Ugandans Divided on Museveni’s Legacy as Analysts Clash Over Corruption, Service Delivery, and Governance
KAMPALA, Uganda — A heated debate on UBC’s Behind the Headlines has revealed sharp divisions over President Yoweri Museveni’s four-decade rule, with commentators offering contrasting assessments of his leadership, particularly regarding corruption, bureaucratic inertia, and the government’s ability to deliver services.
The discussion, featuring political analyst Andrew Mwenda, Hon. Medard Lubega Ssegona, Justine Nameere, and Prof. Sarah Ssali, underscored growing frustration among Ugandans over service delivery even as some defenders point to the president’s initial recovery of a nation “in ruins.”
Corruption and Procurement Reform
Justine Nameere set the tone by arguing that fighting corruption requires fundamental structural changes. “If we are to fight corruption, we must simplify procurement and governance systems,” she said, adding that “every extra signature creates another opportunity for bribery.” Nameere called for digitizing most government processes and insisted on “greater transparency in how government operates.”
Service Delivery as the Benchmark
Prof. Sarah Ssali noted that service delivery has become the dominant concern among citizens. “From the conversations I have had, everyone is talking about service delivery,” she observed. “If that is the key indicator, then I believe the next Parliament is going to focus heavily on improving service delivery.”
Divergent Views on Museveni’s Record
Nameere offered a measured defense of the president, arguing that fair judgment requires context. “When Museveni took power, the country was in ruins. He started from a negative position, not even the bare minimum,” she said. “If people are to judge his leadership fairly, it should be within the last two or three terms, not the 40 years.”
Hon. Medard Lubega Ssegona rejected that framing entirely. “I do not want to judge him entirely by the past. But if I have to, then he has miserably failed,” Ssegona said, suggesting that while some failures “may be inherent and internal, another part could be the people surrounding him.”
Ssegona also questioned the credibility of Museveni’s repeated pledges. “This is now the ninth time he is making an undertaking or pledge to Ugandans. If, in your judgment, you believe he has been scoring 80 or 90 percent, then you are right to trust him again this time.”
‘Bureaucratic Inertia’ and Incompetence
Andrew Mwenda delivered some of the sharpest criticism, pointing to systemic governance failures. “The challenge Museveni has faced, and where I think he has exhibited abysmal performance, is that he has allowed bureaucratic inertia to take control of his vision,” Mwenda said. “Our government is built around accountability to procedure rather than results.”
On Uganda’s economic ambitions, Mwenda was equally blunt. “To multiply a country’s economy tenfold, you need at least energy and infrastructure. In each of those critical areas, the performance of the Ugandan state is characterized by gross incompetence. I do not see how we can achieve that.”
The Gap Between Words and Action
Mwenda concluded with a personal observation about the president’s leadership style. “One thing I have learnt from President Museveni over the years is that there is often a huge gap between what he says and what he does. When speaking, he is inspiring. When acting, it can be frustrating.”
As Uganda looks toward the next parliamentary session, the panel’s divisions reflect a national conversation increasingly focused not on past recovery but on present delivery—and whether the current system can overcome its own inertia to meet citizens’ demands.
About The Author
