{UAH} LESSONS FROM TANZANIA ELECTIONS: the missing link for theopposition in Tanzania and Uganda is lack of adequate organizational depth.
|
9:49 AM |
No comments |
By Augustine Ruzindana
LESSONS FROM TANZANIA ELECTIONS: the missing link for the opposition in Tanzania and Uganda is lack of adequate organizational depth.
"Magufuli ashinda kwa kishindo" literally meaning "Magufuli has won with a big win) with 82.933% (12.5m) of the votes cast. Turn up was fairly low, 15.1m out of 29.7m registered voters and conventional wisdom observes that a low turnout in elections is always in favour of the status quo. The main opposition party Chadema has 1MP, another party also 1MP and other opposition parties were wiped out. In Zanzibar the main opposition candidate, Maalim Seif Sharif got just 19.8% of the votes cast whereas in past elections CCM and the opposition were always neck and neck and the opposition always won in Pemba island. The system of special seats, 40% of Parliament, may eventually raise opposition presence in Parliament but Tanzania has become virtually become a one party state again.
This should give some powerful lessons to participants in the elections in Uganda. There were 15 political parties separately participating in the elections and their almost 3m votes have not been translated into seats. Previously there were opposition seats in Zanzibar, Kilimanjaro, Arusha, Kigoma, Dar es Salaam and a few other places but there are none now. What happened in Tanzania can happen in Uganda I.e that once the voters come to the conclusion that it's a waste of time to vote for the opposition which cannot effect change or serve their interests, then they abandon the effort for change. For the opposition to be attractive they must show that they have a realistic chance of winning. If this is clearly not possible, voters not supporting the status quo stay away. Some of those in support of the status quo also stay away knowing that their side will win whether they vote or not.
The collective opposition strategy in Uganda is clearly a losing one. In areas like Kampala and Wakiso where they could register Parliamentary wins, they have multiple strong candidates against each other. In many constituencies candidates not selected in the party selection process have stood as independents against single ruling party candidates. At the presidential level there are about five opposition candidates with fairly established national profiles but none with adequate nation wide organizational depth. If they could come together the collective formation could become formidable but individually, often sniping at each other in addition to fighting their common opponent, they become emasculated.
In Tanzania there were over 80000 polling stations and each of the opposition 14 parties had to raise agents for the presidential, parliamentary and local government candidates and they could not. In Uganda there are around 35000 polling stations and each presidential candidate must have 2 agents at all of them. Other candidates, parliamentary and local government, must have agents at all polling stations in their respective constituencies. All agents on polling day must be provided with refreshments and food and in most cases a monetary allowance. This requires financial capacity and organizational depth, which largely do not exist.
The opposition weakness is not mainly because of lack of support, it is mainly organizational lack of depth up to the voter level, which is the level that matters. So on polling day most presidential candidates will not be able to collect their copies of polling station declaration results forms because they won't have agents on all of them. Without organizational depth supporters cannot be mobilized to turn up, thus the high numbers that don't turn up. Most parties depend on volunteer efforts but this must be organized and where volunteer organizational effort stops that is where party or candidate support will generally stop.
There are indeed rigging and official biased actions that take place but these mainly take place where parties or candidates are weak or not present at all. For example if there are alert agents, voters who don't turn up cannot be voted for. Or actual polling station results cannot be altered at tallying levels if all polling station results declaration forms have been collected and the agents at the tallying centers have them. So the issue of organizational depth must be addressed. Well and good if many candidates have the necessary depth but if adequate depth is lacking then it would be advisable for candidates on the same side to combine efforts and resources. There is still time for corrective action to be taken but otherwise a foregone conclusion may be inevitable.
--
-- LESSONS FROM TANZANIA ELECTIONS: the missing link for the opposition in Tanzania and Uganda is lack of adequate organizational depth.
