Prime
From Nabbanja to Namisango, what’s Museveni’s game plan?
Author: Asuman Bisiika. PHOTO/FILE
What you need to know:
- Mr Asuman Bisiika says: The most eyebrow-raising appointment was that of Ms Beti Olive Namisango Kamya as the Inspector General of Government.
Mr Museveni spooked many Ugandans when he recently constituted his government (Cabinet). However, he seems to realise this ‘anomaly’; which is why he was later to explain himself over his choice of Cabinet.
Explaining himself, he sought refuge in the Bible: Jesus did not pick his disciples from the elite (Pharisees and Sadducees); he instead picked disciples from fishermen. And with that remark, the tag of ‘Fisherman Cabinet’ was born.
Weeks later, Mr Museveni constituted the administrative management of the government (permanent secretaries (PS) and constitutional bodies). The most eyebrow-raising appointment was that of Ms Beti Olive Namisango Kamya as the Inspector General of Government and retirement of some permanent secretaries (in public interest).
Many analysts have expressed concern over talking points namely: that Ms Kamya’s lack of a legal background (practice or study) made her unfit for her new appointment; and that the PS retired in public interests would not get their gratuity and pension.
************
There is a general feeling that permanent secretaries must be appointed to ministries responsible for areas in which they have academic (professional?) competence. That’s to say the PS for the Ministry of Health must be a medical doctor. This is wrong assumption.
The only Cabinet minister required to be appointed in a ministry responsible for an area of his professional practice is the Attorney General. And the Solicitor General (the PS for the Attorney General), is the only permanent secretary required to be a lawyer. Otherwise, a PS is principally an administrator. So, there is no need or requirement to have a service officer as PS for the Ministry of Defence. In the same vein, the PS for Ministry of Health does not have to be a medic.
About the permanent secretaries who were retired in public interest, some people have said they will not get their gratuity and pension; and that for that matter, they should sue the state. Being retired in public interest is an administrative management tool written in the Public Service Standing Orders. We assume the affected people know this.
The only anomaly in this matter is (was) Mr Museveni’s ‘way of doing things’. This is how things should have gone: Mr Museveni should have written to the Secretary to the Cabinet (also head of Public Service) to express his wish to retire the said people.
The head of Public Service would then write to the chairperson of the Service Commission communicating Mr Museveni’s wish. The Public Service Commission would meet and make a resolution on the matter.
With the resolution of the Public Service Commission, the head of the Public Service would then use that resolution to trigger a letter informing the permanent secretaries about a decision to retire them in public interest. That way, the commander-in-chief is shielded from the wear and tear associated with the day-to-day administrative actions.
The main import of retirement in public interest is that gratuity and pension kick in immediately. Those retired (in public interest) will get their benefits and pension like those who retire at the statutory retirement age. It is something like early retirement triggered off by the employer (not the employee).
Yet even I, with near-to-nil interest in politics, cannot claim to be oblivious of the fisherman Cabinet and recent deployment of administrative managers of the government. Does Mr Museveni’s choice of managers represent anything (past, present or future)? What should Ugandans expect from the Nabbanja and Namisango team? Which is why we ask: from Nabbanja to Namisango, what is Museveni’s game plan?
Mr Bisiika is the executive editor of the East African Flagpost. [email protected]
