The October 27, 2012 London conference on Uganda federalism inspired by the keynote Speaker’s address (available at the Uganda Citizen website) was very successful in terms of participation which was national in scope; demographics which embraced men, women and youth; substantive in content; open, frank and tolerant of one another’s views; agreement that federalism is a national issue and consensus on the way forward. A resolution was adopted at the end of the conference and is available at the Uganda Citizen website.
I summarized areas where consensus was reached and posted the report on Ugandans at Heart Forum, www.kashambuzi.com and www.udugandans.com. Subsequently, I prepared and posted a short note on the same above websites clarifying some issues upon request. As this is work in progress, we need to update and add to the information that we already have. I have received requests in this regard. I appeal for active participation of all Ugandans in this debate so that none is left behind and also remember that nobody has monopoly or all the answers on this important subject. Here we go.
1. What is federalism? There is consensus that federalism is about power sharing between the central and local governments (states, provinces, regions, etc). Central government is also referred to as federal or national government. Unless advised otherwise, I will use Uganda’s Northern, Eastern, Central (Buganda) and Western regions as constituent units. To be consistent, I will also use federal government instead of central or national government. No Ugandan would want power to be concentrated in one institution or distributed in such a way that some regions gain more than others. However, unusual circumstances may cause the federal government to assume more power than originally intended witness the increased powers of USA federal government during the Great Depression of the 1930s. “The New Deal’s response to the Great Depression produced a dramatic growth in national power and a displacement of state authority, as most Americans concluded that only the national government could alleviate the national economic disaster” (Paul S. Boyer 2001). Please note that federo is a Luganda word for federal. The federalism project is not about kingdoms but about sharing power between the centre and regions.
2. Difference between subsidiarity and empowerment. Subsidiarity is at the core of federalism. It lays down principles of regions’ rights as, for example, in the tenth amendment to the United States Constitution. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, not prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or to the people” (Paul S. Boyer 2001). Thus, subsidiarity, “implies that the power properly belongs, in the first place, lower down or father out”. On the other hand, empowerment (or decentralization), “implies that someone on high (central government) is giving away power. … I empower you to do this, but I can disempower you if I don’t like the way you do it”(Charles Hardy 1994). So, subsidiarity should replace empowerment in our debates about federalism.
3. Changing the structure of institutions. A federal system of governance requires that existing structure of institutions and systems change to give power to the regions and to reflect a new balance without losing efficiency and the advantages of coordination and control.
4. Powers and limitations. Hardy has provided useful information worth quoting in full. “Federalism seeks to be both big in some things and small in others, to be centralized in some respects and decentralized in others. It aims to be local in its appeal and in many of its decisions, but national or even global in its scope. It endeavors to maximize independence, provided always that there is a necessary interdependence; to encourage difference, but within limits; it needs to maintain a strong center, but one devoted to the service of its parts; it can and should be led from that center but has to be managed by the parts. There is room in federalism for the small to influence the mighty, and for the individuals to flex their muscles”(Charles Hardy 1994).
5. Federalism, negotiations and compromise. Federalism is anchored on negotiations, compromise and win-win arrangements and on the understanding that the richer groups are ready to assists their poorer counterparts. Under these circumstances, none should expect everything exactly as they would want.
6. Equal rights and equal powers of regions. Whatever constituent unit (state, province, region etc) is finally agreed upon in Uganda, all regions will have equal powers and equal rights. For example, each region will have one vote.
7. Political will. Success or failure to realize federalism in Uganda will depend upon political will among regions and between them and the central government.
8. NRM participation. For the sake of encouraging Ugandans to be responsible for designing and implementing their development policies, strategies and programs, we appeal to the NRM government to welcome these developments and participate constructively in the Working Committee and subsequent National Convention on federalism.
9. UDU participation. At the London conference to which UDU was represented, we expressed readiness to work with other organizations like the Uganda Federal Confederates formally and/or informally and to participate in the Working Committee and subsequent National Convention.
10. Full engagement of Ugandans. All Ugandans are urged to engage in the national debate so that all views and suggestions are taken into account by the Working Committee. This is a national project for all Ugandans. At the end of the journey we should come up with an agreement enshrined in the amended Uganda Constitution that does not create a strong federal government that frustrates individual liberties or allows some regions to gain advantages over others.