The EFF is Prioritizing South Africans: Pan-Africanism is bigger than the Politics of "Abahambe"

 

BM TV AFRICA | OPINION & ANALYSIS

THE EFF IS PRIORITISING SOUTH AFRICANS: PAN-AFRICANISM IS BIGGER THAN THE POLITICS OF "ABAHAMBE"

There is something fundamentally dishonest about the argument that the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) are not prioritising South Africans simply because they refuse to embrace the politics of "Abahambe".

Since the 2024 general elections, the EFF has continued to raise and fight for issues that directly affect the daily lives of ordinary South Africans. Yet, strangely, these contributions are often overlooked by those who measure political commitment through slogans, immigration rhetoric and populist performances rather than legislative action and economic policy.

Let us examine the record.

1. Fighting against VAT increases

When the government proposed increasing VAT, the EFF opposed the move, arguing that it would place an additional burden on already struggling households, particularly the poor and working class. The party joined the legal challenge against the proposed increase, which was subsequently abandoned.

This was not an abstract ideological debate. VAT affects the food people buy, the clothes they wear and the basic necessities they need to survive. It was a direct fight over the cost of living.

2. Fighting against the expiry of mobile data

The EFF also challenged telecommunications companies over the expiry of unused prepaid data and airtime.

Its argument was straightforward: people pay for data with their hard-earned money, so why should telecommunications companies simply confiscate what consumers have purchased because a validity period has expired?

The party raised the issue in Parliament, engaged telecommunications companies and called on ICASA to change the regulations.

In January 2026, ICASA's regulatory changes provided for the rollover of unused prepaid data and airtime. The EFF welcomed this development, although the broader regulatory process involved other institutions and stakeholders.

This is an issue that affects students, unemployed graduates, job seekers, small businesses and millions of ordinary South Africans. Access to data is access to information, education and economic opportunity.

3. The Insourcing Bill: Defending workers

In August 2025, the EFF formally introduced its Insourcing Bill in Parliament.

The proposed legislation seeks to compel government departments and state institutions to insource essential services rather than continuously outsourcing them to private contractors.

Think about the thousands of security guards, cleaners, maintenance workers and other employees who work in government buildings but remain trapped in poorly paid, insecure employment through outsourcing arrangements.

The EFF argues that insourcing would improve workers' conditions, strengthen public institutions, retain skills and reduce the opportunities for inflated tender contracts.

Whether one agrees with every provision of the Bill or not, it is difficult to argue that addressing worker exploitation is somehow not prioritising South Africans.

4. The Student Debt Relief Bill: Defending the future of young people

In February 2025, the EFF's Student Debt Relief Bill was officially gazetted for public comment.

The proposal seeks to address the burden of historical student debt that prevents academically deserving students from receiving their qualifications, despite having completed their studies.

Imagine completing your degree, passing every examination and fulfilling every academic requirement, only to have your future held hostage because you cannot settle outstanding university fees.

How does a country expect to develop its professionals, engineers, teachers, doctors and entrepreneurs while allowing financial barriers to keep qualified young people out of the economy?

This is not simply a student issue. It is a national development issue.

PAN-AFRICANISM IS NOT THE ENEMY OF SOUTH AFRICANS

This brings us to a much bigger ideological question.

Can one genuinely claim to defend South Africans while promoting hostility towards other Africans?

Pan-Africanism does not demand that South Africa surrender its sovereignty, ignore illegal immigration or abandon the responsibility to manage its borders. A sovereign country has every right to enforce its immigration laws.

However, Pan-Africanism rejects the dangerous idea that ordinary Africans are each other's enemies.

It recognises that the economic struggles confronting South Africans cannot be separated from the broader history of colonialism, apartheid, economic exploitation and the unequal development of the African continent.

South Africa's economic problems are not caused simply by the presence of other Africans. Unemployment, inequality, corruption, poor economic management, concentrated ownership and the failure to create sufficient economic opportunities require serious political and economic solutions.

Blaming an ordinary African migrant for the failures of government is an easy political shortcut. It is much harder to confront the economic structures that continue to impoverish millions of people.

The EFF's Pan-Africanist position is rooted in the understanding that African liberation cannot be complete while Africans remain divided, economically dependent and politically vulnerable to exploitation.

THE REAL TEST OF POLITICAL LEADERSHIP

South Africans should judge political parties by more than their ability to produce catchy slogans or identify convenient enemies.

Ask what they are doing about the cost of living. Ask what they are doing about unemployment, student debt, workers' rights, access to education, telecommunications costs and economic exclusion.

Ask what legislation they are introducing and what policies they are fighting for.

The EFF may be criticised for its economic policies, political conduct, leadership decisions or parliamentary strategies. No political organisation should be above scrutiny.

But dismissing its contribution to ordinary South Africans simply because it refuses to sing "Abahambe" is intellectually dishonest.

You do not have to hate another African to love South Africa. You do not have to abandon Pan-Africanism to defend South African workers. And you certainly do not have to manufacture an enemy among the poor to demonstrate patriotism.

At BM TV Africa, we believe that genuine African liberation must be measured by economic justice, dignity, employment, education, sovereignty and the empowerment of ordinary people.

Pan-Africanism and the interests of South Africans are not mutually exclusive.

In fact, they should reinforce one another.

The question is not who can shout "Abahambe" the loudest. The question is who is prepared to confront the economic realities keeping ordinary South Africans poor.

That is where political accountability must begin.

UGANDAN GOV'T PROPOSES EXPANDING SALEH-BESIGYE TALKS INTO NATIONAL RECONCILIATION PROCESS.

 UGANDAN GOV'T PROPOSES EXPANDING SALEH-BESIGYE TALKS INTO NATIONAL RECONCILIATION PROCESS.

The government of Uganda is considering expanding discussions involving General Salim Saleh and opposition leader Dr. Kizza Besigye into a broader national reconciliation process to address longstanding political divisions following the January 2026 general elections. ICT Minister Justine Lumumba stated that the ongoing talks are intended to scale up to involve additional political actors, historical figures, and civil society members.

Key discussion topics include power-sharing in top government positions, electoral reforms, the torture and disappearance of opposition activists, the return of exiled figures, and human rights violations. The government suggests utilizing existing frameworks like the Inter-Party Organisation for Dialogue (IPOD) and the National Consultative Forum (NCF) to guide the broader engagement. Deputy Speaker Thomas Tayebwa has proposed a cross-party reconciliation team of government, opposition, and Independent MPs to resolve political hostilities within parliament.

IRGC warns Iranian retaliation will target enemy leaders directly if commanders are struck

—................................

