By JOACHIM BUWEMBO

More by this Author

Some 15 years ago, an African president who had ruled for many years was finally faced with departure, having run out of constitutionally allowed terms.

Then he remembered that some people had disputed his last election, and he started considering accepting their doubts so that the election could be repeated – after he had ruled for 80 per cent of the term!

His country’s opinion leaders, media and all the itchy commentators refused to accord the suggestion the dignity of response, for once you enter an argument, it can only end in two ways – in your losing or winning. Winning against a guy who controls the resources and instruments of power in Africa is not easy. Refusing to enter the argument, the citizens dispatched another “grand old man” into retirement.

Not seeming to understand this, Ugandans who are opposed to lifting of the constitutional 75-year age limit for the president have started arguing loudly, saying it will help incumbent President Yoweri Museveni remain in office after 2021 when he will be past that age.

But government people say they haven’t considered any motion to remove the age limit, but only expect a constitutional review commission following recommendations of NGOs and of the Supreme Court, in which age may or may not come up. President Museveni himself is on record as opposing fielding persons above the age of 75 for the presidency.

Political activists and the opposition cite the 2005 constitutional amendment that removed the two-term limit, enabling Museveni to stand (and win) again in 2006, 2011 and 2016. They recall that members of the Seventh Parliament were “facilitated” with $3,000 each to amend the constitution.

Stories circulating in Kampala over the suspected plot to lift the age limit are interesting. A ruling NRM party legislator from the northwest who only wears yellow (the party colour) has been telling whoever cares to listen that Museveni must rule until he dies, and that a deal has been struck with MPs stipulating three conditions to lift the age limit.

He didn’t spell out the conditions, leaving people to speculate about money changing hands and increasing the MPs’ own terms from five years upward.

Government people say they don’t know any of these things but argue that as long as the amendments are made in accordance with the Constitution, there should be no problem. Angry anti-amendment people respond interestingly.

Asuman Basalirwa, an official of Jeema, a minority party with very cerebral mostly Muslim leaders, says what is constitutional is not always necessarily right. He says apartheid was constitutional in South Africa but it was evil at the same time. Jeema has taken to radio to declare lifting the age limit a Satanic act that must be resisted.

A former delegate of the constituent assembly that passed the constitution in 1995, Charles Rwomushana, has also gone on air to call upon Ugandans to raise an army to resist the amendment, citing clauses in the constitution that empower citizens to use any means possible to resist abuse of the constitution through illegal means.

Rwomushana argues that bribery is illegal and it covers “facilitating” MPs to pass constitutional amendments. The opposition have thus trapped themselves by entering a debate over something they think should never be debated.

Joachim Buwembo is a social and political commentator based in Kampala. E-mail: [email protected]