President Yoweri Museveni
On March 6, 2023, a decree echoed through the corridors of power, reverberating like thunderclaps: all government advertisements were to find an exclusive channel through the Uganda Broadcasting Corporation (UBC).
President Yoweri Museveni’s directive, in a moment marked by questionable decision-making, sent shockwaves across the media landscape. This decision was further cemented on July 10, with a stern circular issued by Ramadhan Ggoobi, the permanent secretary of the ministry of Finance.
The circular, directed towards government accounting officers, warned of severe consequences for non-compliance, including possible dismissal. Moreover, Ggoobi’s directive required that all print media advertisements be channeled exclusively through the New Vision Printing and Publishing Company (NV).
The culmination of this unsettling journey was an unprecedented meeting at Entebbe on August 10. In this dialogue, the president, accompanied by Prime Minister Robinah Nabbanja and Minister of ICT Dr Chris Baryomunsi, engaged with the executives of the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), Uganda Editors Guild (UEG), media CEOs, and editors. The discussion was as puzzling as it was essential.
The March 6 directive represents a critical juncture, where the president’s decision exclusively funneled government advertisements to UBC. Though aimed at alleviating UBC’s financial burdens—a noble intention—it raises grave concerns regarding the understanding of its financial repercussions.
The mere value of Shs 7.7 billion attached to government advertisements calls into question the depth of comprehension behind decisions that affect the nation’s welfare. This unintentional revelation emphasizes the imperative for well-informed and careful decision-making within the government’s highest ranks.
In an age where information is plentiful, the administration’s apparent lack of insight is perplexing. The president’s metaphor, comparing his dietary habits to the struggles of “starved ones,” illustrates a disconnect with the real challenges faced by private media practitioners.
The unfolding of this baffling directive prompts a close examination of its origin: what inspired the president’s initial decree? Who were the key influencers, and what motivations drove their choices? How did the directive evolve into a perceived solution rather than a potential minefield of media manipulation?
While the president’s eventual reversal of the decision is praiseworthy, it reveals a broader challenge concerning accountability and informed governance. Addressing UBC’s financial difficulties is essential, but the government must develop strategies that ensure sustainable revenue streams without undermining private media’s autonomy.
A thriving media landscape requires diversity; suppressing it to favor a single entity weakens the principles of a free press and fair information distribution.
The Entebbe meeting stands as a watershed moment, offering valuable lessons. Governance must not be dictated by whimsical decrees, nor can accountability be downplayed. As this chapter in Uganda’s political narrative concludes, it should usher in a renewed commitment to introspection, transparency, and collaboration.
The focus must not only be on decisions made but also on the underlying thoughts, advisors, and mechanisms that form them. Only with this enlightened approach can Uganda’s future governance honor, preserve and celebrate the integrity and independence of its media.
Source: The Observer
Share this content: