Contextualizing citizenship in Uganda

This is a self-archived version of an original article. This version may differ from the original in pagination and typographic details. Author(s): Title: Year: Version: Copyright: Rights: Rights url: Please cite the original version: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Contextualizing citizenship in Uganda © Authors, 2020 Published version Alava, Henni; Bananuka, Twine H.; Ahimbisibwe, Karambe F.; Kontinen, Tiina Alava, H., Bananuka, T. H., Ahimbisibwe, K. F., & Kontinen, T. (2020). Contextualizing citizenship in Uganda. In K. Holma, & T. Kontinen (Eds.), Practices of Citizenship in East Africa : Perspectives from Philosophical Pragmatism (pp. 57-72). Routledge. Routledge Explorations in Development Studies. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429279171-5 2020 5 Contextualizing citizenship in Uganda Henni Alava, Twine H. Bananuka, Karembe F. Ahimbisibwe and Tiina Kontinen Introduction According to the pragmatist framework of this book, practices in which citizenship is constructed are embedded in certain environments and, accordingly, current citizenship habits have been formulated in the course of a continuity of experiences and in interaction with existing circumstances (Holma & Kontinen, this volume). In this chapter, we provide a short overview of Uganda in so far as it is relevant for understanding the experiences and practices of citizenship: both vocal political engagement and the everyday processes of addressing matters of local importance. In contemporary Uganda, citizenship is manifest, on the one hand, in the upfront contestation and mobilization of visible opposition figures with increased popular support, and, on the other, continuously in mundane everyday life where problems are solved and shared issues are addressed together. The chapter thus contextualizes subsequent empirical chapters on gendered citizenship (Ndidde et al.), localized citizenship (Ahimbisibwe et al.), subdued citizenship (Alava) and critical education (Bananuka & John) in Uganda, and provides inspiration for reflecting on prevalent liberal ideas of citizenship in light of lived experience of politics in the country. The chapter proceeds as follows: an overview of Ugandan history is followed by discussion of some of its contemporary characteristics, after which we conclude with reflection on the multiple spaces for citizenship learning in Uganda. Historical positioning: From pre-colonial kingdoms to the contemporary hybrid state In 1894, most parts of what is today known as Uganda was annexed as a British protectorate, and the emerging country remained under colonial rule until 1962. At independence, the subjects of the colonial government were transformed, by law, into citizens of the independent state of Uganda (Mamdani 1996/2004). Prior to the British annexation of Uganda as its protectorate, the area comprised numerous socially and politically heterogenous groups. These ranged from the hierarchically ruled and centralized kingdoms of Buganda, Bunyoro, Ankole and Toro, to communities in which leadership was dispersed among chiefs and lineage heads, as in the regions of Lango, Acholi, Madi, West Nile, and Karamoja (Babikwa 2005; Quinn 2014). In the pre-colonial kingdoms, leadership was largely autocratic, and power was bestowed upon certain individuals by right of birth. Local governance habits had emerged over long periods of time; the modern Kingdom of Buganda, for instance, was already established in the fourteenth century (Mutibwa 2008, 1). Accordingly, as Karlström (1996) shows, “customary”Baganda ideas of governance and politics continue to influence people’s interpretations of contemporary politics, transcending, for instance, liberal deliberative democracy when long-standing cultural norms may give priority to civility or good manners. Moreover, colonial power had far-reaching implications for citizenship constellations in Uganda today. The subjection of peoples from different kingdoms and clans to colonial rule instituted a notable departure from the ways in which societies had been organized. Colonial rule also intensified ethnic divisions in the area. Different areas had a different stand on being annexed to the British protectorate. For instance, the Buganda kingdom collaborated with the British and became a springboard for the expansion of colonial rule into Eastern Uganda (Mutibwa 2008). Some areas which resisted British occupation, such as Bunyoro and Acholi, were violently subjugated while others were peaceably annexed. Moreover, different regions were favoured by the British in terms of provision of resources and appointment to leadership positions. Colonial rulers considered the different peoples of Uganda to be suitable for different jobs, hence, while the northern parts of the country, in particular, gained military employment, the central and southern regions were the recipients of investment in high-quality education