The transition Uganda needs is constitutional, not militarised

What the report says

The Observer published a viewpoint arguing that Uganda’s eventual transition beyond President Yoweri Museveni should be handled through constitutional rules and stronger institutions, not by elevating another dominant individual. The piece, written in response to commentary about Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba’s political role, says the country’s problem is not solved by replacing one personalized system with another.

The article says Muhoozi’s prominence and reported public warnings toward the press raise concerns about the relationship between military authority, Parliament, the courts and the media. It argues that a serving chief of defence forces should not be part of a nationwide presidential mobilisation, because the armed forces are meant to remain above partisan succession contests. It also cites past tensions between Muhoozi and political and judicial institutions as evidence that momentum alone is not the same as constitutional legitimacy.

The author challenges the idea that Muhoozi is the only realistic option for stability. The article notes that senior figures in the ruling NRM, including Secretary General Richard Todwong, have described the succession issue as a question of principles and plans rather than a settled choice of person. It also mentions reported discussion in Cabinet about the endorsement campaign, suggesting the question remains open.

More broadly, the commentary says Uganda should prepare for change by strengthening civilian supremacy and allowing the electorate to choose leaders when elections arrive. It argues that a managed transition may still be possible through dialogue and political accommodation, but only if the process remains anchored in the Constitution rather than military power.