Rebuttal to Gen. Sejusa’s Political Argument on the ‘Free Besigye’ Campaign
The digital space has become a vital tool for promoting democratic values, spreading awareness, and rallying support. Historically, many social movements have relied on unconventional methods, including the use of technology, to challenge oppressive regimes.
Uganda Today Edition: Legal and Human Rights Perspectives: A Rebuttal to Gen. Sejusa’s Political Argument on the ‘Free Besigye’ Campaign
By Isaac Christopher Lubogo
To effectively respond to Gen. David Sejusa’s critiques of the “Free Besigye” campaign, it is essential to delve into both the legal and political dimensions of his statements with a nuanced and intelligent argument. Below is a thorough rebuttal, analyzing Sejusa’s position with precision, legal insight, and intellectual rigor.
1. Political Struggles are Rooted in Legal Rights
Gen. Sejusa posits that the current struggle is not about law or rights but rather a “fight for political power.” This argument dismisses the intrinsic value of legal processes and civil rights in a democratic society. Legally, the right to political participation, the right to be free from arbitrary detention, and the right to fair trials are enshrined in Uganda’s Constitution, which is a binding legal framework. Denying these rights in the name of political expediency contradicts the rule of law.
Sejusa’s attempt to frame the situation solely as a political struggle overlooks the fact that Besigye’s detention and the treatment of activists have strong legal implications. According to constitutional law, political disputes must be resolved through the legal system, where rights, including the right to freedom of expression and association, are protected. Dismissing this as a political battle “beyond law” undermines the very foundation of democratic governance and places the nation at risk of sliding into authoritarianism.
2. The Role of “Keyboard Warriors”
Sejusa criticizes activists engaged in the “Free Besigye” campaign, calling them “ignorant keyboard warriors” whose methods are ineffective. However, this critique ignores the role of digital activism in modern political struggles. The digital space has become a vital tool for promoting democratic values, spreading awareness, and rallying support. Historically, many social movements have relied on unconventional methods, including the use of technology, to challenge oppressive regimes.
Furthermore, legal theory and case law have increasingly recognized the importance of digital engagement as part of free speech rights. The Ugandan government’s attempts to stifle online dissent, including the use of cyber laws to target critics, directly contravene international human rights standards, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Uganda is a signatory.
3. Sejusa’s Call for Consensus on Military Restructuring
Sejusa’s emphasis on restructuring the military through consensus is noteworthy but overlooks the larger context of military-political entanglement in Uganda. The UPDF’s current dominance in political life raises concerns regarding the military’s role in civilian governance. International legal principles, including the African Charter on Democracy, Elections, and Governance, promote the separation of powers and civilian oversight over military forces. The military should not play a dominant role in shaping political narratives or intervening in civilian matters.
4. The Importance of Legal Representation and Fair Trial
Sejusa suggests that activists should focus on securing Besigye’s fair trial and medical care rather than engaging in protests. While the principle of securing a fair trial is undoubtedly important, Sejusa’s view assumes that the Ugandan judicial system is impartial and free from political interference. However, legal scholars have critiqued the Ugandan judiciary for its lack of independence, particularly in politically sensitive cases.
The notion of “securing bail” overlooks the reality that Uganda’s political prisoners, including Besigye, often face politically motivated charges and trials. The international community has repeatedly criticized Uganda for violating the rights of political detainees. Therefore, the demand for a fair trial is not merely a procedural issue; it’s about ensuring that the judicial system is free from government control and that individuals are not subjected to arbitrary detention based on political motivations.
Moreover, the right to medical care for prisoners is not negotiable; it is a human right, enshrined in both national and international law, including the ICCPR and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. By downplaying Besigye’s health concerns, Sejusa risks ignoring the grave legal and moral implications of denying medical treatment to detainees.
5. The Alleged “Tactical Ignorance” of the Activists
Sejusa dismisses the tactics of activists as “tactical ignorance.” This is an attempt to delegitimize the activism by portraying it as misguided or inefficient. However, political movements across history have often employed a variety of tactics, including protests, media campaigns, and online activism, to challenge injustice and bring attention to issues. The diverse methods used by the “Free Besigye” campaign, whether digital or street-level, are part of a broader strategy to force political change in a system where traditional channels have been constrained or compromised.
Furthermore, Sejusa’s critique of the activists’ “presumption” and “arrogance” overlooks the broader context of systemic injustice that prompts such activism. It’s essential to recognize that political activism in an authoritarian context often thrives on defiance and urgency, as activists seek to counterbalance the significant power disparity between the government and the people.
Conclusion
General Sejusa’s analysis, though shaped by his personal political history, overlooks the fundamental importance of legal processes, human rights, and democratic participation. By dismissing political dissent and the legitimate struggle for freedom as misguided, he fails to acknowledge the critical role that legal frameworks and human rights play in achieving lasting political change. It is essential to continue advocating for the rule of law, the protection of individual rights, and inclusive political participation, especially when those rights are under threat. A legal, rights-based approach is not only the ethical and just course of action but the only one that can ensure long-term peace, stability, and progress for Uganda.
📍 Website: https://www.ugandatoday.co.ug/about-cmk
📍 Website: https://www.ugandatoday.co.ug
📱 WhatsApp: +256 702 239 337
🐦 X (formerly Twitter): @uganda43443 | @ugtodaynews (Uganda
📧 Email: ugandatodayedition@gmail.com bit.ly/3REw5gR WhatsApp Channel: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaNLnekInlqV6YbcnQ0d
Let’s help you grow your brand and keep your audience informed. Partner with Uganda Today—where your story matters in shaping the social and economic dynamics of the country.
