When the late Jacob Oulanyah passed away, the question of succession within Parliament should have been guided by the principle of institutional precedence.
In my view, the Deputy Speaker at the time, Anita Annet Among, should have remained in that position for the remainder of the parliamentary term. Traditionally, deputy speakers serve two terms in that role before any consideration of elevation.
Ideally, the NRM Central Executive Committee (CEC) could have advised that the Deputy Speaker remain in office while identifying another candidate—preferably a male Member of Parliament from Northern Uganda—to complete the late Oulanyah’s term as Speaker.
Under such an arrangement, the current Deputy Speaker, Thomas Tayebwa, would likely have remained Government Chief Whip.
It is my belief that the issue of institutional precedent was not sufficiently discussed within CEC before the decision to elevate the Deputy Speaker to the position of Speaker. Had the matter been properly deliberated, the transition might have unfolded differently and with broader consensus within the ruling party.
When those of us who had expressed interest in the Speakership were invited to appear before CEC under the chairmanship of Moses Kigongo, each applicant was given only a few minutes to introduce themselves. Shortly afterwards, we were called back and informed of the committee’s decision, without an opportunity for further discussion or feedback.
In any organisation, strategic decision-making requires strong internal debate and the presence of individuals willing to critically analyse choices before they are implemented. Leadership decisions should not simply follow momentum; they should be carefully evaluated for their long-term implications.
Today, as the debate around the Speakership emerges again ahead of the next parliamentary term, many questions remain.
In my view, some of the tensions witnessed during the 11th Parliament might have been avoided if the principle of precedence had been maintained. A transitional Speaker completing Oulanyah’s term might have helped address issues such as accountability systems and regional representation.
Given that the precedent was not followed, perhaps the most practical solution now is to start afresh.
As we approach the 2026–2031 parliamentary term, Parliament could consider establishing clearer rules regarding leadership succession. For example, the duration of service for Speakers and Deputy Speakers could be defined more clearly, rather than relying on assumptions about automatic second terms.
Ultimately, leadership renewal should be based on performance rather than entitlement. Before any parliamentary leader is given another term, several questions should be asked:
- How effectively did they perform their duties in Parliament?
- How well did they treat fellow Members of Parliament?
- What level of accountability did they ensure within the Parliamentary Commission?
- How are they perceived by the citizens they represent?
Performance—both in Parliament and in constituencies—should be the basis for renewal.
As the late Rt. Hon. Jacob Oulanyah once said, ” The rules of the game should be set at the beginning of the game, not in the middle of it. It is therefore important that Parliament establishes clear, transparent guidelines now to avoid future disputes.
If the previous rules were not properly applied, then the best path forward may be to reset the process and define the rules anew.
Only through such clarity can Parliament strengthen institutional integrity and public confidence in its leadership.
Dr. Florence Asiimwe Akiiki is a sociologist and public commentator and speaker of parliament aspirant.
