By Cato N. Lund
Posted
Monday, February 1
2016 at
02:00
In Summary
In countries where political opinion polls in the shape of monthly “barometers” have been around for decades, people accept them as a more or less scientific assessment of the public mood.
After following the 2001 election at a distance, I had a close-up of the 2006 and 2011 elections. Now I am experiencing the 2016 version. There has not been much difference, voters have been consistently bribed.
About three quarters of the Ugandan population are below 30 years of age. This means a substantial part of the voters who are actually going to vote, never has known any other president than the incumbent and perceive him as the Father of the Nation. You cannot vote out your father.
About four out of five Ugandans live in the villages where going against leaders and elders is disrespectful and against the norms. This obviously plays into the hands of any incumbent, no vote rigging is necessary to secure a majority vote for him or her.
Nevertheless, rigging has happened before and is going to happen again. To reduce the need for crude methods, soap, sugar and coins will be distributed as in previous elections. Observers will marvel at the modest price of a Ugandan vote. Even then, overzealous cadres will want to save the incumbent from an embarrassing re-run; he needs to win with at least 50 per cent plus one. It would probably happen in any case, but some nervous supporters of the incumbent will try “to make sure”.
In previous elections, I have been happy not to be a Ugandan voter because I would be at a loss when I should decide whom to vote for. This time however, after the TV-performances of candidates Benon Biraaro and Abed Bwanika, I would have two viable alternatives. Both have a coherent programme for development of Uganda, not merely an economic growth that benefits few and does not initiate a true development. Unfortunately, the female candidate appeared too shallow, the former prime minister is co-responsible for everything that has gone wrong and the retired colonel would be more of the same.
The empty seat hopes that his non-appearance will show that he represents an elevated level compared to the insignificant “high school students” who were participating. Alas, the interpretation that he is a coward, shunning a situation where he would not be in complete control, is closer at hand.
It might not be very important, however; the number of TV-viewers is limited and readers of newspaper comments do hardly represent a larger audience. The important media are the FM radios and their owners and editors know very well where the power to revoke their licences resides. No external censorship is required; they take well care of it themselves.
The run-up to any modern election is incomplete without opinion polls. They were not very prominent five and 10 years ago. This time tends to be different. In countries where political opinion polls in the shape of monthly “barometers” have been around for decades, people accept them as a more or less scientific assessment of the public mood. Not so in Uganda. Whoever does not like the numbers coming out of the polling normally dismisses them as doctored by opponents; he has his own figures, which he refuses to disclose, showing that the picture is quite different, rather the opposite of what the pollsters publish.
So instead of taking poll results as the important sources of information they are, conflicting figures are used to hit each other with. It’s quite immature, fruitless and counterproductive. The figures, especially the unpleasant ones, should rather be used as correctives and inspire a positive campaign, that is actually what opinion polls are for.
Mr Lund is a visiting senior lecturer, Department of Architecture and Physical Planning- Makerere University.
catonlund@gmail.comu
0 comments:
Post a Comment