Supreme Court Whitewashes Uganda’s Most Flawed Election

by Valerian Kkonde

PEARL NEWS SERVICE

Former presidential candidate Amama Mbabazi. His petition challenging the election of Museveni has been thrown out. What next?

The Supreme Court has pronounced itself on the February 18, 2016 Presidential Election and upheld that Yoweri Museveni was elected and declared winner according to the laws.

The judgment that was no surprise to many Ugandans, in effect set new parameters for rigging of elections with impunity. For while the Court agrees with the Petitioner that elections were marred with interference by Police, Presidential representatives in the districts and District Intelligence Officials, there was no evidence of involvement of Yoweri Museveni.

The Supreme Court has given the incumbent the leeway to rig using state apparatus and party structures, as long as the incumbent does not physically get involved. In Uganda and Africa at large, albeit for any incumbent vying for election, the state apparatus and party structures are used to the advantage of the candidate. The logical thing to consider is that these structures which garner support for the candidate, whatever they do is for the good of the candidate and therefore cannot be judged to act in isolation. The candidate is equally guilty more so, when he did not categorically disassociate with these structures.

“This judgment must have been written by Museveni and given to the Judges to sign and read out,” a business man along William Street sarcastically told PNS.

Commenting on the Court’s ruling, Dr. Kizza Besigye, the man said to have actually won this election and is since being held under house arrest, said that the out come was obvious.

“Given the gymnastics that go on before the appointment of judges, Court cannot be independent.

“It is me who was best suited to challenge the Election in Court because I was closest to the person declared winner. The Courts are interested in the substantial effect of the fraud on the results. In fact I would even have gone ahead to prove that I had won the election.”

On March 30^th, the High Court dismissed a case in which relatives of Christopher Aine wanted Court to order Police to produce him. The relatives told Court that Aine, who was the head of Amama Mbabazi’s security during the Presidential Elections, was abducted from his home by Police using a Police vehicle.

Although Court absolves the Electoral Commission and its chairman of any wrong doing, Ugandans equate Badru Kiggundu to the brutal al Shabab extremists who murder, mutilate and cause destruction in the name of Allah and at will. It is the incompetence, bias, secretiveness and  non compliance with the law that Ugandans witnessed during and after the elections that they base on to judge the Commission. And that has been the practice since 2001.

For Ugandans, Museveni and Kiggundu are comrades in the vote rigging racket and no amount of the Supreme Court white-washing of the crime will stop them from demanding for their heads.

The Chief Justice notes, in the judgment, that key issues that are indispensable in the organizing of a free and fair election, as demanded by the same court in the 2001 and 2006 judgments, have never been put in place. These include disbanding and putting in place an independent EC and reforming the electoral laws among others.

One would think that if the judges are aware that the elections were conducted in an environment that is not free and fair, then they would have no basis for upholding the elections. But in their judgment they white wash the whole exercise.

International elections observers from the European Union and the Commonwealth maintain that there was nothing like an election in Uganda on the February 18, 2016. A number of Ugandan Civil Society organisations stated the same.

The biggest achievement of the judgment is that Court has legitimised the use of non legitimate means to bring about change in the country. If all peaceful and legitimate means have been blocked, then the remaining means at the disposal of advocates for change can be sought after.

The Supreme Court has not only postponed the much awaited witnessing of a peaceful regime change in Uganda but has also rendered the whole election process hopeless, meaningless and a sham. As for how many more bloody regime -changes the country can brace for, before sanity finally reigns, only time will tell.