Buganda’s Political Hospitality Should Not Be Taken for Granted

Call for Fairness in Uganda’s Democracy
By Alexander Luyima | Hoima Post

In Uganda’s political landscape, Buganda continues to be held to a different standard one that demands unconditional openness while denying its people the same agency afforded to other regions. When Baganda assert their right to indigenous representation, they are swiftly labeled “tribalists.” Yet, when other regions prioritize their own, it is celebrated as empowerment. This glaring double standard undermines national unity and exposes deep-seated biases in Uganda’s democracy.

The 2001 Mbarara Municipality parliamentary election serves as a stark example. Despite President Museveni’s full backing, NRM’s Ngoma Ngime was resoundingly defeated by Winnie Byanyima, a daughter of the soil. The people of Mbarara were praised for choosing a leader who understood their culture and aspirations. No one accused them of tribalism.

Fast forward to Buganda: when Baganda advocate for leaders deeply rooted in their traditions such as those aligned with the Buganda Kingdom’s values they are met with accusations of sectarianism. Political analyst Dr. Fredrick Golooba-Mutebi observes:

> “The selective outrage reveals a troubling narrative that Buganda’s political choices are scrutinized more harshly than those of other regions. This isn’t about exclusion; it’s about fair representation.”

As the seat of Uganda’s capital, Kampala, Buganda has long been a melting pot where Ugandans from all regions thrive economically and politically. Yet, this generosity is increasingly exploited.

Hon. Medard Sseggona (Busiro County East, DP) argues:

> “Buganda’s openness should not be mistaken for surrender. We welcome all, but we also have the right to demand leaders who understand our history, our kingdom, and our people’s needs.”

A persistent falsehood used to discredit Buganda is the claim that Kabaka Mwanga “sold Uganda to the British.” Historian Prof. Samwiri Lwanga-Lunyiigo refutes this:

> “The 1900 Buganda Agreement was not a voluntary transaction, it was imposed under colonial coercion. Kabaka Mwanga resisted and was exiled. To blame Baganda for colonialism is not just wrong, it’s a deliberate distortion to justify marginalization.”

If Ugandans seek modern-day colonial collaborators, they need look no further than State House. Under President Museveni’s 38-year rule, Uganda has witnessed:

Mass land grabs, such as the Luweero and Mubende evictions.

Privatization of national assets, including UMEME and Uganda Railways.

Military alliances prioritizing foreign interests, such as Uganda’s involvement in South Sudan and the DRC.

Calls for a Buganda Parliamentary Caucus one accountable to the Baganda are not divisive. They are a democratic necessity. Other regions have similar caucuses:

Acholi Parliamentary Group

West Nile Parliamentary Association

Ankole Parliamentary Forum

Why is Buganda’s demand treated differently?

Hon. Betty Nambooze (Mukono Municipality, NUP) states:

> “When Ankole or West Nile MPs unite for their people, it’s called advocacy. When we do it, it’s called tribalism. This hypocrisy must end.”

Uganda must move beyond selective moralism. What is permissible in Mbarara, Gulu, or Arua must be equally acceptable in Mengo, Masaka, or Entebbe. Respecting Buganda’s political voice is not a threat to national unity, it is its foundation.

As Kabaka Ronald Muwenda Mutebi II has emphasized:

> “A nation that respects all its parts is a nation that thrives.”

Uganda’s future depends on fairness. The time for double standards is over.