An adviser to the commander-in-chief of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has warned that Tehran will abandon proportional responses and directly target top "enemy leaders" should Iranian military commanders or political leadership come under attack in any renewed military escalation. "If they target our commanders and leaders this time, they should expect their own commanders and leaders to be killed," Fars News Agency quoted IRGC adviser Mohammad Moghadamfar as saying. Emphasizing a fundamental shift in Tehran's strategic doctrine, Moghadamfar stated that future military retaliations will no longer adhere to measured or reciprocal frameworks: "Our responses will no longer be reciprocal or proportional. We will go beyond the point of attack and set their assets ablaze, regardless of time or place." The stern military warning comes amid sustained regional volatility following the direct US-Israeli military campaign launched against Iran on 28 February, which triggered extensive Iranian missile barrages against Israeli military hubs and US occupation bases prior to an April ceasefire. Implementation of a subsequent 18 June maritime navigation agreement governing the Strait of Hormuz remains stalled due to ongoing disputes over security protocols and foreign military presence.

THE EVIL GENIUS OF MUSEVENI'S REGIONAL BALANCE

  

For more than 40 years, Yoweri Kaguta Museveni has ruled Uganda. His long tenure will undoubtedly be studied for generations by political scientists, historians and students of African politics. He is a politician whose public statements, political manoeuvres and shifting positions have left many observers struggling to understand where his real convictions lie.

Museveni is, in many ways, a two-faced political operator. Once you begin to understand his political hypocrisy and contradictions, you may find yourself in one of three positions: hating him for life, abandoning any attempt to understand him, or admiring him even more for his extraordinary ability to navigate the political landscape.

Former Ugandan president Milton Obote, who came to know Museveni politically, is widely credited with describing him as:

"Museveni is a pathological liar who only tells the truth by accident."

The expression is often accompanied by an illustration of Museveni's political unpredictability: when he says he is going to Masaka, you had better know that he might actually be heading to Jinja.

Whether one agrees with Obote's assessment or not, those who have followed Museveni's political career closely will recognise the pattern of contradictions, reversals and carefully calculated political positions that have characterised his leadership.

THE POLITICS OF PROMISES AND CONVENIENCE

When Yoweri Kaguta Museveni seized power in January 1986, he made statements suggesting that his government would not remain in power indefinitely.

He reportedly promised to rule for only four years, according to retrospective reporting by Uganda's Daily Monitor.

More importantly, in his political writings around 1986, Museveni criticised African leaders who overstayed in power, famously declaring:

"The problem of Africa in general and Uganda in particular is not the people, but leaders who want to overstay in power."

These were powerful words from a man who would eventually become one of Africa's longest-serving presidents.

But what happened to those principles?

As the years progressed, the political philosophy that Museveni had presented in his early years in power gradually gave way to a different argument. Constitutional restrictions, which had previously been part of Uganda's political framework, became obstacles that his government sought to remove.

In 2005, Museveni supported the removal of presidential term limits. He publicly praised Members of Parliament who voted in favour of the constitutional amendment.

According to reports, he described the term-limit restriction as:

"A lock that prevented me from leading the people of Uganda."

He also argued that term limits had been wrongly included in the Constitution.

In July 2005, he maintained that the people, rather than constitutional restrictions, should determine who leads Uganda through regular elections.

But there was another side to the story. Critics and political opponents alleged that some MPs had been financially induced or intimidated to support the amendment. Such allegations became part of the wider controversy surrounding the removal of term limits.

Museveni's argument was that voters should have the freedom to decide whether he remained in office. His opponents, however, questioned why a leader who had once criticised overstaying in power was now campaigning to remove the very constitutional provision designed to prevent it.

And that was not the end of the story.

THE AGE-LIMIT CONTRADICTION

If the removal of presidential term limits was not enough, Museveni would later preside over another constitutional controversy: the removal of the presidential age limit.

Under Article 102(b) of Uganda's Constitution, a presidential candidate had to be at least 35 years old and not more than 75 years old.

Museveni had previously expressed views suggesting that people above 75 were too old to occupy the presidency. His position on age and leadership would, however, become another subject of political controversy when the constitutional restriction threatened his own eligibility.

On 20 December 2017, Parliament passed the controversial constitutional amendment removing the presidential age limit.

The parliamentary proceedings were particularly dramatic. Security forces entered Parliament, and opposition MPs who resisted the amendment were forcibly removed from the chamber. The incident attracted widespread criticism and raised serious questions about parliamentary independence and the use of state security institutions in political disputes.

The amendment was subsequently signed into law by Museveni on 27 December 2017.

Once again, a constitutional restriction that had previously existed became something his government was determined to eliminate.

What does this tell us about Museveni?

It demonstrates a political style in which positions can change dramatically depending on the circumstances. What is presented as a fundamental principle today can become an inconvenience tomorrow. And when the political circumstances change, a new explanation is always available.

Whether he genuinely believes in a particular position or simply finds it politically useful at a given moment, the outcome is that his political messaging has repeatedly shifted without the kind of accountability that critics expect from a leader.

That, in many ways, is Museveni's politics: saying what is convenient today, then finding a political or constitutional justification for saying something entirely different tomorrow.

THE GENIUS OF REGIONAL BALANCE: HOW MUSEVENI MANAGES POWER

Now, let us turn to another important aspect of Museveni's political survival: regional balance and the management of Uganda's ethnic and political diversity.

Since the colonial period, one of Uganda's most persistent political challenges has been how to build a country in which all communities feel represented, included and equally entitled to participate in national affairs.

Uganda's political history provides important lessons about what happens when power becomes concentrated around particular regions or political groups.

During the colonial period, political and administrative arrangements contributed to regional inequalities and competing centres of influence. Under Kabaka Yekka politics, Buganda's interests occupied a central position in the political landscape. Under Milton Obote, northern political networks, particularly those associated with the Langi community, became influential in government. During Idi Amin's rule, military and political power became strongly associated with northern Uganda, particularly the West Nile region.

These arrangements, although different in character, contributed to perceptions of exclusion and political domination.

The concentration of power within particular communities created resentment among other groups. In some instances, such grievances contributed to political resistance, rebellions and the eventual collapse of governments.

Museveni appears to have understood one important lesson from this history: concentrating visible political power in one ethnic or regional group can become a government's greatest political weakness.

His approach has therefore been different.

Rather than allowing one community to dominate every visible political institution, he has developed a system in which people from different regions and ethnic backgrounds can occupy prominent government positions.

At first glance, this can appear to be an impressive model of national inclusion and regional balance.

But there is another dimension worth examining.

I would argue that Museveni's genius lies not merely in distributing political positions across Uganda's regions, but in understanding the difference between occupying power and actually exercising it.

Just like a magician who uses a smokescreen, what the audience sees on the surface may be very different from what is happening behind the scenes.

THE VISIBLE AND THE INVISIBLE CENTRES OF POWER

Consider the structure of government ministries.

A ministry typically has a political head, the minister, and an administrative head, the Permanent Secretary (PS).

The minister is the public face of the ministry. Ministers attend public functions, make announcements, defend government policies and answer political questions. They can be appointed, transferred, reshuffled or dismissed at the president's discretion.

The Permanent Secretary, on the other hand, is the senior administrative official responsible for overseeing the ministry's administration, financial management and implementation of government programmes, within the applicable legal framework.

