‘Opposition’ is an expensive commodity that our politicians unfortunately offer cheaply

NUP supporters previously in the dock

Since news broke of their military court-martial guilty pleas, I have not stopped finding a way to think about the NUP’s 19 political prisoners outside the lens of the personal trauma they have endured.

This is not an attempt to downplay the pain of political persecution and incarceration: the loss of life –– livelihood and the disintegration of the entire family. The emotional trauma of staring death in the face, or torture and permanent physical harm. The loss of hope to see the next day.

At the end of four grueling years – or even less – one finally collapses and resigns to the tyranny of their oppressors. Therefore, the work of activists, Agartha Atuhaire, Godwin Toko and others, in meticulously and tirelessly documenting the plight of these political prisoners and their families, must be commended.

And as a potential candidate for political imprisonment myself – I write this column, talk a lot and deeply despise Museveni’s empty autocracy – I tremble every time I think of the political persecution and its ruins. (However, because we love this country too much, we can’t stop).

Suffice it to say that in the extensive chronicles of the circumstances of Olivia Lutaaya and others, Atuhaire and Toko have acknowledged the contribution – legal fees and personal/family costs – of the party to which the victims are affiliated: National Unity Platform (NUP). But it is this support for me – both legal and family support – that I find misleading and completely distracting.

Not that it shouldn’t be given. Not at all. But making these two the only projects in the context of political prisoners – yes, political prisoners – is completely problematic. Consciously or unconsciously, this approach distracts our opposition – or blinds us from demanding it – and charts a clear course that makes political prisoners irrelevant.

Note that my intention here is to focus on the opposition, and not on Museveni’s otherwise well-documented autocracy, which neither of us doubts. Yoweri Museveni’s ugly treatment of his countrymen, especially people who try to oppose his government, needs no further explanation.

YOU SHALL NOT NEGOTIATE WITH A TYRANT

I come from a clear historical-theoretical position: there are only two ways in which political prisoners can get out of prison: (a) either the government that threw them in prison collapses – against many factors – and closes the gates of Hell are closed. thrown open, or (b) the outsiders, associates and friends of political prisoners, vigorously negotiate with the incumbent government to release their political prisoners.

I say again: political prisoners are not candidates for lengthy legal arguments and bail applications. Not at all. They are candidates for political struggle or political settlements. There is no recourse in the law for political prisoners. Courts may only come into the picture as icing on the cake. These are the facts in the history of politics.

I fully appreciate the shame – the political incorrectness – of ‘negotiating with the autocrat’, a situation you are trying to overthrow and which has caused your people enormous suffering. It looks like capitulation. But doesn’t it seem like capitulation itself to agree to form an “official opposition” to work with the autocrat’s government?

I know, it’s a legal requirement, but don’t you have the choice not to form one? Note also that political prisoners mean the continuity of a political struggle. Throwing them into prison does not mean the end of the struggle, but rather its continuity in another form. The more they remain in prison, resiliently and painfully refusing all machinations, temptations, threats and buyout offers from the government, the more they actually perpetuate the strife and struggle against which they were thrown in prison.

No wonder political prisoners are often even more triumphant when they get out of prison. In the context of the NUP supporters imprisoned during the 2021 elections, the position was aimed at overthrowing Yoweri Museveni, “removing a dictator!” So their time in prison meant they stuck to this claim.

On the other hand, their partners in this mission – to remove the dictator – the larger NUP brotherhood, however, chose – without any coercion – to form “the opposition”, to run under Yoweri Museveni’s government side in parliament work.

This indicates a change in positions bordering on treason. The argument that paying the legal fees (knowing the law was useless) and paying some family expenses – while welcome – was absolute window dressing.

UNUSED VALUE OF OPPOSITION

It is not my intention to challenge the decision to form ‘the opposition’ in Parliament. Political struggles and political positions should be fluid depending on the context in which political actors find themselves. My problem is what the NUP was trying to achieve by agreeing to form the ‘official opposition’.

My contention is that (a) the decision should have integrated the interests and lives of their fellow fighters, including their political prisoners, and (b) not simply replaced the previous majority opposition groups. The historical-theoretical position is that modern autocrats who flirt with democratic rule – YKM being a good example – need the opposition more than the opposition needs to work under them.

To maintain their veneer of ‘multiparty democracy’, the autocrats of the neoliberal era (from the 1990s onwards) need their autocratic machines to appear democratic. This means, among other things, an opposition, which is defined and implemented as such. This actually gives more value to the opposition with enormous bargaining power.

I will return to that fleeting moment when the then Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Matheus Mpuuga threatened the government that the opposition would not return to Parliament if the missing and allegedly tortured individuals were not brought forward. I know this moment was short-lived because it threatened to leave Mpuuga alone – while the other opposition members did not commit to the boycott.

Even his party leader, Hon. Robert Kyagulanyi Ssentamu was lukewarm in his approval of the move. But I do remember the government side going crazy. They were naked without resistance. Remember that during the Tojikwatako campaign, YKM/NRM actually had to bribe people in the opposition to oppose and vote against the amendment. Precisely, because they could not declare victory if they were only fighting against themselves.

This would be the time to talk when the “autocrat-democrat” is desperate to find his cover –– to appear democratic. You don’t fight to depose him, but make big demands and make concessions. This seems a better attitude than simply (legally) enjoying parliament and letting the autocrat-democrat strut around in the aura of parliamentary democracy!

This is when the issue of political prisoners would be brought forward – and several other demands. And these moments – when the autocrat-democrat desperately longs for something – always appear and recur. Look, Museveni would never arbitrarily create an ‘opposition’ if all 57 NUP MPs – and some committed MPs – collectively boycotted parliamentary sessions before certain demands were met.

(In Part II, through Isaac Ssemakadde’s rise to the presidency of the ULS – and his work to date – and Samuel Leeds’ hospital, and the NUP’s Ush5b IPOD budget, I will expand on this further, with the emphasis on ‘scaring’ and turning the tables; leading the autocrat-democrat – and not simply responding to his tyranny – and perhaps making political prisoners completely irrelevant or more expensive).

[email protected]

The author is a political theorist based at Makerere University.