{UAH} HOW THE KY/UPC BROKEN AGREEMENT IS A TEACHING MOMENT FOR BAGANDA AND UPC.

In particular, the neo-traditionalists from Buganda considered political parties to be 

enemies of the kingship, and feared that the Kabaka and the chiefs would loose power 

if regular elections were held (Kasfir 1976:115). Prior to independence, the Buganda 

kingdom therefore became more resolute in the demands for self-determination to the 

extent that it was proposed that either the Kabaka would become the Head of State of 

Uganda after independence, or Buganda would secede (Rukooko 2001:10). 

Consequently, the kingdom boycotted the independence elections and as a result only 

3% of the population in Buganda voted (Rukooko 2001:10). 

 

Considering the lack of political parties with national support and the focus on 

questions relating only to Buganda, the sub-national character of politics was 

confirmed in the period leading up to independence. The lack of focus on the national 

level can partly be explained by the nature of the colonial policy, which emphasized, 

rather than removed, differences. The districts, the units for local government in the 

protectorate, had been developed as if they were independent of each other since this 

was considered the easiest way for the British to maintain control in the protectorate 

(Karugire 1996:27). This particularly affected Buganda where people felt attached to 

Buganda and showed little loyalty to Uganda as a nation. 

 

The Independence Constitution of 1962 further confirmed the development of 

sectarianism. The fundamental constitutional problems were to decide what form of 

government would be suitable for an independent Uganda, and who should be the 

head of state. The various kingdoms had more or less been governed as autonomous 

areas, and it was therefore necessary to create a national system presided over by a 

universally accepted head of state (Odongo 2000:38). As a result, the Independence 

Constitution provided for a semi-federal system. Buganda achieved a full federal 

status, while the kingdoms of Ankole, Bunyoro, Toro, and the territory of Busoga 

were granted a semi-federal status (Constitution 1962:Article 2). The rest of the 

districts were accorded a unitary status with the central government. The 

Independence Constitution accordingly consisted of elements of unitarism, federalism 

and semi-federalism, considered as a challenging foundation for a peaceful and united 

nation (Mutibwa 1992:25). In this sense, the constitution certainly supported the idea 

of Buganda as a strong unit within Uganda. 

 

In 1963 the Independence Constitution was amended to provide for a constitutional 

president of Uganda as head of state and for a vice-president. Since the head of state 

could not be a commoner or a politician, the election was limited to hereditary rulers 

and constitutional heads of districts (Mutibwa 1990:14). This amendment was in line 

with demands from Baganda who did not accept a superior Prime Minister over the 

Kabaka and other hereditary leaders (Odongo 2000:38). The first elected ceremonial 

president was the king of Buganda, Mutesa II, while another traditional ruler became 

vice president. Accordingly, Mutesa II functioned as king for Buganda, and President 

for the nation Uganda. In the following years the relationship between the President 

and the Prime Minister caused considerable antagonism, and eventually led to the, you guessed, article 118.

Viele GruBe

Robukui