This distinction creates an interesting political arrangement.

A minister can come from one region, while the Permanent Secretary comes from another. The public sees regional representation at the political level, but the administrative structure has its own centres of influence and authority.

This is where Museveni's approach to political management deserves closer examination.

The argument is that he has mastered the art of distributing visible political positions while retaining substantial presidential influence over the wider machinery of government.

A minister from one community may occupy an important political office, but that does not automatically translate into independent control over the ministry's administration, resources or long-term institutional direction.

The Permanent Secretary is not simply a presidential representative, and ministers and PSs have distinct legal responsibilities. Nevertheless, the balance between political leadership and administrative authority can create different levels of influence within government.

Consequently, regional representation in ministerial appointments does not, by itself, tell us who exercises the greatest influence over government decisions.

This is the distinction that must be examined when analysing Museveni's regional balancing strategy.

Take the example of Prime Minister Robinah Nabbanja. Her appointment placed a woman from the Busoga region in one of Uganda's most visible political positions. However, understanding the actual distribution of power requires looking beyond the identity and regional background of officeholders to examine their responsibilities, decision-making authority and institutional influence.

The central question is not simply who occupies the office, but who actually exercises power, who controls the resources, and who makes the decisions.

And that is where the deeper examination of Museveni's political system must begin.

Aber Kawas wins the New York State Senate, becoming the first Palestinian American elected to the state legislature.

 

HISTORIC VICTORY: ABER KAWAS BECOMES THE FIRST PALESTINIAN AMERICAN ELECTED TO NEW YORK'S STATE LEGISLATURE

NEW YORK, USA – November 4, 2026

Aber Kawas has made history after winning a seat in the New York State Senate, becoming the first Palestinian American elected to New York's state legislature.

Kawas, a Palestinian American community organiser from Queens, secured victory in the November 3 elections, marking a significant milestone for Palestinian and Muslim American political representation in the United States.

Her victory follows a successful Democratic primary campaign in June, where she defeated incumbent Assemblymember Steven Raga to secure the party's nomination for Senate District 12.

Backed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and progressive political organisations, Kawas campaigned on issues including affordable housing, workers' rights, healthcare, immigration reform and Palestinian rights.

Her election represents a historic moment for Palestinian Americans, demonstrating the growing presence of diverse communities in American political institutions.

Kawas is expected to take office in January 2027, where she will represent communities in Queens and participate in legislative decisions affecting millions of New Yorkers.

Her victory adds a new chapter to the history of minority representation in American politics.

PETE HEGSETH: THE FIRST POLITICAL CASUALTY OF TRUMP’S MIDTERM DEFEAT?

 PETE HEGSETH: THE FIRST POLITICAL CASUALTY OF TRUMP’S MIDTERM DEFEAT?

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth could become one of the biggest political casualties of the Republican Party’s 2026 midterm defeat. His controversial handling of the Iran war, which critics argue was driven by Netanyahu’s influence and a failure to adequately weigh America’s strategic interests, may have helped turn voters against Trump and his administration. His repeated removal of experienced generals and senior military officials has also raised serious questions about his judgment, leadership and politicization of the military. With reports of growing frustration among White House insiders and calls for personnel changes, Hegseth could become the administration’s first major casualty of the electoral backlash. As Democrats are poised to take control of both the US Senate and the US House of Representatives, he will face a much tougher battle: congressional investigations, subpoenas, public hearings and potentially impeachment proceedings. In many ways, Hegseth could become the face of a costly foreign-policy gamble that Republicans will struggle to defend.

Donald Trump's Republican Party has lost control of both chambers of the US Congress in the November 3, 2026 midterm elections.

 

TRUMP SUFFERS MAJOR POLITICAL DEFEAT AS DEMOCRATS SEIZE CONTROL OF BOTH CHAMBERS OF US CONGRESS

Washington, United States – November 4, 2026

US President Donald Trump has suffered a major political setback after the Democratic Party secured control of both chambers of the United States Congress following the November 3, 2026, midterm elections.

According to Associated Press projections and election reporting, Democrats have won control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, ending the Republican Party's control of Congress and delivering a significant blow to Trump's political influence in Washington.

The results represent one of the most consequential political defeats of Trump's presidency, exposing growing dissatisfaction among American voters and raising serious questions about the direction of his administration.

The Democratic victories reportedly extended into traditionally Republican strongholds, demonstrating the scale of the political shift. Issues including rising living costs, inflation, concerns about government corruption and the administration's handling of the war involving Iran featured prominently in voters' decisions.

For Trump, who placed himself at the centre of the Republican campaign and encouraged voters to treat the midterm elections as a referendum on his leadership, the outcome represents a serious rejection of his party's political agenda.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR TRUMP?

With Democrats controlling both the House and Senate, Trump's ability to push his legislative priorities through Congress will face significant obstacles.

Democratic lawmakers are expected to intensify congressional oversight of the administration, launch investigations into government policies and challenge several of Trump's major political decisions.

Control of the House also gives Democrats substantial influence over government spending legislation, while their Senate majority strengthens their position in debates over federal appointments and national policy.

Although Trump remains president and retains executive powers, including the ability to veto legislation, he will now have to govern without the support of a Republican-controlled Congress.

A NEW POLITICAL BATTLE BEGINS

The election results could reshape American politics during the final two years of Trump's current presidential term. Democrats now have an opportunity to challenge his administration more aggressively, while Republicans face the difficult task of rebuilding public confidence and reassessing their political strategy.

The defeat also sends a powerful message ahead of the 2028 presidential election, when both parties will compete for control of the White House.

For the Democratic Party, the victory represents an opportunity to regain political momentum and demonstrate that it can provide an effective alternative to Trump's leadership.

For Trump and the Republicans, however, the message from the ballot box is difficult to ignore: American voters have dramatically shifted the balance of power in Washington.

BM TV AFRICA will continue following developments in Washington as the new congressional leadership prepares to take shape.

Source: Associated Press (AP) and international election reporting.

 Ilhan Omar has won a fifth term representing Minnesota's 5th Congressional District, defeating Republican challenger John Nagel in the November 3, 2026, midterm elections. CBS News projected her victory, while Minnesota Public Radio and local election reporting confirmed the result.

The result is particularly notable because it comes amid an ongoing federal investigation into allegations concerning her immigration history, which Omar has denied. She has not been charged with a crime.

ILHAN OMAR WINS FIFTH CONGRESSIONAL TERM DESPITE FEDERAL INVESTIGATION INTO HER IMMIGRATION HISTORY

BM TV Africa | Breaking News | United States Politics

Democratic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar has secured a fifth consecutive term in the United States House of Representatives, defeating Republican challenger John Nagel in Minnesota's 5th Congressional District despite facing an ongoing federal criminal investigation involving allegations concerning her immigration history.