and industrial development. In many areas, traditional chiefs were replaced with colonially appointed rulers. The British administration also applied the Bugandan model –based on a hierarchy of chiefs under a king –to the rest of the country (Mutibwa 2008, 9). In order to empower chiefs to fulfil the tasks expected of them by the colonial government, such as tax collection, a system of “indirect rule” granted chiefs a breadth of power far beyond what they had previously had and effectively removed the checks and balances that had reigned in chiefly power in the pre-colonial era. In Mamdani’s (1996/2004) terms, the pre-colonial systems in which chiefs had acted not only as rulers but also as patrons and caretakers of their subjects were replaced with decentralized despotism. The bolstering of ethnic identities and the creation of formidable regional socioeconomic divisions during the colonial era had long-lasting effects once Uganda gained independence. Post-independent Uganda: Struggles and changing regimes The first few years after independence were characterized by hope, enthusiasm and a booming economy. The Constitution of 1962 included a 58 Alava, Bananuka, Ahimbisibwe and Kontinen comprehensive Bill of Rights, and gave relative autonomy to the kingdoms, especially Buganda. However, by 1966, the socialist-leaning Prime Minister Milton Obote had suspended the Independence Constitution and, in 1967, instituted a new one that positioned him as executive president with immense powers (Halsteen 2004, 104). The Bugandan parliament resisted this act, whereupon the Buganda king was forced into exile in Britain following an attack on his palace by forces led by the army commander, Idi Amin. In 1971, Amin deposed Obote, and was initially welcomed with high expectations both in Uganda and Britain, a euphoria that swiftly vanished as Amin unleashed a reign of terror and dictatorship. A protracted struggle led by the combined forces of exiled Ugandans and Tanzanian forces overthrew Idi Amin in 1979 and, in a highly disputed election in 1981, Milton Obote regained power (Apter 1995). The regimes of Obote I, Amin and Obote II were all criticized for favouring their own people and entrenching ethnic, regional and religious rivalries (Carbone 2003; Makara et al. 2009). Discontent with the increasing violence of Obote’s second regime, most of which was perpetrated by his primarily northern Ugandan Acholi and Langi soldiers, culminated in the rise of resistance in what became known as the Bush War (1981–1986). At its core was the National Resistance Army (NRA; later renamed the National Resistance Movement, NRM) led by Yoweri Museveni. Initially, Museveni’s troops consisted mainly of members of the Banyarwanda group, which has historically lived and migrated across the colonially established borders between Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi and DR Congo. Their orderly conduct and respect for civilians in the areas they controlled led the rebels to gain support from local populations in central and southern Uganda. As the rebellion gained momentum, so did Obote’s troops’violent retaliations, most heatedly so in the Luwero Triangle north of the capital, Kampala, which again spurred support for the NRA. A peace deal eventually struck between Obote and a number of rebel groups was short-lived, and in 1986 the NRA took over Kampala and established Museveni as president, a position which he has retained to this day. After years of chaos and violence, the new regime started a process of consolidating peace and nation-building. Museveni’s takeover was seen by many Ugandans as providing much needed respite from the chaos that had characterized the preceding years (Tripp 2010, 1), yet experiences across the country diverged widely. In areas where Obote’s soldiers had subjected the population to a reign of terror, Museveni was hailed as a saviour. In those parts of the north where Museveni’s troops rounded up former soldiers and inflicted brutal retributive violence on the civilian population, the NRA was seen as a reign of terror. While the north continued to be drenched in waves of violent warfare between Museveni and rebel groups opposed to him –the Lord’s Resistance Army in the Acholi region among the most long lasting –the south set out on a path of stabilization, economic growth and human development. This split in experiences of state power created two distinctly different realities co-existing within Ugandan borders (Shaw & Mbabazi 2007). Contextualizing citizenship in Uganda 59 A new constitution was promulgated in 1995 following country-wide citizen consultation and participation in seminars, workshops, written memoranda and public debates (Halsteen 2004, 104). The constitution of 1995 legalized “movement democracy”and a political “movement system”, thus diminishing hopes that some had held of introducing a multi-party system (Anderson & Fisher 2016, 69; Rubongoya 2018, 102). The “non-party