There are many Ugandans today who hate comparing Uganda to other countries, especially in terms of vices such as corruption, misgovernance, criminality, human rights abuses, violence, et cetera. When Uganda is compared to other countries, they jump up and point out: We are better off than other countries.

They don’t care to think about degrees of difference in vices does not make a country necessarily a better place to live in. Vices, however less pronounced, lower the quality of life of a people. The best thing to do is to devise policies and strategies to eliminate the vices and make life worth living. Imagine what the trillions of shillings being stolen by individuals would do if invested in education, health, transport, agriculture or infrastructure for the whole society.

We need always to compare ourselves to others to establish to what extent we are appreciating or depreciating in quality of life. Why not compare Uganda, which has depreciated in so many areas of human endeavour, to Rwanda which has appreciated in so many areas of human endeavour since 1994 and learn from the people of Rwanda how to manage society for the benefit of everyone rather than a few?

Scispace has submits:

Comparative analysis is important in research because it allows for scientific discovery, informs policy decisions, and helps in understanding the nuances and differences in research traditions across different countries and regions. It is a multidisciplinary method that can be applied in various fields such as education, social sciences, health sciences, and humanities. Comparative analysis involves comparing multiple units of study, such as groups, individuals, or conditions, to determine correlations, arrive at conclusions, and produce results. It helps in identifying research topics, foci and trends in different countries, and highlights the differences in research traditions and paradigms. Comparative analysis also contributes to the development of theories, methodologies and best practice guidelines in various research areas, including management and business. Overall, comparative analysis is a valuable research method that enhances our understanding of diverse phenomena and facilitates cross-cultural collaboration and knowledge exchange”.

Drobnic (2014) in his article “Comparative Analysis” published in Michalos, A.C. (eds) “Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research”, states that the goal of comparative analysis is to search for similarity and variance among units of analysis.

In this article I want to compare the politics of Chad and Uganda so that I can identify the differences, particularly, the similarities between the two countries in terms of leadership and governance. Others have compared the two countries in terms of economies, criminalities and quality of life. All these are interlinked and reflect the kind of politics, but I have not seen any attempt to compare the politics of Chad and Uganda. The reason could be that the rulers of the two countries are influencial members of the African Union that are greatly feared by researchers.

The politics of Uganda occurs considered by many in authoritarian context. Since assuming office in 1986 at the end of the NRM/A rebellion in the bushes of Luwero Triangle, President Yoweri Tibuhaburwa Museveni has ruled Uganda with an iron hand despite a degree of benevolence. Multipartyism was banned from 1986 and somewhat allowed in 2006 following the 2005 referendum on multipartyism, which was won by pro-democracy forces. Since then, however, politics has been conducted in a militarily controlled manner to ensure that alternative political forces exist but do not survive and function as truly alternative sources of leadership of the country.

As part of the control process, the military and police have been fused, with virtually all police commanders from top to bottom being resourced from the army. This could explain the rocketing violence of both police and army on the hapless civilians – both the led and leaders. Utmost, the political parties, as in the past, are confined and allowed to function in very limited sociopolitical space, mainly at their headquarters. Elections are conducted by a carefully selected or composed Electoral Commission of 100 per cent National Resistance Movement (NRM) cadres.

Therefore, the aim of elections in Uganda is not so much to afford the country opportunity to change leadership and governance of the country as to ensure the perennial stay in power of the ruling NRM and its perpetual chairman, Yoweri Tibuhaburwa Museveni.

In terms of justice, the Bench has been clogged with NRM cadre judges, so that the judgement that emanates from the judiciary is the kind that is not politically-sensitive. In terms of legislation, gerrymandering has ensured that parliament is absolutely dominated by NRM cadre Members of Parliament and that what is called “NRM Parliamentary Caucus has complete control over the process, let alone how the national budget is allocated.” This explains why the national budget today is more oriented towards the military, political and State House needs that the social development of the country and its people.

Chad, like Uganda, is formally a multiparty democracy from 1991 when Idriss Deby captured political power to 2021 when he was shot dead by his own children. However, the president’s party – the Patriotic Salvation Movement (MPS) – and its allies dominate the political process.

Interestingly, President Tibuhaburwa Museveni had the words Patriotic and Salvation at heart and in his political vocabulary and politico-military struggles for power. His original rebel group was called Front for National Salvation (FRONASA). This was succeeded by the formation of Uganda Patriotic Movement (UPM), thanks to Dr Joshua Mugenyi and Dr Ezra Suruma, who agreed to dissolve their Uganda Nationalist Movement (UNM) in favour of forming UPM to contest the 1980 elections with Yoweri Tibuhaburwa Museveni as its presidential candidate.

Following the dismal performance of UPM and himself in the 1980 elections, Yoweri Tibuhaburwa Museveni then formed the Peoples Patriotic Army (PPA), which later coalesced with former Ugandan President Prof Yusuf Kironde Lule’s Freedom Fighters of Uganda (FFU) to form the National Resistance Movement (NRM) and its military wing, the National Resistance Army (NRA), to destabilise Apollo Milton Obote’s nascent regime; a feat that continued from 1981 to 1985, when the Tito Okello junta overthrew Obote’s government.

President Tibuhaburwa Museveni still loves the words “Movement” and “Patriotism” and recently allowed his son to form the Patriotic League of Uganda (PLU) within NRM to influence the political space as if it was an anti-NRM party. He subsequently selected some top leaders of PLU to be members of his cabinet, while others continued to tick as top members of NRM and Members of Parliament. He then praised his son for his patriotism and being a forthright patriotic leader in Uganda.

