Democracy and Sit-tight Syndrome in Africa, the Case of Uganda

Written by Chukwu .C. Ikechukwu

January 15th, Uganda will conduct an election that will be anything but free and fair or democratic.

The previous elections were no different. The popular candidate, Bobby Wine, was harassed, and more than 50 people were killed. This pattern is not peculiar to Uganda. The last election in Tanzania was characterised by suppression of the opposition, brutalising the electorate, and a bogus electoral victory for the incumbent. Cameroon, with the nonagenarian president Biya, who has largely been missing in action, had a horrible election that magically saw the man who has governed the country for over forty years with nothing to show by way of development emerge “winner” for the umpteenth time. Only a few countries in Africa conduct elections that are worthy of the name.

For Uganda, the incumbent president, Yoweri Museveni, has held tight to power since 1986, when he took over after a fierce battle for Kampala, the capital city. In 2005, the constitution of the country was changed to allow Museveni to get not just a third term but as many terms as possible by removing the term limit from the constitution. By 2017, the Ugandan constitution was again tampered with, this time to remove the 75-year-old age limit to effectively pave the way for the then 73-year-old Museveni, who would have been due for retirement in 2019. The 2017 change enabled him to again run for president in 2021, much as he is running in 2026 and perhaps will remain president for life.

And this is where I want to drag the AU and other regional bodies in Africa for their conspiracy of silence. These African regional bodies have always and rightly, too, condemned military coups in the region in the defence of democracy. But what staggers my imagination is how these bodies have managed to exist over the years without a history of condemnation of the sit-tight behaviour of African Heads of State, most, if not all, of whom are their members. How do they feel comfortable pretending they don’t know that the key threat to democracy in Africa is bad governance, lack of credible elections, stifling of opposition, destruction of the rule of law for the rule of might, and “unconstitutional” constitutional changes to perpetuate the incumbents in power? African regional bodies sit idly by and watch democracy being strangled or cry foul when the military counterparts of the ruling civilian class strike.

To be sure, military and other forms of dictatorship have not and will never do Africa any good. But democracy in Africa would be better protected and promoted if the same vigour and sanctions against military usurpers of political power were applied to their civilian counterparts who manipulate the system: elections, constitutions, institutions of state, etc., to remain in office. At present, it does appear that what the AU is interested in is not democracy but the protection of civilian regimes, whether such regimes have legitimately assumed positions of leadership or not. This will not help Africa in the long run. If Africa must avoid sliding further down into the dark days of military coups and regimes, now is the time to awake and voice out against antidemocratic forces whether such forces are civilian incumbents or not, now is the time to sanction those who rig elections, now is the time to sanction those who elongate tenure of office, now is the time to seek the aid of the larger supranational bodies outside Africa to rise against those who make it difficult for democracy to thrive. Wake up, Africa! Wake up AU!!