system”was supported by arguments that after the decades of brutal violence and ethnic conflicts, the country was not ready for politics based on contestation (Carbone 2003; Makara et al. 2009). While the NRM’s stated claim has been that it is a movement of all citizens, without ethnic, regional or religious bias (Rubongoya 2018, 103), the top leaders of Museveni’s regime largely hail from his home region in western Uganda (Tripp 2010, 25). Many of the tensions laid down during the colonial era thus continue to influence the present. In place of blanket statements about “Ugandan”experiences of citizenship, there is a need for historical and contextual nuance. Multi-party system and hybrid governance During the colonial era, education was largely in the hands of Catholic and Protestant (Anglican) missionaries, which led to the emergence of a political elite divided along religious lines. Four years prior to independence, the country’sfirst political party, the Uganda National Congress (UNC), was formed with strong backing from the Protestant Church, whereas the majority of activists in the Democratic Party, formed shortly after the UNC, had Catholic backgrounds. Considering the violence of the first decades of Uganda’s independence, Museveni’s move to ban political parties on grounds of their perpetrating religious and ethnic sectarianism can thus be seen as an attempt to address a genuine problem. Political parties were only re-allowed in 2005, following donor pressure and an eventual public election (Rubongoya 2018, 106). What at first sight appeared a step towards democratization led, however, to new pressures on civic space. Many commentators agree that the old ideas of “divide and rule”on the basis of politicized identities such as religion and ethnicity have intensified during Museveni’s time in power (Rubongoya 2018, 106; Tripp 2010, 25), and although opposition parties are allowed, they are treated as “enemies”to be side-lined or destroyed, rather than as political contestants (Rubongoya, 2018). The most recent changes in legislation in 2017, pushed through parliament by Museveni and his dominant NRM members of parliament, have removed presidential age limits, paving the way for Museveni –already nominated in 2019 as NRM’s sole candidate for the 2021 election –to remain in power without any constitutional restrictions. Contemporary Uganda is thus rightly characterized as a “hybrid regime”, in which democratic or liberal structures of governance co-exist with non-democratic or authoritarian governance methods such as patronage, violence and repression (Tripp 2010, 1–3). This kind of hybrid regime, and the many contradictions and tensions that 60 Alava, Bananuka, Ahimbisibwe and Kontinen characterize it, provide the context for citizenship practices in Uganda today, especially when it comes to political participation and state-citizen relationships. Despite the multi-party system, in practice the NRM party retains such a tight hold on power that the state and the NRM are largely inseparable in the eyes of many Ugandan citizens (Alava & Ssentongo 2016). In the following section we turn to some elements that characterize contemporary discussions on the citizenship environment in Uganda, which provide lenses for understanding the contexts of different citizenship practices, both in the vocally contested political sphere and in everyday life. Characteristics of citizenship environments Our historical overview pointed to the specificities that characterize citizenship in Uganda to date. In this section, we discuss four elements that we consider of relevance for shaping current citizenship practices: belonging, patronage, religion and violence. Belonging: Politicizing ethnicity In a country of diverse ethnic groups and over 52 spoken languages, one’s place of origin and mother tongue and the particular cultural practices attached to diverse ethnicities are common topics of everyday conversations. Questions of belonging are also central to debates about citizenship –both as a right (to vote, to own property, to claim land), and as an identity (Bøås & Dunn 2013). Claims to belonging can provide important arenas of participation and inclusion, but they also function as mechanisms of exclusion. While a universal notion of “Ugandan”citizenship has been hard to craft, the sphere in which “citizenship”has de facto taken place (Clarke et al. 2014) has been either the broader ethnic community, or closer membership in the community towards which one fulfils one’s social responsibilities (Cheney 2008). In this vein, good citizenship can be understood as “residence”in a community (Ahimbisibwe et al., this volume; Ndidde et al., this volume). Therefore, while the rights-based discourse portrays citizens as individuals with rights to claim, lived experience can emphasize citizenship as good and responsible membership in a community. Yet, even when membership in the local community may be regarded as a