Both Uganda and Chad have had perennial rulers in the names of Yoweri Tibuhaburwa Museveni and Idriss Déby Itno respectively. The former has ruled Uganda continuously from 1986 to the present, while the former ruled Chad from 1991 to 2021when he was shot dead by his own sons.

Both Yoweri Tibuhaburwa Museveni of Uganda and Idriss Deby of Chad have a few similarities: They both loved power to the extent of excluding others from accessing it so long as they ruled; relied heavily on their armies, which they personalised; organised regular elections not to lose power to others, but simply to show that elective politics worked to prove their popularity; preferred politicomilitary politics to civilian politics and ensured that soldiers were in every civic space as dominants; and believed everything started with themselves and ended with themselves. The military is a t the centre of the electoral process.

In Chad, when Idriss Itno showed no sign of relinquishing power, and used trickery to separately promise two of his children and one child of a brother that he was to succeed him, in the spirit of hereditary politics, he had organised elections every five years, ostensibly to get the people’s approval, but whether people elected him or not, he had multiple ways of ensuring that when the results were declared he emerged as the victorious one.

Like President Tibuhaburwa Museveni in Uganda, he made sure that the military was at the centre of the electoral process right from production of ballot papers, to the ballot boxes, to polling stations, to tallying points and to the final declaration of the results. Of course, this is an electoral fuss but it worked for Idriss Deby and continues to work for President Tibuhaburwa Museveni as well.

Chad has not been so stable since the death of Idriss Itno. Incumbent transitional president Mahamat Déby, the son of Idriss Déby, has decided to run for a full term as the candidate of his fallen father’s political party, the Patriotic Salvation Movement (PSM). Potentially if he wins, which is most likely, he will extend the 33 years of rule by the Déby family (three of the years is the period he himself has been in power). Presidential elections were held on May 6, 2024, with a second round, if necessary, to take place on 22 June 2024. The elections follow a constitutional referendum held on 17 December 2023, following the death of President Idriss Déby in 2021.

There is every likelihood that Mahamat Deby will win the election and go on to entrench deceptive democracy and further perfect politicomilitary politics in Chad.

It will be remembered that Idriss Itno fast-tracked the promotion of his son, now the ruler of Chad, Mahamat Deby, through the army ranks, the same way President Tibuhaburwa Museveni fast-tracked the promotion of his son, Muhoozi Kainerugaba, through the ranks up to the rank of general and, in fact, recently named him the Chief of Defence Forces (CDF), thereby making him the topmost commander in the Uganda Peoples Defense Forces (UPDF).

In Uganda, where elections have been held regularly every five years since 1996 when President Tibuhaburwa Museveni Ugandans and the whole world that he was no longer in the army. Political activity is already on for the 2026 general election. All indications are that President Tibuhaburwa Museveni wants to be the President of Uganda beyond 2026 for an extra 5 years (7 years if Nobert Mao succeeds in causing a constitutional change to that effect).

This will mean that President Tibuhaburwa Museveni will have ruled the country as long as his political mentor, Mammuar Gaddafi, ruled Libya – 42 years.  Way back in history, during his visit to Uganda, Gaddafi told President Tibuhaburwa Museveni never to consider retiring because revolutionaries don’t retire. This is true. Most revolutionaries never leave power willingly. They are forced out. Gaddafi is a good example. He was shot out of power.

It is abundantly clear ghat President Tibuhaburwa Museveni has been strategising to get elected again in 2026, just like Chad’s Mahamat Deby ensured he was on the ballot paper on May 6, 2024. We hear that the President will not be elected by all the people of Uganda, but by the Parliament of Uganda, who are easily manipulated to toe the line. Parliament is dominated in terms of numbers by members of the ruling party.

The president is using leader of the Democratic Party (DP), Nobert Mao, whom he appointed minister of justice and constitutionals affairs, to tinkle with the Uganda Constitution 1995 and make the election of the president of Uganda a primary function of parliament. When Nobert Mao succeeds in doing what the president desires, then Uganda will be firmly on course to laying the foundation for hereditary politics and dynastic rule in Uganda well into the 21st century.

Meaningful and effective democratisation will be a very distant possibility in Uganda. Uganda will be just a source of raw materials for foreigners. Development, transformation and progress will continue to be empty talk. Nobert Mao will have done exactly what Godfrey Binaisa, as attorney-general, did for President Apollo Milton Obote: usher in a new political dispensation.

However, while Obote’s was republican rule and governance, Museveni’s will be dynastic rule and governance by a family. It will make nonsense of the constitutional provisions that power belongs to the people and Uganda is a presidential republic in which the President is the head of state and the prime minister is the head of government business. Uganda will be a dynasty with a line of hereditary rulers at the top level of leadership and governance. President and Prime Minister will be just deceptive if they coexist The President will rule like a monarch or emperor just like Baptiste Bokassa did in the Central African Republic (CAR). It will be remembered that Bokassa, on 4th December 1977 the MESSAN Congress instituted a new constitution that transformed the republic into the Central African Empire (CAE), with himself as “His Imperial Majesty” Bokassa I. His formal coronation took place on 4 December 1977 at 10:43am. Oh Uganda!

• A Tell report / By Prof Oweyegha-Afunaduula, a former professor in the Department of Environmental Sciences of the Makerere University, Uganda