A project of IPS-InterPress Service and MS, the Danish Association for International Cooperation

Copenhagen Commitments - Five Years On

By Katy Salmon

KAMPALA June 2000 (IPS) - "The impact [of Copenhagen], if any, is very little. There are no conscious efforts to use these commitments as a basis for interventions," says Robert Ekongot of the Development Network of Indigenous Voluntary Associations (Deniva).

When Ekongot sought to find out about the government's preparations for the Social Summit in Geneva he came up against a wall of silence. "The information is not there. There are no reports. Just to find a minister to work with is a real struggle," he sighs.

No one can even tell him who attended the Copenhagen conference in 1995. At Copenhagen, the government promised to submit a draft report in May 1999 detailing its progress over the following five years.

It did not. Instead, Uganda is "hiding behind" the generalised G77 plus China statement which gives no details about individual countries. "It defeats the purpose. There could be a joint position but there should have been individual positions before," says Ekongot.

Faced with government intransigence, Deniva set out to compile their own report. "Government was not taking it seriously, so civil society took a lead," says Ekongot. With funding from MS-Uganda, researchers travelled the country collecting people's opinions. It was the first time many district government officials even heard about Copenhagen.

Despite the government's complete lack of interest in its international commitments, it has - by "happy coincidence" according to Ekongot - made substantial progress. "The government should be commended in the area of education. Universal Primary Education is a good initiative," he concedes.

Charles Lwanga-Ntale of Development Research and Training agrees: "They've scored the right notes on heavy investment in education. They could score more by investing in health and completing decentralisation - all the big things still happen in Kampala."

However, Ekongot is incensed by the government's failure to make use of the Jobs for Africa initiative, supported by United Nations Development Programme and the International Labour Organisation.Uganda was lucky to be one of the six African countries selected yet nothing has been implemented.

Poverty reduction is another area in which the government has worked hard. "The President says a lot about the need to address poverty. The political commitment is there," says Ekongot.

In Uganda, where power revolves around the charismatic president, his personal support is crucial for an idea to take off. But good intentions do not always produce tangible results.

"The idea sounded good but it was a very top-down thing," says Charles Lwanga-Ntale of Development Research and Training. The Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) was drawn up by donors and technocrats with little input from the people it was supposed to be assisting. The end result? "People feel poverty is worsening yet statistics show the opposite," says Ekongot.

Many see increasing polarisation of wealth. "There is affluence for the young, well-educated professionals who have landed the right job. There are more cars on the roads. Our mobile phone density is probably the highest in the region," says Lwanga-Ntale.

Others are becoming noticeably poorer. "One indicator is the phenomenal rise in the number of street kids in Kampala. We hear stories of parents encouraging their daughters to go on the streets as prostitutes," he says. "When everyone talks about development, you have to ask: 'What development and for whom? Who's benefiting and who's losing out?' Liberalisation has benefited a few but not very many. Is it possible that those who are getting richer are doing so at the expense of those who are getting poorer?"

The second PEAP, launched this year after lengthy consultations at the grassroots, hopes to do better. "We are beginning to see that people's participation is very important," says Lwanga-Ntale.

"Ordinary people are very clear about issues affecting them and good at suggesting solutions." Human rights commitments are an undoubted weak spot. Compared to (former presidents) Idi Amin and Milton Obote's murderous regimes, Museveni scores well. Nonetheless, thousands still live in fear.

With insurgencies in the north and west and Ugandan troops fighting in the Congo, peace is still a long way off. The government's failure to protect its citizens from Karamajong cattle-rustlers is another major bone of contention.

"There has been some change but there is still a long way to go," says Ekongot. Many are opposed to what they regard as a senseless involvement in the war in Congo which has brought Uganda to the brink of war with her former ally, Rwanda.

The political situation compounds the problem. "There's a feeling the system should be opened up for better human rights monitoring," says Ekongot. With no alternative to the Movement system, the government is not held accountable to the people. The government's refusal to introduce multiparty democracy is the bugbear of many analysts, some of whom believe Museveni's heyday as the feted leader of the African Renaissance could be over.

"We're beginning to see diminishing returns," says Lwanga-Ntale. "We shouldn't be talking about one group of people in power. When you're in power and you can't let go, everything comes into your hands. Power gets concentrated in one group of people unless you have a system that enables competition and challenges to be made.

"With our economic system, we're saying everyone should be free to participate as they please. The political system should be the same. He sees the government's opposition to multiparty democracy as a missed opportunity: "If he [Museveni] opened up [the political system], he would win but most of his lieutenants would not. He has that baggage with him. There are big business people and politicians whose interests must be protected and they will protect those interests to the last."