privilege by that community’s members, the question of who can stake claims on the state remains influential and has powerfully shaped Ugandan history. The expulsion of Asians living in Uganda by Idi Amin in 1972 presents perhaps the most striking example of exclusions from citizenship. Yet less visible but equally striking disputes continue regarding, for instance, the question of when a migrant or refugee –and there are millions in Uganda – becomes a Ugandan. The question of who belongs has in recent years also been waged on sexual grounds, with queer Ugandans –often condemned as “un-African”(Tamale 2009, 58) –calling to be accepted as full citizens of the Contextualizing citizenship in Uganda 61 country, with the same political rights and freedoms as everyone else (Valois 2015). Additionally, while Uganda has been at the forefront of women’s movements in Africa (Tripp 2001; 2002), citizenship rights and experiences are gendered when it comes to the right to own land, to gain independent income, to fully participate in political decision-making or to have control of one’s own sexuality (Tamale 2009, 53), especially in rural areas. Patronage: Loyalties and obligations The second element characterizing citizenship experiences in Uganda is the relationship between participation and patronage. The extent to which Ugandans have been able to participate in public affairs has historically fluctuated from violent subjection to colonial rule, to eras of dictatorship, to the current regime’s initial (at least rhetorical) emphasis on broadened participation in decision-making at the grassroots level. Colonial administrators used small gifts and benefits to set subjects against each other in a manner that benefited the rulers, and post-independence leaders have continued to use patronage to stay in power and as a political bargaining tool (Green 2011; Rubongoya 2018, 108; Titeca 2018, 115). In Uganda, patronage is frequently used to gain support, using the provision of gifts and services in order to ensure personal support and loyalty. During electoral campaigning, candidates want to picture themselves as good patrons by offering gifts and money to potential voters. Although intensified in the run-up to elections, exercising patronage is an ongoing effort; members of parliament and the president himself are frequently shown visiting communities and providing money to fix an immediate problem such as the lack of a decent road or toilets in schools (Titeca 2018, 123). Patronage implies citizenship experiences that revolve around showing loyalty to power holders, and expecting the “father of the nation”, and other “big men”to provide something material in exchange; the NRM, for instance, is perceived by many people as a fountain of good things (Vokes & Wilkins 2016). Such citizens’experiences are quite different from the vision of citizenship as holding the government accountable, or as participation in deliberation on political issues. Therefore, Uganda’s patrimonial politics and personalized rule can be seen as a contrast to liberal democracy (Halsteen 2004, 110), and, from such a perspective, patronage has been argued to be one of the main constraints on democratization (Hickey & King 2016). Religion: Towards moral orders of citizenship In Uganda, religion plays an important role both in national politics and in local mobilizing. The most enduring effect on the political sphere has come from the Catholic and the Protestant (Anglican) Churches, which have until recently been the largest in the country. While, on the one hand, they have created inter-ethnic allegiances, they have also functioned as sources of 62 Alava, Bananuka, Ahimbisibwe and Kontinen division (Wasswa-Kintu 1995). Throughout the colonial and much of the post-colonial era, churches were the primary conduits between the state and citizens, and the primary provider of many social services, including education (Alava & Shroff, 2019). Despite its formal opposition to religion, Obote’s reign entrenched the division between the Anglican Church, which functioned as a de facto state church, and the Catholic Church, which was pushed into opposition despite its majority status. Museveni’s disbanding of earlier political parties, the two biggest of which were closely connected with the Uganda’s largest churches, transformed the public role of religion: the churches’direct ability to influence politics decreased, yet they maintained a notable capacity to mobilize people at the local and national levels, with religious leaders employing their highly visible positions to take part in and influence public debates (Alava & Ssentongo 2016). At the local level, alongside the activities of religious leaders, many of whom are respected as public authorities, a variety of local church groups exist to provide arenas for participation in parish decision-making and in various development initiatives –examples include parish councils, the Mother’s Union of the