Book Review: Human Rights Watch, Hostile to Democracy: The Movement System and Political Representation in Uganda (New York: Human Rights Watch, 1999, 163 pp., no price given.)
| DOI | 10.1177/03058298000290010426 |
| Date | 01 January 2000 |
| Published date | 01 January 2000 |
| Author | Susanne Zistel |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Book Reviews
225
Human Rights Watch, Hostile to Democracy: The Movement System and
Political Representation in Uganda (New Yo rk: Human Ri ghts Watch, 199 9, 163
pp., no price giv en.).
New g overnments provi de an opp ortunity to exp eriment with new forms of
political organisation. In a so ciety that has suffered from po st-independence
violence for more than two decades, the p rotection of the i ndividual as well as the
collective beco mes a major yardstick for j udging this organisation. Hostil e to
Democracy takes issue wit h the human ri ghts abuses related to the no-pa rty
democracy in Uganda, and it thus co ntributes to both the p ractical campaign
against human rights abuses and the theoreti cal debate about different forms of
democracy.
The v erdict reached by the American NGO Human Rights Watch is that
Uganda’s no-part y syste m rest ricts political participation and thus prevents the
formation of an opposition. T he no-party system is merely a one-party system in
disguise (p. 2). Instead of contributing to demo cracy, Ugan da’s no-part y system
prevents cit izens from partakin g in the decisio n-making process (p. 2 4). The study
includes a nu mber of recommendations which c all upon the government of Uga nda
as well as the international commu nity to chan ge the present political system into
one simil ar to Western forms of democracy, where political partie s function as the
representativ e bodies of the elect orate’s interest (pp. 9-12).
In chapter five the historical background of th e stud y is laid out. Ever since
Yoweri M useveni seized po wer in Uganda i n 1986, Uganda n democracy has been
organised in form of a no-party, or Movement , system of which every Uga ndan is a
member. As a response to t he experien ce of the past, the infamous te rror of the
dictatorshi ps of Idi Amin and Milton Obote and the ethnic cleavages they prod uced
which manifest ed t hemselves in extreme party po larisation, Museveni’s
government introduced a n o-party system. T his structure op erates from local
councils, a form of partici patory democracy on a grassroots lev el, to the national
level. Most me mbers of parliament are elec ted directly. Political parties t hemselves
are no t prohibited, ho wever, the freedom of assembly and association is restricted
by the constitution and other legislation.
The main arg ument of the report, t hat the Movement system is ‘hostile to
democracy’, relies on chapter four in which Uganda’s obligations under
internatio nal law are e stablished. These obligation s g uarantee the unhindered
participat ion of society in the political decisio n-making process. Unfortunately , the
chapter conta ins no discussion of the cult ural and temporal biases of la ws, and thus
uncriticall y ac cepts and promote s the universal appl icability of regulatio ns i n
general, and a cert ain notion of democracy in particul ar.
The Uga ndan Movemen t system, it is argued, does not conform to the politic al
rights as established in treaties like t he Universal Declarat ion of Human Rights or
the Intern ational Conventio n on Civil and Political Rig hts (p. 15). C entral to these
criticisms are restricti ons on t he freedom of associat ion and a ssembly, as well as
freedom of spee ch through censorship and self-censo rship. These restrictions are
To continue reading
Request your trial