Prime
Militarisation of police must be frowned upon
Former presidential candidate Robert Kyagulanyi is arrested by a group of police and military personnel in 2020. PHOTO | FILE
What you need to know:
The issue:
Uganda Police Force.
Our view:
Right thinking members of society should continue to call for the policies of the UPF, and the threshold for the use of force, to be reexamined.
The Network of Public Interest Lawyers or NEPTIL’s 2023 study on an institutional culture that provides cover for militarisation and military capture in the Uganda Police Force (UPF) ought not to be treated like a footnote. The study, coming as it has when robust scrutiny as well as accountability in relation to police actions and inactions has tapered off, keeps a stark and undeniable anomaly in the public eye.
NEPTIL’s body of work bemoans a culture of entitlement and subversion of authority that is rife in a UPF that has half a dozen military officers in its 20-strong top brass. While the study spares no criticism of Gen (rtd) Kale Kayihura for the part he played in militarising the Force, it stopped short of calling out his replacement as Inspector General of Police (IGP).
Mr Martin Okoth Ochola, a trained lawyer who has been in the police ranks since 1985, seemed sincere in his determination to shake things up when he took over the reins from Gen Kayihura five years ago. IGP Ochola promised to transform the much-maligned Force into a modern, professional, pro-people, effective and service-oriented institution.
Far from being that, procedural aspects of criminal law as well as human rights continue to elude many a police officer. It matters precious little that at the Force’s helm is someone who between October of 1984 and January of 1988 worked as a legal assistant. If anything, on the learned friend’s watch, there has been a proliferation of grey areas that have engendered police military capture. Small wonder, trust in the Force remains at a low ebb.
Reforming the Force and restoring confidence in it should ordinarily top the pile, but the possibility of this being actualised remains minuscule. And that is putting it mildly. Military and political patronage networks render useless any reforms that Mr Ochola had up his sleeve. An overbearing presidency that is intent on dismantling any checks and balances will continue to lord it over all. We agree with NEPTIL that cowering in the face of such an ugly reality should not be an option. Rule of law and not rule by law should continue to be championed. Right thinking members of society should continue to call for the policies of the UPF, and the threshold for the use of force, to be reexamined.
It is a given that the Force requires robust external oversight as well as internal change. As such NEPTIL’s recommendation for a professional unit trained to deal exclusively with public order management and riot control is especially welcome. Ditto reforms in the recruitment, promotion and training of police officers.
The establishment of a specialised civilian oversight body for the police whose independence is constitutionally guaranteed will also doubtless have a ripple effect. It will be a bulwark against human rights abuses that are increasingly the calling card of the Force’s militarised officers. What is clear is that any supposed ambiguity about the police’s militaristic intentions and behaviour should not be uninteresting. They are a patent threat to our society.