Anglican Church and the Roman Catholic Church’s Small Christian Communities. In Kassimir’s view, these groups have limited effect in promoting transformation in civil society, partly because they have largely been established by missionaries or by local clerics rather than by local initiative (Kassimir 1998). Yet, despite such limitations, other observers note that churches in general must be acknowledged as deeply meaningful arenas for organizing at the local level (Jones 2009). Particularly since the 1980s, a key arena for collective mobilizing and organizing has developed around charismatic religious expression, both concerns over witchcraft and spirit possession, and over the apparent failure of the state and the moral corruption of society. This is an energy that the structures of mainline churches have largely been unable to capture for their own mobilization. Furthermore, it evidences understandings of “civility”that may be highly different to those implied by West-centric understandings of “civil society”(Kassimir 1998). Meanwhile, increasingly politicized Pentecostal/Charismatic forms of Christianity are articulating ideals of citizenship that are profoundly shaped by religious idioms and moral projects (Bompani & Valois 2017). The growth of these movements’public influence has spread a concern about morality to all segments of public debate, whereby notions of what constitutes a “good citizen”in Uganda have increasingly turned into questions of morality (Gusman 2009). Violence: Militarization of the polity Ugandan post-colonial history has been characterized by what Anderson and Fisher (2016, 68) refer to as a general “militarization of the polity”: the fusion of military and political power centralized around the president. Ugandan military and security services played a key role in ensuring support for Contextualizing citizenship in Uganda 63 Museveni’s regime during the elections in 2001, which were characterized by outbursts of violence. Moreover, the police and army frequently harass and arrest assemblies of oppositional parties, as well as protesters addressing any issue in demonstrations or journalists covering such events (ibid., 80). This activity is partly enabled by the Anti-Terrorist Act of 2002 that gave security agencies a lot of power. Museveni’s hold on power owes much to the, at times, brutal violence meted out by the army and special forces under the command of his younger brother, and to networks of informants that are commonly believed to have infiltrated all institutions, from village councils and churches to universities (Tapscott 2017). It has been argued that international donors have (often indirectly) strengthened the Ugandan military, and, thus, supported the authoritarian and violent regime (Anderson & Fisher 2016, 68). Uganda’s remarkable role in peacekeeping in the region has also enabled international military support to be flown into the country. Moreover, during the first decade of NRM rule, it sought to secure full control all over the country in the face of protesting rebel groups. In that period, Local Defence Units (LDUs) were set up, and training schools of mchakamcaka were established under the NRM to train citizens in basic defence skills and inculcate political values in civilian participants in order to legitimate NRM power, with the argument that all citizens should be able to defend themselves against the future abuses of a tyrannical leader (Rubongoya 2018, 100). Such programs were compulsory for all citizens, and every morning “hundreds of thousands of Ugandans could be seen marching with wooden guns and chanting pro-NRM slogans”(Tripp 2010, 77). Clearly, a very specific kind of good citizenship is learned in militarized citizenship education of the type conducted by the NRM; loyalty to the party and to the nation, combined with the violent underpinnings of the training, come to shape understandings of what citizenship means (Verma 2013). Spaces for learning citizenship In any country, the formal education system plays an important role not only in provision of basic literacy and numeracy skills, but also in nation-building and the creation of a sense of citizenship. Moreover, civil society, both in the form of established civil society organizations (CSOs) and citizens’own associations cohering around shared issues, provide opportunities for learning citizenship. Educational system Uganda is an example of the current “crisis of learning”(World Bank 2018): while access to basic education has increased substantially, the learning outcomes in even the most basic skills have been low. The lack of skills such as literacy hampers the competence of citizens to participate actively and to hold the government accountable, thereby fulfilling the current ideals of citizenship 64 Alava, Bananuka, Ahimbisibwe and Kontinen Karlström, M. (1996). Imagining democracy: Political culture and democratisation in Buganda. Africa, 66(4), 485–505. Kasozi, A.B.K. (2003). University education in Uganda: challenges and opportunities for reform. Kampala: Fountain Publishers. Kassimir, R. (1998). The social power of religious organization and civil society: The Catholic Church in Uganda. Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 36(2), 54–83. King, S. (2015). Political capabilities for democratisation in Uganda: Good governance or popular organization building? Third World Quarterly, 36(4), 741–757. Makara, S., Rakner, L. & Svåsand, L. (2009). Turnaround: The national resistance movement and the reintroduction of a multiparty system in Uganda. International Political Science Review, 30(2), 185–204. Mamdani, M. (2002). African states, citizenship and war: A case-study. International Affairs, 78(3), 493–506. Mamdani, M. (2004). Citizen and subject: Contemporary Africa and the legacy of late colonialism. Kampala: Fountain Publishers. (Original work published 1996). Mamdani, M. (2007). Scholars in the market place: The dilemmas of neoliberal reform at Makerere University, 1989–2005. Kampala: Fountain Publishers. Mutibwa, P. (2008). The Buganda factor in Ugandan politics. Kampala: Fountain Publishers. Nabayego, C. (2013). Suggestions for improving Ugandan higher education to produce productive graduates. Makerere Journal of Higher Education, 4(2), 261–277. Ndidde, A.N., Ahimbisibwe, K.F. & Kontinen, T. (2019). Gendered citizenship in rural Uganda: Localized, exclusive and active. In this volume. Oloka-Onyango, J. (2009). NGO struggles for economic, social, and cultural rights in UTAKE: A Ugandan perspective. In M. Mutua (Ed.). Human rights NGOs in East Africa. Political and normative tensions (pp. 75–111). Kampala: Fountain Publishers. Opio-Odongo, J.M.A. (1993). Higher education and research in Uganda. Nairobi: Acts Press. p’Bitek, O. (1972). Song of Lawino and Song of Ocol. Nairobi: East African Publishing House. Quinn, J.R. (2014). Tradition?! Traditional cultural institutions on customary practices in Uganda . Africa Spectrum, 49(3), 29–54. Rubongoya, J.B. (2018). ‘Movement legacy’and the neoliberalism as political settlement in Uganda’s political economy. In J. Wiegratz, G. Martiniello & E. Greco (Eds.). Uganda: The dynamics of neoliberal transformation (pp. 95–110). London: Zed Books. Shaw, T.M. & Mbabazi, P.K. (2007). Two Ugandas and a ‘liberal peace’? Lessons from Uganda about conflict and development at the start of a new century. Global Society, 21(4), 567–578. Ssekamwa, J.C. (1997). History and development of education in Uganda. Kampala: Fountain Publishers. Tamale, S. (2009). Law, sexuality, and politics in Uganda: Challenges for women’s human rights NGOs. In M. Mutua (Ed.). Human rights NGOs in East Africa: Political and normative tensions (pp. 51–74). Kampala: Fountain Publishers. Tapscott, R. (2017). The government has long hands: Institutionalized arbitrariness and local security initiatives in Gulu, northern Uganda. Development & Change, 48(2), 263–285. Contextualizing citizenship in Uganda 71 Titeca, K. (2018). More is less? Decentralisation and regime control in neoliberal Uganda. In J. Wiegratz, G. Martinello & E. Greco (Eds.). Uganda: The dynamics of neoliberal transformation (pp. 111–126). London: Zed Books. Tripp, A.M. (2001). The politics of autonomy and cooptation in Africa: The case of the Ugandan Women’sMovement.The Journal of Modern African Studies,39, 101–128. Tripp, A.M. (2002). The politics of women’s rights and cultural diversity in Uganda. In M. Molyneux & S. Razavi (Eds.). Gender justice, development, and rights (pp. 413–440). New York: Oxford University Press. Tripp, A.M. (2010). Museveni’s Uganda: Paradoxes of power in a hybrid regime. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers. Valois, C. (2015). Virtual access: The Ugandan ‘anti-gay’movement, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender blogging and the public sphere. Journal of Eastern African Studies, 9(1), 145–162. Verma, C.L. (2013). Guns and tricks: State becoming and political subjectivity in wartorn northern Uganda. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Copenhagen, Denmark). Retrieved from https://anthropology.ku.dk/PhD/thesis/ Vokes, R. & Wilkins, S. (2016). Party, patronage and coercion in the NRM’S2016reelection in Uganda: Imposed or embedded? Journal of Eastern African Studies, 10(4), 581–600. Wasswa-Kintu, J.A. (1995). Constraints to post-colonial economic development in Uganda 1962–1995: A political interaction approach (Masters’Thesis, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada). Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/ 56371039.pdf Wiegratz, J., Martiniello, G. & Greco, E. (Eds.). (2018). Uganda: The dynamics of neoliberal transformation. London: Zed Books. World Bank (2018). World Development Report 2018: Learning to realize education’s promise. Washington, DC: World Bank. Retrieved from http://www.worldbank.org/ en/publication/wdr2018 72 Alava, Bananuka, Ahimbisibwe and Kontinen