Concern as Among, Ssenyonyi rift grows wider

When LoP Ssenyonyi stopped short of calling the decision flimsy, Speaker Among was unstinting in her criticism. She said the pace that Mr Ssenyonyi, then the Cosase chair, was handling issues raised in the Auditor General’s report left a lot to be desired.
“I know what I am talking about,” the House Speaker said. “I once chaired that committee.”
The three sittings that processed the National Coffee (Amendment) Bill, 2024, at the backend of this year went to great lengths to show how there is no love lost between the House Speaker and the LoP. Mr Ssenyonyi enjoyed two rather short-lived victories.

"Just to give you assurance, these members are not standing up because they are defying you. We are standing up in pursuit of the [Parliament] rules [of procedure] which provide for a modus operandi on how a decision or ruling of the Speaker can be challenged. So it is not indiscipline for members to stand," Ssenyonyi told Among late last month after there was a second attempt to have the Bill read.
Before a physical count was conducted, the Speaker’s microphone in the House picked her up making what appeared to be a statement laced with a tribal innuendo.

The Speaker and the House communications team protested her innocence, clarifying that, during the consultation with the clerk at the table, Ms Among “tasked the Government Chief Whip [Mr Hamson Obua] not to allow tribal sentiments to obscure the general intent of the Bill.”
Yet, perhaps unsurprisingly, Ssenyonyi has not let the issue fizzle out. He has been unyielding in his demand for an apology. This has succeeded in worsening relations between two key figures in the House.

“From the onset, I wish to state that I was quoted out of context. In any event, this House is a House of record and being the custodian of the rules of procedure and being the House of record and if anybody feels that I mentioned what the Leader of Opposition mentioned I want to urge that member, to bring documentary evidence and lay on table and once it is true that I said what he said then I will be able to apologise to this country and the persons who were affected. But before that is done, because it isn’t true, I will not do it,” Among recently said.

Costly standoff

The passing of the Coffee Bill on November 6 did not pass by easily. The House degenerated into a farce, with unidentified people going over and above to ensure that the Bill, which among others dissolves the Uganda Coffee Development Authority (UCDA), got the green light.
“When we return to Parliament I will ask her [Speaker Among], now that you are saying I was wrong to claim it was security operatives, you tell us who raided Parliament, now that you know,” Ssenyonyi recently said after the House Speaker ordered that what he had said on the same be expunged from the Hansard.
It is evident that the gloves will remain off as Uganda’s 11th Parliament enters the last of a five-year mandate. But at what cost?

Ms Sarah Bireete, the executive director for the Centre for Constitutional Governance (CCG), attributes the clash to little focus placed on the principles of democracy that accommodate tolerance, something the duo should appreciate while in office.
“It is a reflection of little understanding of multiparty dispensation,” Ms Bireete told Sunday Monitor, adding that there “is need for mutual respect from both leaders” if they are to both effectively serve the expected roles.
On his part Mr Mwambutsya Ndebesa, a political analyst, opines that the standoff between the House Speaker and LoP is a mere reflection of the broader political situation in the country.

“We have got a foundation of politics of intolerance and this is manifested in the two leaders. The problem is not in the two, it is the political system in Uganda. From the onset, when the President wins elections, he pledges to deal away with the Opposition,” he said, adding, “In other words, the political competition here is not for finding ideas to build the nation; it is finding a way of undermining your colleague.”

Mr Ndebesa further submits that such a reflection frustrates the expectations envisaged in the Constitution.
“The debate in Parliament is about winning at all costs and that means even if one has views from the other side, you don't listen to the views. That was not what was envisaged in our Constitution, so nobody wants to tolerate the other. Therefore, whatever comes up in Parliament, those with a majority will win [hence giving off a sense of a] majoritarian dictatorship,” he said, adding “I don't think they have personal vendettas against each other. It is just that they don't want to listen to each other at all.”

The political analyst, nevertheless, warns that the friction could erupt into regrettable circumstances if not checked.
“Of course, the citizens and the country are the losers. If you don't have some shared interests that would bring the country together but instead have this kind of polarisation where nobody wants to listen to each other, this will end up being reflected in the voter faces who also do not tolerate each other,” he said.

He added: “The end result will be a polarised political class, society and country which lead the country to fall apart. We are not nurturing the values of tolerance as a nation.”

Cleavages

Among’s fractured relationship with Ssenyonyi differs markedly from what she shared with his predecessor, Mr Mathias Mpuuga.
After Mr Mpuuga made his handover speech on January 9, the Speaker made it clear that together with Mr Thomas Tayebwa, her Deputy, few regrets, if any, were shared for “being your friends and we will continue being your friends”.
She also went on to note that Mr Mpuuga did “a good job as LoP and this country will forever be indebted to you".
Observers note that it was telling that Among, while asking Ssenyonyi to make his maiden speech as the LoP, referred to the Nakawa West lawmaker as “my son”.
Straightaway, a superior-inferior dynamic was evoked that was always bound to end in a dialectical opposition. Indeed, Ssenyonyi, in setting out his store, stressed that he intended to hold leaders accountable.
"I want to appeal that where we disagree, and indeed we are going to have numerous opportunities to disagree, I hope that we can disagree respectfully and that there gets to be space to disagree and for divergent views,” Ssenyonyi said on January 9.
Since then cleavages between the top two figures in the House have not been in short supply. This culminated in the vast majority of Opposition lawmakers boycotting the three-day inaugural sitting of four regional plenary sessions that Among set out to popularise.

Before that Ssenyonyi had also rallied Opposition lawmakers to boycott attending the State-of-the-Nation-Address and the Financial Year 2024/25 National Budget reading that were both held at Kololo Independence Grounds in June.
The fractious deliberations over the Coffee Bill saw Among adjourn plenary indefinitely (sine die). Ssenyonyi has made it abundantly clear that when House sittings resume, leaders will continue to be held accountable.
Mr Ssenyonyi will mark a year as LoP next month. While December brings with it good tidings, it does not promise to be a season to be jolly.

"Some of your members are in hospital, some of your members are in detention. I don’t know whether you are concerned because you are smiling. You are happy and yet I am making an appeal to you as our leader," a visibly exasperated Ssenyonyi submitted in the aftermath of the passing of the Coffee Bill on November 6.