新冠肺炎时代“科学选举”的谬论:探索乌干达2020-2021年选举管理的挑战

Norman Sempijja, P. Brito
{"title":"新冠肺炎时代“科学选举”的谬论:探索乌干达2020-2021年选举管理的挑战","authors":"Norman Sempijja, P. Brito","doi":"10.33119/kszpp/2022.1.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"COVID-19 broke out in the period that Uganda was due to have presidential and parliamentary elections, posing a very precarious human security challenge. The ruling party (National Resistance Movement; NRM) faced the challenge of passing power to the Speaker of parliament if elections were not to be held. To mitigate the public health challenges and maintain power, the government acquiesced to an election process without public campaigns. Instead, campaigns were to be held over the radio, TV, and social media in what came to be known as 'scientific elections.' However, in a country hamstrung by massive political and bureaucratic corruption and an entrenched regime that uses violence against opponents, little attention was paid to the fairness of the process, especially in terms of access to media resources by the opposition. Conversely, as elections are about crowds and showmanship, the Ugandan Electoral Commission struggled with the ever-evolving electoral campaign process, especially as large spontaneous crowds sprang up on the campaign trail of the political candidates. The opposition needs a large crowd for legitimacy and a show of popularity. To mitigate this, the ruling party used violence against opposition members as an excuse to enforce standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the prevention of COVID-19, yet its candidates were left to gather crowds. This radicalized some of the opposition that used media outlets to call for violence and ethnic cleansing. This qualitative study delves into the extent to which the 'scientific elections' process was designed to produce a fair outcome of the 2021 elections in Uganda. This study uses the rational choice theory to explore the calculations of different stakeholders. The study relies on secondary data, especially available in media outlets, but also primary data through reports and social media and speeches of key figures in the political landscape in Uganda. The study finds that the Independent Electoral Commission was caught between two highly sophisticated opponents and did not have the capacity and agency to enforce the rules in the political game. In the end, the key facets of the 'scientific elections' process were found wanting and did not produce a fair outcome of the 2021 elections in Uganda.","PeriodicalId":48550,"journal":{"name":"Studia Z Polityki Publicznej - the Journal of Public Policy Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The fallacy of 'scientific elections' in the COVID-era: exploring the challenges of managing the 2020-2021 elections in Uganda\",\"authors\":\"Norman Sempijja, P. Brito\",\"doi\":\"10.33119/kszpp/2022.1.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"COVID-19 broke out in the period that Uganda was due to have presidential and parliamentary elections, posing a very precarious human security challenge. The ruling party (National Resistance Movement; NRM) faced the challenge of passing power to the Speaker of parliament if elections were not to be held. To mitigate the public health challenges and maintain power, the government acquiesced to an election process without public campaigns. Instead, campaigns were to be held over the radio, TV, and social media in what came to be known as 'scientific elections.' However, in a country hamstrung by massive political and bureaucratic corruption and an entrenched regime that uses violence against opponents, little attention was paid to the fairness of the process, especially in terms of access to media resources by the opposition. Conversely, as elections are about crowds and showmanship, the Ugandan Electoral Commission struggled with the ever-evolving electoral campaign process, especially as large spontaneous crowds sprang up on the campaign trail of the political candidates. The opposition needs a large crowd for legitimacy and a show of popularity. To mitigate this, the ruling party used violence against opposition members as an excuse to enforce standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the prevention of COVID-19, yet its candidates were left to gather crowds. This radicalized some of the opposition that used media outlets to call for violence and ethnic cleansing. This qualitative study delves into the extent to which the 'scientific elections' process was designed to produce a fair outcome of the 2021 elections in Uganda. This study uses the rational choice theory to explore the calculations of different stakeholders. The study relies on secondary data, especially available in media outlets, but also primary data through reports and social media and speeches of key figures in the political landscape in Uganda. The study finds that the Independent Electoral Commission was caught between two highly sophisticated opponents and did not have the capacity and agency to enforce the rules in the political game. In the end, the key facets of the 'scientific elections' process were found wanting and did not produce a fair outcome of the 2021 elections in Uganda.