
I’m not saying we have perfect freedom of speech in Tanzania, but I do think Tanzanians are moving in that direction, whatever is happening on the political stage.
What we have more trouble discussing is the comparision between CCM and opposition parties, perhaps because even these political parties do not come face to face in front of the people to debate critical matters.
Good read. I think it’s time we study the power sharing deals practiced in Germany. It always isn’t a perfect union but works. It’s said that the mind of politicians reflect how their society think…so might be an uphill to solve the challenges facing these EA countries if these bully politicians are replaced.
Thank you “ak” and “VR” for your comments. It means a lot to get feedback from readers.