Omar's victory in the November 3, 2026, midterm elections reinforces her political standing in one of America's most reliably Democratic congressional districts and comes at a time when she has been facing renewed scrutiny from the Trump administration.

According to election projections and Minnesota media reports, Omar comfortably defeated Nagel, a former Minnesota State Patrol trooper, with local results showing her securing more than 75 per cent of the vote as counting progressed.

Her victory marks another electoral success for one of the most recognisable progressive voices in American politics.

A POLITICAL FIGURE WHO HAS REMAINED UNDER INTENSE SCRUTINY

Omar's re-election campaign unfolded against the backdrop of an escalating federal investigation into her immigration history and family background.

In October 2026, federal agents from Homeland Security Investigations searched her Washington, D.C., residence as part of an investigation authorised through a judicial search warrant.

The investigation reportedly concerns allegations that false information may have been provided in immigration and citizenship documents involving Omar or members of her family.

One of the longstanding allegations involves claims surrounding her 2009 marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, with critics alleging that the marriage was intended to facilitate immigration benefits.

Omar has repeatedly denied wrongdoing and rejected the allegations.

Importantly, she has not been charged with a crime in connection with the investigation. The allegations remain unproven, and an investigation should not be treated as evidence of guilt.

The congresswoman has characterised the investigation as politically motivated intimidation, accusing President Donald Trump's administration of using federal law enforcement to target one of his most outspoken political critics.

TRUMP'S CRITICISM AND THE POLITICAL BATTLE OVER IMMIGRATION

Omar has been a frequent target of President Trump's criticism since entering Congress in 2019.

The Somali-born American politician has repeatedly clashed with Trump over immigration, foreign policy, racial politics and the treatment of minority communities in the United States.

Trump has previously made controversial remarks about Omar's background and questioned her place in American political life.

Her supporters argue that the investigation and repeated political attacks have contributed to an atmosphere of hostility towards the congresswoman.

Republican critics, however, maintain that allegations involving immigration documentation and financial disclosures deserve proper investigation regardless of an individual's political position.

WHO IS ILHAN OMAR?

Born in Somalia, Omar arrived in the United States as a refugee before eventually settling in Minnesota.

She entered American politics through the Minnesota Legislature, where she served in the state House of Representatives before winning election to Congress in 2018.

Her election made history, as she became one of the first two Muslim women elected to the United States Congress.

She has since emerged as a prominent member of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, advocating universal healthcare, economic equality, immigration reform and stronger social protections.

Omar is also a member of the progressive congressional group known as The Squad, which has challenged traditional Democratic Party positions on several domestic and international policy issues.

Her outspoken criticism of Israeli government policies and her positions on the Palestinian question have also made her a controversial figure in American politics.

WHAT HER FIFTH VICTORY MEANS

Omar's re-election demonstrates the continued electoral support she enjoys in Minnesota's heavily Democratic Fifth Congressional District.

It also highlights the limitations of political controversy as an electoral weapon in a district where Democratic voters have consistently supported her political platform.

Her victory comes amid wider national political battles over immigration enforcement, presidential power, the independence of federal law enforcement agencies and the treatment of political opponents.

For the Democratic Party, Omar's continued presence in Congress means that one of its most recognisable progressive voices will remain part of the national political debate.

For Republicans, the result represents another reminder that investigations and political criticism do not automatically translate into electoral defeat, particularly in districts with strong partisan voting patterns.

BM TV AFRICA ANALYSIS: THE POWER OF THE BALLOT BOX

Ilhan Omar's fifth congressional victory illustrates an important feature of American democracy: ultimately, voters in each congressional district determine who represents them in the House of Representatives.

Her re-election does not settle the outstanding legal questions surrounding the federal investigation, nor does it establish the truth or falsity of the allegations against her.

Those matters remain subject to the appropriate investigative and judicial processes.

What the election does establish is that voters in Minnesota's Fifth Congressional District have once again chosen Omar to represent them in Washington.

Her political journey, from a Somali refugee to one of the most prominent Muslim women in American politics, remains an important chapter in the country's changing political and demographic landscape.

Despite the controversy, federal scrutiny and repeated political attacks, Ilhan Omar has secured another five-term mandate from her Minnesota constituents.

BM TV Africa – Bringing Africa and the World into Focus.

Sources and further reading

• CBS News – Ilhan Omar wins Minnesota's 5th Congressional District race.

• Minnesota Public Radio – Omar wins fifth term amid federal investigation.

• Minnesota Star Tribune – Ilhan Omar wins fifth term representing Minneapolis.

• Minnesota Star Tribune – What to know about the investigation into Rep. Ilhan Omar.

• Reuters – US probes Omar's immigration paperwork.

The General who challenged the Muhoozi succession project.

  

FLASHBACK: GENERAL DAVID SEJUSA – THE FORMER MUSEVENI INSIDER WHO CHALLENGED THE PRESIDENCY AND DISAPPEARED FROM UGANDA'S POLITICAL SPOTLIGHT

BM TV Africa | Uganda Political History | Power, Politics & Military Affairs

Once one of President Yoweri Museveni's most influential military and intelligence insiders, retired General David Sejusa has experienced a remarkable political journey, moving from the inner circles of Uganda's security establishment to open confrontation with the government he once helped protect.

Formerly known as David Tinyefuza, Sejusa was a senior figure in the National Resistance Movement's military establishment. He served as Coordinator of Intelligence Services and Senior Presidential Adviser, placing him at the centre of Uganda's intelligence and national security operations.

Today, following years of political controversy, military detention and a prolonged struggle to leave the army, the former general maintains a considerably lower public profile than he did during his years of confrontation with the government.

His story offers an important insight into the complicated relationship between loyalty, military power, political succession and dissent in Uganda.

2013: THE LETTER THAT CHANGED EVERYTHING – THE MUHOOZI SUCCESSION CONTROVERSY

Sejusa's dramatic fallout with the government became public in 2013, following a controversial letter he authored on April 29, which was subsequently published by the Daily Monitor on May 7.

In the letter, Sejusa called for investigations into allegations surrounding what became known as the Muhoozi Project – claims that President Museveni was preparing his son, General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, to succeed him as Uganda's next president.

Sejusa raised concerns that senior military and government officials opposed to the alleged succession arrangement could face assassination.

The allegations generated a major political storm, particularly because they came from a man who had previously occupied one of the most sensitive positions in Uganda's intelligence establishment.

The government disputed the allegations, while the controversy triggered a confrontation involving security agencies and the media.

Daily Monitor's offices, together with its sister radio stations KFM and Dembe FM, were raided and temporarily closed by security forces during the resulting investigation.

Sejusa eventually left Uganda for the United Kingdom in April 2013, where he continued making statements critical of the Museveni administration.

The episode marked one of the most significant public fractures within the NRM's senior military establishment.

DECEMBER 2014: RETURN FROM EXILE, BUT FREEDOM WOULD BE SHORT-LIVED

After approximately 20 months in the United Kingdom, Sejusa returned to Uganda on December 14, 2014.

