Скачать или смотреть From Critic to Mirror: How Museveni Surpasses Amin in Authoritarian Rule.

President Museveni has frequently and publicly criticized the legacies of Idi Amin and Milton Obote, portraying their administrations as defined by lawlessness, repression, and institutional decay. However, in my view, his own leadership reflects many of the same characteristics he has long condemned—and in certain respects, has had an even more far-reaching and detrimental impact.

I do not express this comparison lightly, nor out of admiration for past regimes. Rather, it stems from concern over patterns that appear increasingly familiar. Museveni once criticized Ben Kiwanuka for accepting the position of Chief Justice under Idi Amin, a government he described as lawless and marked by impunity. Yet today, similar accusations of lawlessness and impunity are directed at Museveni’s own administration. The judiciary, led by officials appointed under his authority, is widely perceived by critics as reluctant to challenge the executive, reinforcing concerns about the concentration of power. Museveni himself has, at various times, made remarks acknowledging his significant influence over state institutions—remarks that further fuel debate about judicial independence.

In this commentary, I argue that the distinctions often drawn between Amin’s rule and Museveni’s leadership are narrower than many would like to admit. I contend that the consolidation of power, the suppression of dissent, and the persistence of corruption and coercive governance under Museveni’s tenure raise serious questions about the trajectory of leadership in Uganda. Ultimately, I examine whether the methods used to sustain political control—particularly those rooted in force and patronage—have not only mirrored the past but, in some respects, surpassed it.