Senior Presidential Press Secretary Mr. Don Wanyama is worried that Ugandans no longer value the traditional ways of settling matters but rather front capitalistic ideology of “either eat or be eaten.”
He is optimistic that employing such doctrines only damages the country’s moral fabric instead of focusing on building consensus as a nation.
The President’s spokesperson was commenting on a fight at Uganda Telecom Limited (UTL) involving two powerful government officials, Hon Evelyn Anite and URSB Head Bemanya Twebaze, a fight that has since sucked into the public.
State Minister for Investment Ms. Anite in the recent past ordered the sacking of an Administrator General, Mr. Bemanya who was installed by court to source for an investor and recapitalize an already collapsing UTL.
The two according to various reports disagreed on the kind of investors who had expressed interest to invest in UTL.
Whereas Ms. Anite who according to the public wields a lot of powers instructed two the Attorney General to inform court of her decision to fire Bemanya.
But the Attorney General responded otherwise notifying Anite that her decision was unlawful.
Uncontended Anite wrote to the President supporting her position to relieve Bemanya of his duties.
But shockingly the President on Wednesday issued a letter to Justice Minister Kahinda Otafiire and completely ignored Anite neither did he (President) copy Anite in.
Don Wanyama however, made completely different comments insisting that Ugandans must maintain the African ways of solving a matter by holding talks instead of “chest-thumping, declaring yourself victor and the other viewpoint a loser.
Below is Wanyama’s Commentary
The debate on UTL has now shifted to which wing apparently is winning. If you ask me, I actually do not know who is victor and who is vanquished.
Instead, what I am thinking about is the death of consensus. We have been badly bitten by the Capitalist bug whose mantra is you either eat or get eaten. In the African systems of old, you rarely found these situations of chest-thumping, declaring yourself victor and the other viewpoint a loser.
There existed the “Under the Big Tree” democracy for example. Here, communities usually congregated under a big village tree and debated on key issues of the day.
Views would be as varied as the people congregated but under the skillful guidance of mainly elders, positions would be arrived at that took care of nearly each one’s interests.
But even those whose interests were not taken into consideration, it would be abundantly clear why the gathering had rejected their viewpoints. It was done in such a way that it did not come off as defeat. These were all-encompassing, all-caring, all-embracing societies. Everyone left the village gathering happy and contented.
When, then, did the rain begin to beat us? Where did this African spirit of all-winners, no-losers get replaced with this man-eat-man mentality? What happened to our Africanness?
Do some of you now understand why some of us bemoan the death of the Movement System? It is perhaps what came closest to the African spirit of old in our contemporary times.