His return initially raised hopes that the confrontation with the government might have been resolved.

However, the circumstances surrounding his return quickly became controversial.

In January 2015, security forces deployed around his residence in Kampala and placed him under house confinement.

The EastAfrican reported that his movements were restricted, with soldiers surrounding his home and preventing people from freely accessing the premises.

Government spokesperson Ofwono Opondo publicly confirmed the confinement, arguing that the military was acting to maintain discipline.

The deployment raised questions about the freedom of a senior military officer who had returned to his country after a prolonged period abroad.

JANUARY 31, 2016: ARRESTED AND TAKEN BEFORE THE GENERAL COURT MARTIAL

Sejusa's confrontation with the military establishment escalated again shortly before Uganda's February 2016 general elections.

On January 31, 2016, military police arrested him at his home in Naguru, Kampala.

Two days later, he appeared before the General Court Martial in Makindye, where he faced several military-related charges.

These included:

• Absence from duty without official leave.

• Insubordination.

• Participating in partisan political activities.

• Conduct prejudicial to the good order and discipline of the army.

The prosecution accused him of defying military instructions by attending opposition political rallies, making public statements critical of the government and participating in political activities while still considered a serving UPDF officer.

Sejusa's lawyers disputed the military court's jurisdiction, arguing that he had already applied for retirement and should no longer be subjected to military disciplinary proceedings.

He was remanded to Luzira Prison as the legal battle continued.

In March 2016, the High Court suspended the General Court Martial proceedings while considering the dispute over his military status. The suspension did not amount to an acquittal or a determination that he had been discharged from military service.

The case became another major episode in the complicated relationship between Sejusa and the government.

THE LONG BATTLE TO LEAVE THE MILITARY

Even after his confrontation with the government, Sejusa's departure from the UPDF was far from straightforward.

He had sought retirement years earlier, but his military status remained the subject of legal proceedings.

In 2016, the High Court ruled in his favour in a case concerning his continued service, but the decision was subsequently challenged by the Attorney General.

In February 2022, the Court of Appeal overturned the earlier ruling, holding that the High Court had no authority to retire him through the judicial review proceedings.

Three months later, Sejusa signed his retirement documents at the UPDF headquarters in Mbuya.

His retirement officially took effect in August 2022, bringing to an end a prolonged and unusual struggle to leave the military institution he had helped build.

LIFE AFTER THE MILITARY: A DIFFERENT DAVID SEJUSA?

Since retiring, Sejusa has maintained a much lower public profile compared with his earlier years as an outspoken military insider.

However, he has not completely withdrawn from public affairs.

In July 2024, reports emerged that the retired general was undertaking a short course in nursery teaching, explaining that he wanted to remain occupied during retirement.

He has also continued to use social media to engage with issues concerning Uganda, African politics and international developments.

His reduced visibility should therefore not necessarily be interpreted as a complete withdrawal from political life.

Rather, it represents a different chapter in the life of a man whose previous public interventions once shook Uganda's political and security establishment.

BM TV AFRICA ANALYSIS: WHEN INSIDERS BECOME CRITICS

The political journey of General David Sejusa raises important questions about the relationship between power, loyalty and freedom of political expression within military-led political systems.

For decades, Sejusa was part of the establishment that helped President Museveni consolidate power. He occupied senior military positions, coordinated intelligence operations and served as a presidential adviser.

Yet his public disagreement with the alleged presidential succession plans involving Muhoozi Kainerugaba transformed him from an influential insider into one of the government's most prominent military critics.

His experience also illustrates the difficulties that can arise when serving military officers become involved in partisan political disputes, particularly in countries where the armed forces have a significant role in national politics.

The government maintained that Sejusa had violated military discipline and service regulations. His lawyers, meanwhile, challenged the legitimacy of the proceedings and questioned whether he remained subject to military jurisdiction.

More than a decade after the 2013 controversy, the questions surrounding political succession, military influence and the relationship between the presidency and the armed forces remain central to Uganda's political debate.

General David Sejusa's story is ultimately one of a former insider who challenged the system from within, paid a significant political and legal price for the confrontation, and eventually left the military after a prolonged struggle over his retirement.

BM TV Africa – Bringing Africa and the World into Focus.

Sources and historical records

1. Daily Monitor – Sejusa letter: How we were closed, reopened – The 2013 letter and Muhoozi succession controversy.

2. The EastAfrican – Sejusa's refusal to meet Museveni leads to house arrest – His January 2015 confinement.

3. Uganda Radio Network – Gen Sejusa remanded to Luzira Prison – The 2016 arrest and military charges.

4. New Vision – High Court halts Sejusa prosecution – The March 2016 court decision.

5. Uganda Court of Appeal – Attorney General v General David Sejusa (2022) – The legal dispute over his retirement.

6. Pulse Uganda – Gen David Sejusa reveals his retirement journey – His eventual retirement in August 2022.

7. Pulse Uganda – Former spymaster Gen Sejusa takes up kindergarten teaching – His life after retirement.

BREAKING: Abdul El-Sayed wins Michigan’s Senate, becoming the first Muslim senator in U.S. history.

 

ABDUL EL-SAYED ON THE BRINK OF MAKING AMERICAN HISTORY: MICHIGAN SENATE RACE COULD PRODUCE FIRST MUSLIM US SENATOR

BM TV Africa | Breaking News | United States Politics

A historic political moment could be unfolding in the United States as Democrat Abdul El-Sayed contests Michigan's highly watched US Senate seat against Republican candidate Mike Rogers.

El-Sayed, a progressive politician and former public health official, is seeking to become the first Muslim ever elected to the United States Senate, potentially breaking a significant religious and political barrier in American history.

The Michigan contest has attracted national attention, not only because of its implications for control of the US Senate, but also because of the historic significance of El-Sayed's candidacy.

WHO IS ABDUL EL-SAYED?

Born in Michigan to Egyptian immigrant parents, El-Sayed is a physician by training and a public health expert who previously served as Detroit's health commissioner and Wayne County's director of health and human services.

He emerged as a prominent figure within the Democratic Party's progressive movement, advocating policies focused on universal healthcare, economic equality, workers' rights and affordable living.

His political rise gained momentum after he defeated Democratic establishment-backed Congresswoman Haley Stevens in the August 2026 Democratic Senate primary.

His victory demonstrated the growing influence of progressive politics within a party that has faced internal disagreements over its future direction.

A HISTORIC BREAKTHROUGH FOR MUSLIM AMERICANS

If El-Sayed secures the Michigan Senate seat, he will become the first Muslim elected to the United States Senate.

His potential victory would represent a major milestone for Muslim Americans and immigrant communities seeking greater representation in the country's highest legislative chamber.

The development would also add another chapter to America's evolving political and demographic landscape, where candidates from previously underrepresented communities are increasingly competing for positions of national leadership.

A CRITICAL RACE FOR CONTROL OF THE SENATE

Michigan is one of the most politically significant battleground states in the United States.