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48550,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studia Z Polityki Publicznej - the Journal of Public Policy Studies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studia Z Polityki Publicznej - the Journal of Public Policy Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33119/kszpp/2022.1.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Z Polityki Publicznej - the Journal of Public Policy Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33119/kszpp/2022.1.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

新冠肺炎是在乌干达即将举行总统和议会选举期间爆发的,对人类安全构成了非常不稳定的挑战。如果不举行选举,执政党(全国抵抗运动)将面临将权力移交给议长的挑战。为了缓解公共卫生挑战并保持权力,政府默许了没有公开竞选的选举过程。相反,竞选活动将通过广播、电视和社交媒体进行,这被称为“科学选举”然而,在一个被大规模政治和官僚腐败以及对反对者使用暴力的根深蒂固的政权束缚的国家,很少关注这一过程的公平性,尤其是在反对派获得媒体资源方面。相反,由于选举是关于人群和表演技巧的,乌干达选举委员会在不断演变的竞选过程中举步维艰,尤其是在政治候选人的竞选活动中涌现出大批自发人群的情况下。反对派需要一大群人来获得合法性和声望。为了缓解这种情况,执政党以针对反对派成员的暴力行为为借口,强制执行预防新冠肺炎的标准操作程序(SOP),但其候选人不得不聚集人群。这使一些反对派变得激进,他们利用媒体呼吁暴力和种族清洗。这项定性研究深入探讨了“科学选举”程序在多大程度上旨在为2021年乌干达选举产生公平结果。本研究运用理性选择理论探讨不同利益相关者的计算。这项研究依赖于二级数据,尤其是媒体上的数据,但也依赖于通过报道和社交媒体以及乌干达政治格局中关键人物的演讲获得的一级数据。研究发现,独立选举委员会夹在两个高度老练的对手之间,没有能力和机构在政治游戏中执行规则。最终,“科学选举”过程的关键方面被发现不足,也没有在2021年乌干达选举中产生公平的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The fallacy of 'scientific elections' in the COVID-era: exploring the challenges of managing the 2020-2021 elections in Uganda
COVID-19 broke out in the period that Uganda was due to have presidential and parliamentary elections, posing a very precarious human security challenge. The ruling party (National Resistance Movement; NRM) faced the challenge of passing power to the Speaker of parliament if elections were not to be held. To mitigate the public health challenges and maintain power, the government acquiesced to an election process without public campaigns. Instead, campaigns were to be held over the radio, TV, and social media in what came to be known as 'scientific elections.' However, in a country hamstrung by massive political and bureaucratic corruption and an entrenched regime that uses violence against opponents, little attention was paid to the fairness of the process, especially in terms of access to media resources by the opposition. Conversely, as elections are about crowds and showmanship, the Ugandan Electoral Commission struggled with the ever-evolving electoral campaign process, especially as large spontaneous crowds sprang up on the campaign trail of the political candidates. The opposition needs a large crowd for legitimacy and a show of popularity. To mitigate this, the ruling party used violence against opposition members as an excuse to enforce standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the prevention of COVID-19, yet its candidates were left to gather crowds. This radicalized some of the opposition that used media outlets to call for violence and ethnic cleansing. This qualitative study delves into the extent to which the 'scientific elections' process was designed to produce a fair outcome of the 2021 elections in Uganda. This study uses the rational choice theory to explore the calculations of different stakeholders. The study relies on secondary data, especially available in media outlets, but also primary data through reports and social media and speeches of key figures in the political landscape in Uganda. The study finds that the Independent Electoral Commission was caught between two highly sophisticated opponents and did not have the capacity and agency to enforce the rules in the political game. In the end, the key facets of the 'scientific elections' process were found wanting and did not produce a fair outcome of the 2021 elections in Uganda.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Studia Z Polityki Publicznej - the Journal of Public Policy Studies
Studia Z Polityki Publicznej - the Journal of Public Policy Studies policy studies, public policy, sociology, public administration, public health -
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
60 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信