"Magufuli ashinda kwa kishindo" literally meaning "Magufuli has won with a big win) with 82.933% (12.5m) of the votes cast. Turn up was fairly low, 15.1m out of 29.7m registered voters and conventional wisdom observes that a low turnout in elections is always in favour of the status quo. The main opposition party Chadema has 1MP, another party also 1MP and other opposition parties were wiped out. In Zanzibar the main opposition candidate, Maalim Seif Sharif got just 19.8% of the votes cast whereas in past elections CCM and the opposition were always neck and neck and the opposition always won in Pemba island. The system of special seats, 40% of Parliament, may eventually raise opposition presence in Parliament but Tanzania has become virtually become a one party state again.
This should give some powerful lessons to participants in the elections in Uganda. There were 15 political parties separately participating in the elections and their almost 3m votes have not been translated into seats. Previously there were opposition seats in Zanzibar, Kilimanjaro, Arusha, Kigoma, Dar es Salaam and a few other places but there are none now. What happened in Tanzania can happen in Uganda I.e that once the voters come to the conclusion that it's a waste of time to vote for the opposition which cannot effect change or serve their interests, then they abandon the effort for change. For the opposition to be attractive they must show that they have a realistic chance of winning. If this is clearly not possible, voters not supporting the status quo stay away. Some of those in support of the status quo also stay away knowing that their side will win whether they vote or not.
The collective opposition strategy in Uganda is clearly a losing one. In areas like Kampala and Wakiso where they could register Parliamentary wins, they have multiple strong candidates against each other. In many constituencies candidates not selected in the party selection process have stood as independents against single ruling party candidates. At the presidential level there are about five opposition candidates with fairly established national profiles but none with adequate nation wide organizational depth. If they could come together the collective formation could become formidable but individually, often sniping at each other in addition to fighting their common opponent, they become emasculated.
In Tanzania there were over 80000 polling stations and each of the opposition 14 parties had to raise agents for the presidential, parliamentary and local government candidates and they could not. In Uganda there are around 35000 polling stations and each presidential candidate must have 2 agents at all of them. Other candidates, parliamentary and local government, must have agents at all polling stations in their respective constituencies. All agents on polling day must be provided with refreshments and food and in most cases a monetary allowance. This requires financial capacity and organizational depth, which largely do not exist.
The opposition weakness is not mainly because of lack of support, it is mainly organizational lack of depth up to the voter level, which is the level that matters. So on polling day most presidential candidates will not be able to collect their copies of polling station declaration results forms because they won't have agents on all of them. Without organizational depth supporters cannot be mobilized to turn up, thus the high numbers that don't turn up. Most parties depend on volunteer efforts but this must be organized and where volunteer organizational effort stops that is where party or candidate support will generally stop.
There are indeed rigging and official biased actions that take place but these mainly take place where parties or candidates are weak or not present at all. For example if there are alert agents, voters who don't turn up cannot be voted for. Or actual polling station results cannot be altered at tallying levels if all polling station results declaration forms have been collected and the agents at the tallying centers have them. So the issue of organizational depth must be addressed. Well and good if many candidates have the necessary depth but if adequate depth is lacking then it would be advisable for candidates on the same side to combine efforts and resources. There is still time for corrective action to be taken but otherwise a foregone conclusion may be inevitable.
--
H.OGWAPITI
-----------------------------------------------------
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
---Theodore Roosevelt
-----------------------------------------------------
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
---Theodore Roosevelt
Disclaimer:Everyone posting to this Forum bears the sole responsibility for any legal consequences of his or her postings, and hence statements and facts must be presented responsibly. Your continued membership signifies that you agree to this disclaimer and pledge to abide by our Rules and Guidelines.To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ugandans-at-heart+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ugandans at Heart (UAH) Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ugandans-at-heart+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ugandans-at-heart/CAOxg445_ULaXPGZEeg8W7cPd8ETgckCxOLdFmx4bC74P4CKVRA%40mail.gmail.com.
0 comments:
Post a Comment