The contest between El-Sayed and Republican Mike Rogers has attracted substantial campaign spending and national political attention.

Rogers, a former congressman, is seeking to secure the seat for Republicans, while Democrats view Michigan as essential to their efforts to regain control of the Senate.

The outcome therefore carries consequences extending far beyond the two candidates.

BM TV AFRICA ANALYSIS

El-Sayed's political journey illustrates the changing character of American politics.

His campaign has brought together progressive economic policies, grassroots mobilisation and questions about religious representation in a country where political identity remains an important part of national debate.

Whether he ultimately secures the seat or not, his candidacy has already placed questions of representation, political inclusion and the direction of the Democratic Party firmly in the national conversation.

The world is watching Michigan. A victory for Abdul El-Sayed would make history, opening the doors of the United States Senate to its first Muslim elected member.

BM TV Africa – Bringing Africa and the World into Focus.

Israel’s Central Elections Committee says it reviewed all party complaints and found no evidence of election irregularities.

ISRAEL'S ELECTION WATCHDOG CLEARS ELECTION RESULTS AFTER REVIEWING THOUSANDS OF POLLING STATIONS

BM TV Africa | International News | Middle East Politics

Israel's Central Elections Committee has announced that its examination of complaints and allegations of electoral irregularities following the country's October 27 parliamentary elections found no evidence that the integrity of the vote had been compromised or that the election results had been manipulated.

The announcement comes amid growing political tensions following the closely contested elections, which saw several political parties raise complaints about alleged irregularities at polling stations across the country.

In a statement released on November 4, 2026, the committee said it had completed an extensive examination of complaints submitted by political parties, candidates and members of the public.

The review covered records from 9,069 polling stations, with investigators examining voting protocols and, where necessary, physical election materials, including ballot papers and voter registers.

According to the committee, the investigation found no evidence of systematic electoral misconduct or irregularities capable of undermining the credibility of the election results.

The committee's acting Director-General, Dean Livne, said every complaint had been examined individually and that corrections were made wherever discrepancies were identified, based on official records and available election materials.

POLITICAL CONTROVERSY OVER THE ELECTION RESULTS

The election had been accompanied by allegations of possible interference, with several political parties questioning aspects of the voting process.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party and some of its political allies raised allegations of electoral fraud and possible foreign interference, including claims involving efforts to influence Arab voter participation.

Other political parties also reported problems involving missing or damaged ballot papers and suspected irregularities at polling stations.

The allegations generated a heated political debate, particularly after Arab political parties recorded a significant improvement in their parliamentary representation.

However, Israel's electoral authorities repeatedly rejected claims of widespread or systematic ballot manipulation, insisting that individual complaints should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of a compromised national election.

A SEPARATE SECURITY INVESTIGATION

Despite the election committee's findings, a separate investigation by Israel's domestic intelligence agency, Shin Bet, into suspected foreign interference and possible illegal payments connected to the election remains an important part of the wider controversy.

Israeli authorities have stressed that the security investigation is limited in scope and that its existence does not establish that the election was stolen or that any particular community participated in wrongdoing.

Central Elections Committee Chairman, Supreme Court Justice Noam Sohlberg, has maintained that the election was properly conducted and that the results reflect the will of Israeli voters.

He has also argued that suspicions requiring investigation should not be confused with established evidence of electoral fraud.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

Following the completion of its examination, the Central Elections Committee said the official results would be submitted to President Isaac Herzog on November 4 for publication in accordance with the country's electoral procedures.

The results will then provide the basis for consultations with political parties as Israel moves towards forming its next government.

The election has left the country facing a complicated parliamentary arithmetic, with competing political blocs unable to secure an outright majority independently.

The Arab-led parties have also emerged with increased parliamentary representation, making their political position particularly significant in the negotiations over the formation of the next government.

BM TV AFRICA ANALYSIS: ELECTION INTEGRITY AND THE POLITICS OF LEGITIMACY

The Israeli election controversy highlights an important principle in democratic governance: allegations of electoral misconduct must be investigated, but political accusations alone cannot establish that an election was manipulated.

Equally, an official declaration that an election was properly conducted does not mean that every individual complaint or suspected criminal offence should be ignored.

The distinction between isolated irregularities, criminal investigations and systematic electoral manipulation is essential.

For Israel, the immediate challenge is not only to finalise the election results but also to maintain public confidence in the institutions responsible for protecting the democratic process.

As political parties prepare for the next stage of government formation, the findings of the Central Elections Committee provide an important official assessment of the election's integrity.

The central message from the electoral authorities is clear: complaints were examined, necessary corrections were made, and the review found no evidence that the integrity of the national election had been compromised.

BM TV Africa – Bringing Africa and the World into Focus.

FROM DETENTION TO THE CABINET! -Henry Tumukunde's extraordinary political comeback

 

FLASHBACK: HENRY TUMUKUNDE – THE GENERAL WHO FELL OUT WITH MUSEVENI, FACED ARREST TWICE AND EVENTUALLY RETURNED TO GOVERNMENT

BM TV Africa | Uganda Political History | Leadership & Power

Uganda's political history is filled with stories of loyalty, political disagreements, military influence and the complicated relationship between power and dissent. Few political careers illustrate these contradictions as vividly as that of retired Lieutenant General Henry Tumukunde.

A former intelligence chief, senior military commander, Security Minister and presidential candidate, Tumukunde experienced two major confrontations with the Ugandan security establishment, both occurring during his political relationship with President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni.

His story is particularly significant because he was not an ordinary opposition figure. He was once an influential member of the military and intelligence establishment that helped consolidate the National Resistance Movement (NRM) government.

2005: THE FIRST MAJOR CONFRONTATION – PRESIDENTIAL TERM LIMITS

Tumukunde's first major political confrontation with the government occurred in 2005, when Uganda was debating constitutional amendments that would remove presidential term limits.

The proposed amendment, commonly associated with the political debate over Museveni's continued presidency, generated considerable controversy within the ruling establishment.

Tumukunde, then a serving senior army officer and representative of the Uganda People's Defence Forces in Parliament, reportedly opposed the constitutional changes.

His position placed him on a collision course with the military leadership and the President.

On May 27, 2005, Tumukunde was summoned to a meeting of the UPDF High Command, where he was directed to resign his parliamentary seat. He subsequently wrote to the Speaker of Parliament, explaining that he had been instructed to resign.

He was arrested shortly afterwards and placed under military detention.

According to court records, the charges against him included conduct prejudicial to military discipline and spreading harmful propaganda. The case became a major legal and political controversy, raising questions about freedom of expression, military discipline and the constitutional rights of serving army officers.

The Supreme Court would later examine aspects of the dispute surrounding his parliamentary removal. In 2013, the General Court Martial proceedings resulted in a severe reprimand for military misconduct.

The episode marked a significant breakdown in the relationship between Tumukunde and the political establishment he had previously served.

