Uganda Parliament Exhibition Trends on Social Media
For almost three weeks now, the hashtag “#UgandaParliamentExhibition” has been trending on X, previously known as Twitter, as Ugandans utilize social media to expose instances of corruption within Uganda’s parliament. Originating last year, this exhibition initially focused on highlighting the prevalent issue of potholes in Kampala. The initiative was spearheaded by a coalition including Makerere University Lecturer Dr Jimmy Spire Ssentongo, Journalist Agather Atuhaire, and activist Edwin Toko.
The exhibition’s impact has been significant, drawing attention to widespread corruption within Parliament and increasing scrutiny on its leaders from various political factions.
Corruption Allegations Target Speaker Among
The fallout from the exhibition has extended to the National Unity Platform (NUP), Uganda’s largest opposition party in parliament. Allegations of corruption, particularly involving the Speaker of Parliament, Anita Among, have surfaced. These accusations include increasing her per diem from $900 to $4,000, claiming allowances for unattended trips, and withdrawing large sums through aides for purported corporate social responsibility activities, many in her Bukedea district.
Calls for Among’s resignation have emerged, but resignation seems unlikely without significant pressure. Efforts are now directed towards NUP, urging them to initiate a censure motion against Among.
Challenges in NUP’s Push for Censure
NUP’s push for censure faces challenges within parliament’s political landscape. With the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) dominating parliament, any censure motion would likely face staunch opposition.
Among 529 voting members, NRM holds 336 seats, while NUP has 57. The majority of the remaining seats are either allied with NRM or independent, making it difficult for a motion against Among to succeed without NRM’s support.
Impeachment Criteria and NUP MPs’ Responses
According to Uganda’s 1995 Constitution, a Speaker or Deputy Speaker can be removed through specific circumstances, including a two-thirds majority vote by all Members of Parliament. Despite NUP leaders desiring their MPs to pursue a censure motion against Among, only a few have expressed outright support.
Among the 40 NUP MPs contacted, only two confirmed they would sign a petition for censure. Others expressed reservations or opted to wait for more information before making a decision.
Diverging Views and Political Complexities
Opinions among NUP MPs vary, reflecting the complexities surrounding the issue. Some emphasize the need for concrete evidence before initiating a censure motion, while others express solidarity with the party’s stance.
Interviews with NUP officials highlight a lack of consensus within the party regarding Among’s censure. Some advocate for action based on allegations of corruption, while others stress the importance of verifying information before proceeding.
Analysts Weigh In on NUP’s Strategy
Political analysts offer perspectives on NUP’s approach to the censure motion. While NUP portrays itself as anti-corruption, critics argue that the party’s own members may be implicated in similar scandals, raising questions about their resolve.
The political landscape suggests challenges for NUP in rallying support for censuring Among, given the power dynamics within parliament. Analysts highlight the complexities and potential consequences of NUP’s strategy.
Speaker’s Allies Respond
Friends of Speaker Among suggest that the allegations have caused stress but maintain silence on the matter publicly. They speculate about underlying motives behind the accusations, hinting at political vendettas within parliament.
Some allies express skepticism about the allegations and await further developments before taking a stance. Amidst the controversy, Speaker Among’s supporters await the unfolding of events within parliament.
