The so-called presidential assistant/advisor supports Museveni's 3rd term as  quoted here below:

1)   

"The question of term limits is not a unique case for Uganda. So don't call it a third term. Don't call it "life presidency". But discuss it on principle. Those opposed to lifting the term limit are, of course, motivated by the American experience of the two-term limit presidency." 

2)

"But they fail to remember that Mr Franklin Delano Roosevelt served a four-term presidency from 1933-1945."

                     *******************

Fellow Citizens,

The amount of time Roosevelt took to have four terms, is equivalent to the Museveni's first term -  And this is supposedly a good exampel and comparison for our presidential assistant - Frank Tumwebaze.

We need not wonder any more why Museveni performs the way he does - being surrounded by this kind of presidential advisor/assistant is the worst that should ever happen any president on earth!!

If the presidential advisor/assistant is as insatiable as the president himself, what would one expect?

Well, Mwebaze, you and your president should starting packing and leave as Ugandans get worked up and ready to regain their rights and freedom and their concscience from your un-quenched thirst for power, wealth and human blood.

Best regards,

Nyar'Onyango

******************


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Elum aniap Godfrey Ayoo 
To: [log in to unmask] ; Edward Mulindwa 
Cc: [log in to unmask] 
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2003 10:09 PM
Subject: 'Third term' critics are cowards 



'Third term' critics are cowards 
By Frank Tumwebaze 
September 29, 2003

      Some of the Ugandan political elite have a tendency to deliberately distort issues and fail to discuss them on principle, but rather sensationalising them to appease certain sentiments. 

      It is always prudent that any subject, no matter how controversial it may be, be objectively discussed with due respect and consideration to both its pros and cons, without distorting the content. 

      The question of term limits is not a unique case for Uganda. So don't call it a third term. Don't call it "life presidency". But discuss it on principle. Those opposed to lifting the term limit are, of course, motivated by the American experience of the two-term limit presidency. But they fail to remember that Mr Franklin Delano Roosevelt served a four-term presidency from 1933-1945. 

      The two-term convention was seized upon by a coalition of senators who wanted more power for themselves, haters of Roosevelt, as well as presidential aspirants who wanted to ensure a regular turnover at the top. Otherwise, there was no logical basis for this limitation beyond that. 

      And to me, the effect of this scheming is damaging because it denies the citizenry the chance to vote for a candidate they might want to support. In principle, it limits voter choice, creates a weak executive, and tilts balance in government in the legislators' favour. 

      In fact, this is the concern of most of us who propose an open presidency. Why is it that legislators are not limited too? If incumbency reduces the chances of fair competition, then legislators should be limited too.

      Then there is this deliberate distortion and narrowing of the debate that removing term limits means giving President Museveni a third term and making him a life president. 

      This is a shallow argument. Life presidents are dictators. They don't need constitutions to follow in the first place. Constitutionalism to them is the extreme opposite of their norms and interests. So, a mere provision of term limits has nothing to do with a dictator. Among the indicators of a well-built democratic culture, term limiting is none of them. 

      You will talk of free and fair periodic elections, full participation of the citizenry and a free press. I wish we debated how to strengthen these components in our democratic set up. How are you going to ensure full participation of the citizenry in their own affairs when you are limiting their voter choice? I challenge the opponents of the open presidency to answer these questions and avoid mixing issues with a third term. 

      Why are critics bothered about a third term for Museveni as an individual anyway? Their longstanding campaign since the inception of the NRM has been to open political space and allow competition on political party basis. 

      And so I thought their concern would not be which individual rules next, but which party or organisation? If Museveni and his NRM have been dictatorial, I thought the best way to scheme against him was to plan a total defeat for his organisation out of power, rather than struggle to lock him out of an election using a constitutional technicality. That is total cowardice. So, I support the lifting of presidential terms to allow an open presidency and unlimited voter choice.

      This matter was indeed not contentious in the Constituent Assembly as some of those opposed to the lifting of term restrictions are now confessing. It was because there was no thorough debate on it to understand its pros and cons. Remember the CA was the first legitimate and representative body to discuss a constitutional process. The delegates had no good constitutional experience of our own to look at. So, provisions like article 105(2) only came in as a replica of the 22nd American constitutional amendment. Yet that amendment was not in any way backed by democratic values but rather cheap political sentiments against Roosevelt. 

      In fact, they say that in practical terms, term limits were not accidentally omitted from the first American constitution; that their founding fathers considered, debated and finally rejected term limits. It was not like our 1995 CA experience where the matter was unanimously endorsed, without much analysis. 

      The advantage of an open presidency is that it creates the prospect of future tenure, which gives the presidency leverage to get things done. Without this, presidential terms suffer the lame duck effect, making a president less and less able to promote his legislative agenda. 

      Another reason to support open presidency is the fact that some policies require long-term leadership to ensure their success over a long period. For example, the UPE, which also gives prospects for USE (Universal Secondary Education). If these are policies on the basis of which the people voted for Museveni in previous elections, and they have total confidence and trust that he will deliver, why deny the voters the chance of this continuous development? 
      If the two-term rule is aimed at preventing an entrenched clique in power, why permit other elective offices, right from a Member of Parliament down to a village council chairperson, remain unlimited? 

      This is a terrible imbalance, especially in our case. The lawmakers are only concerned about their own security of tenure. That is why the recall bill has never been discussed anywhere. That is why legislation these days is pegged to issues of their own welfare, such as pension, no matter how unconstitutional it may be. 

      Let us discuss issues in principle and on their merits and demerits, but not on sentiments. Allow everybody, even those in favour of a third term for Museveni, to express themselves without labeling them opportunists or shallow thinkers.


      The author is a special presidential assistant/research and information
      franktumwebaze @yahoo.co.uk.

     


© 2003 The Monitor Publications


 
"And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall march ahead. We cannot turn back. There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, 'When will you be satisfied?' We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities (.) No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream". (Martin Luther King, 1964 Nobel Peace prize laureate, assassinated for his struggle)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~