2020: ARRESTED AGAIN AFTER ANNOUNCING PRESIDENTIAL AMBITIONS

Nearly 15 years later, Tumukunde again found himself in conflict with the government.

On March 3, 2020, he publicly announced his intention to challenge President Museveni in the 2021 presidential election.

His declaration was particularly significant because of his background in Uganda's military and intelligence institutions.

On March 12, 2020, a joint security operation arrested him at his offices in Kololo, Kampala.

Uganda Police subsequently confirmed the arrest, saying it followed televised and radio interviews in which Tumukunde had made statements about seeking support from neighbouring Rwanda to bring about political change in Uganda.

Police accused him of treason and offences relating to inciting violence and encouraging an invasion of the country. These were allegations, not proof of guilt.

He was subsequently taken through the judicial process and remanded to Luzira Prison.

His arrest attracted considerable attention because it involved a former senior security official who had once occupied positions of considerable influence within the same government he was now seeking to challenge politically.

Tumukunde was later released without a conviction in the case.

FROM POLITICAL CONFRONTATION TO A RETURN TO GOVERNMENT

Perhaps one of the most remarkable aspects of Tumukunde's political journey is his eventual return to government.

Despite his previous confrontations with the administration, he later became a member of the National Resistance Movement government.

He served as an independent presidential candidate in the 2021 elections, before eventually returning to the political establishment.

In June 2026, President Museveni appointed him Minister of Gender, Labour and Social Development. Tumukunde officially assumed the ministerial office on June 10, 2026.

He also represents Rukungiri Municipality in Uganda's Parliament.

His return to government illustrates the complex and sometimes unpredictable nature of Ugandan politics, where former allies can become opponents, political disagreements can produce dramatic confrontations, and individuals who once challenged the establishment can eventually return to positions of authority.

THE BIGGER POLITICAL QUESTION

Tumukunde's story raises important questions about the relationship between military institutions, constitutional politics and political dissent in Uganda.

His 2005 confrontation centred on presidential term limits and the constitutional direction of the country. His 2020 arrest came after he announced his intention to challenge Museveni electorally.

Both episodes demonstrate how disagreements involving powerful figures within the ruling establishment can develop into major national political controversies.

But his subsequent return to government also demonstrates the enduring importance of political alliances and reconciliation in Uganda's political landscape.

For Tumukunde, the journey has been extraordinary: from a senior military and intelligence official to a political dissenter, from military detention and treason allegations to a presidential campaign, and eventually back into the Cabinet.

His political journey is a reminder that in Uganda, the relationship between power, loyalty and political survival is rarely straightforward.

BM TV Africa – Bringing Africa and the World into Focus.

Editorial fact-check and sources

A few important details have been checked against official and historical records:

• 2005 arrest: Uganda's Supreme Court records document the circumstances surrounding his forced resignation from Parliament and subsequent military detention.

  ULII+1

• 2020 arrest: Uganda Police confirmed his arrest on March 12, 2020, on allegations of treason.

  Uganda Police Force

• 2021 presidential campaign: His presidential ambitions and arrest were reported by AFP.

  The Citizen

• 2026 ministerial appointment: State House confirmed his appointment and swearing-in under the new Cabinet.

  State House Uganda+1

• Parliamentary representation: Parliament lists him as the representative of Rukungiri Municipality, with his political affiliation recorded as independent, not NRM

ZOHRAN MAMDANI: THE POLITICAL FORCE CHALLENGING THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY TO REDISCOVER ITS WORKING-CLASS ROOTS

 

BM TV Africa | International Politics | United States

The Democratic Party in the United States may have found an unexpected source of political renewal in New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, whose rise has reignited a national debate about the party's identity, its relationship with ordinary working people, and its future electoral strategy.

For years, Democrats have struggled with a growing perception that the party has become increasingly disconnected from the economic frustrations of ordinary Americans. Rising living costs, unaffordable housing, healthcare expenses, stagnant wages and declining economic security have left millions of working-class voters questioning whether the political establishment still understands their everyday struggles.

It is against this background that Mamdani's remarkable political rise has attracted national attention.

A democratic socialist and former New York State Assembly member, Mamdani built his political movement around a message that was deliberately different from conventional American political campaigning. Rather than concentrating primarily on party politics, established political personalities and corporate interests, he placed the cost of living at the centre of his campaign.

His promises included affordable housing, free public bus services, universal childcare, rent protections and municipal grocery initiatives aimed at reducing the financial pressure on ordinary New Yorkers.

His message was straightforward: people should not have to struggle simply to afford the basic necessities of life.

A DIFFERENT KIND OF DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

Mamdani's political breakthrough became particularly significant following the Democratic Party's difficulties in the 2024 presidential election.

His campaign demonstrated that economic issues could become a powerful political mobilisation tool when communicated in language ordinary people understand.

A Brookings Institution analysis published in July 2025 observed that Mamdani successfully connected with voters by presenting specific proposals addressing their everyday concerns. His campaign also demonstrated the importance of grassroots organisation, social media communication and activating voters who had previously felt disconnected from conventional politics.

His victory over former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo in the Democratic mayoral primary was an important demonstration of the growing appetite for a different political approach.

He subsequently won the November 2025 mayoral election, becoming New York City's first Muslim mayor, its first mayor of South Asian heritage and its first African-born mayor.

The result was more than a personal political achievement. It became a significant moment for progressive politics within the Democratic Party.

FROM CAMPAIGN PROMISES TO GOVERNMENT ACTION

Mamdani's influence has not ended with his election.

Since taking office on January 1, 2026, his administration has pursued an agenda focused on workers' rights, consumer protection, housing and affordability.

In April 2026, New York City's administration announced that it had secured more than $9.3 million in restitution for workers, consumers and small businesses during its first 100 days. It also introduced consumer protection measures targeting unfair business practices and worker exploitation.

The administration has also reported financing more than 12,000 affordable homes during the first six months of 2026, including housing for formerly homeless residents.

These developments have given Mamdani an opportunity to demonstrate how his campaign's economic promises can translate into government programmes. However, the long-term affordability of his proposals, their funding and their implementation remain important tests of his administration.

A CHALLENGE TO THE DEMOCRATIC ESTABLISHMENT

Perhaps the most significant development is Mamdani's growing influence beyond New York City.

In June 2026, candidates he supported achieved victories in several Democratic congressional and state legislative primaries. The results demonstrated his expanding influence within party politics and intensified the debate between the Democratic establishment and its progressive wing.

According to Associated Press reporting, some senior Democratic figures have been cautious about the extent to which his political approach should shape the party's national direction.

Mamdani, however, has continued to argue that working people must return to the centre of Democratic politics.

This debate raises an important question: has the Democratic Party spent too much time concentrating on political messaging and internal ideological disagreements while failing to address the economic concerns that determine how millions of Americans live?

His political approach suggests that reconnecting with voters requires more than slogans. It requires policies that people can understand, identify with and ultimately experience in their daily lives.

THE BIGGER LESSON FOR AMERICAN POLITICS

The rise of Zohran Mamdani offers a broader lesson about modern democratic politics.

Political parties cannot indefinitely take working-class communities for granted. Voters who feel economically abandoned, politically ignored or excluded from national conversations will eventually look elsewhere for representation.

Mamdani has demonstrated that a candidate can challenge established political structures by combining grassroots mobilisation, direct communication, a strong economic message and a campaign that speaks to people's immediate concerns.

Whether his approach can be replicated across the United States remains to be seen. New York's political and economic circumstances are not identical to those of other states, and his administration will ultimately be judged by its results.

Nevertheless, his rise has forced an important conversation within the Democratic Party about its future direction.

The message is increasingly difficult to ignore: working people want affordable housing, decent wages, accessible healthcare, reliable public services and leaders who understand their economic realities.

For a party seeking to rebuild its relationship with ordinary Americans, Mamdani's political journey provides both an example and a challenge.

The Democratic Party may not owe one individual all the credit for its political future, but it would be a mistake to ignore the lessons of Zohran Mamdani's remarkable rise.

BM TV Africa – Bringing Africa and the World into Focus.

 

Uganda’s Consociational Democracy: A Promise of Power-Sharing or Another Political Distraction?

By BM TV Africa

“When the next few months, we shall have a combined outlook of the Uganda we want to see. We are studying a consociational democracy agreement,” Gen. Salim Saleh reportedly said while addressing heads of parliamentary committees in Kapeeka.

On the surface, the statement sounds like an invitation to imagine a different Uganda: a country where political differences are accommodated, competing interests are represented, and governance is no longer a winner-takes-all contest. But coming from the brother of President Yoweri Museveni, who has ruled Uganda for nearly four decades, the announcement raises an uncomfortable question: Is the ruling establishment genuinely preparing to share power, or is it searching for another formula to preserve its grip on it?

The Hypocrisy of Preaching Power-Sharing

Consociational democracy is a political arrangement designed to manage deep divisions in society through mechanisms such as inclusive government, proportional representation, minority protections and power-sharing among competing groups.

It can be a useful model for societies emerging from conflict or struggling with entrenched political divisions. But it requires something more fundamental than an agreement drafted by political elites: a genuine willingness to surrender exclusive control over political power.

Uganda's problem is not a shortage of constitutional provisions, political conferences or promises of national unity. Its problem is the persistent question of whether the country's institutions can operate independently of the interests of the ruling establishment.

For decades, Museveni's government has presented itself as the guarantor of national stability. Yet opposition politicians, activists and civil society organisations have repeatedly raised concerns about arrests, intimidation, restrictions on political activity and allegations of unlawful detention.

Against this background, talk of a new power-sharing arrangement invites scepticism. What exactly is the government proposing to share, with whom, and under what enforceable conditions?

A democracy in which the ruling party determines the terms of political competition, while its opponents struggle to organise freely, cannot be repaired simply by introducing another political agreement.

The Question of Muhoozi and Unaccountable Power

The controversy becomes even more pronounced when considering the political influence and public conduct of Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba, Museveni's son and Uganda's Chief of Defence Forces.

Muhoozi's public statements on social media have repeatedly generated controversy, particularly when they concern opposition figures and supporters of the National Unity Platform (NUP), led by Robert Kyagulanyi, popularly known as Bobi Wine.

Critics have questioned whether the language used in some of these statements is compatible with the responsibilities of a senior military officer in a constitutional democracy. They argue that threatening rhetoric directed at political opponents can contribute to an atmosphere of intimidation, especially when it comes from someone occupying a powerful position within the security establishment.

The wider concern is accountability. In a democratic system, military officers are expected to remain within the law, respect civilian authority and refrain from using their positions to intimidate citizens over their political affiliations.

Allegations of abductions, threats and abuses involving security personnel must be independently investigated, regardless of the political status of the individuals implicated. Where evidence establishes wrongdoing, accountability should follow.

The rule of law cannot depend on whether an accused person belongs to the ruling family, the opposition or the security establishment.

This is precisely why Saleh's proposal deserves scrutiny. Power-sharing cannot be credible if powerful individuals remain beyond meaningful public and legal accountability.

Eddi Mutwe, NUP Supporters and the Politics of Fear

The experiences of opposition supporters have become central to Uganda's democratic debate.

Eddi Mutwe, Bobi Wine's longtime bodyguard, became the subject of widespread concern after his reported disappearance and subsequent appearance in military custody in 2025. His case intensified questions about the treatment of opposition figures and the use of security institutions against political opponents.

NUP supporters have also reported arrests, intimidation and other forms of mistreatment. Such allegations demand transparent investigations, access to legal representation and effective judicial oversight.

The issue extends beyond individual cases. When citizens fear that supporting an opposition candidate could expose them to harassment or detention, the freedom to participate in politics becomes theoretical rather than practical.

The same principle applies to allegations involving military personnel detained by their fellow soldiers. Any detention must have a lawful basis, respect due process and remain subject to appropriate judicial oversight. Military discipline cannot become a justification for arbitrary detention.

If Uganda is serious about national reconciliation, these concerns cannot be brushed aside while political leaders negotiate a new governance formula behind closed doors.

Besigye's Detention and Bobi Wine's Exile

The detention and prosecution of opposition leader Dr. Kizza Besigye have further intensified debate about political freedoms and the independence of Uganda's justice system. His case has attracted domestic and international attention, with critics questioning the circumstances of his detention and the treatment of political opponents.

Meanwhile, Bobi Wine's departure from Uganda amid security concerns has raised additional questions about whether the country's leading opposition figures can operate freely and safely within its borders.

A government genuinely committed to democratic inclusion should be able to tolerate peaceful political opposition without treating it as a national security threat.

If the opposition's leaders cannot campaign, organise or speak without fearing arrest, intimidation or violence, what meaningful participation would a proposed power-sharing agreement actually guarantee them?

Uganda Needs Accountability, Not Another Political Formula

Salim Saleh may genuinely believe that consociational democracy offers a pathway towards a more inclusive Uganda. But intentions alone cannot establish the credibility of such a proposal.

Any serious agreement must guarantee independent institutions, transparent elections, freedom of association, judicial independence, civilian oversight of the military and investigations into alleged human rights abuses.

It must also include the opposition in meaningful negotiations rather than present an arrangement designed by the ruling establishment as a national consensus.

Ultimately, Uganda does not need power-sharing merely as a mechanism for distributing positions among political elites. It needs a system in which ordinary citizens can exercise political rights without fear and where no family, party or military institution stands above the law.

The question facing Museveni's government is therefore simple: Can it genuinely share power if it is unwilling to share accountability?

Until that question is answered through credible reforms and demonstrable action, talk of consociational democracy risks sounding less like a democratic breakthrough and more like another promise from a political establishment that has spent decades resisting the very competition it now appears willing to accommodate.