The race for the Speakership of Uganda’s 12th Parliament has exposed a quiet but consequential struggle inside the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM), with incumbent Speaker Anita Among emerging as both the symbol and beneficiary of a rapidly closing party consensus.
When Norbert Mao publicly suggested in media interviews that the Speakership should be open to broader contestation, his remarks landed like a spark in dry grass. Within days, pro-NRM voices were on air defending Among’s record, praising her as a “steady hand” and warning against what several legislators called “destabilising experiments” at a delicate political moment.
The speed of that response was telling. Senior party figures stopped short of formal endorsements, but their repeated appeals for “discipline” and “unity” were widely interpreted as a signal that the establishment was circling the incumbent.
Among, for her part, leaned into the optics of continuity, appearing alongside key NRM actors and framing her tenure as proof that Parliament could be both efficient and loyal to the government programme.
What began as a speculative comment by Mao has since hardened into a broader conversation about who controls the institutional nerve centre of Uganda’s legislature. The Speakership contest is no longer just procedural politics; it has become an early test of how power will be negotiated, defended, and consolidated inside the NRM as the 12th Parliament takes shape.
Over the past decade, the Speakership has evolved into more than a routine parliamentary election. It has become a revealing lens through which to examine the tension between constitutional design and political practice in Uganda’s semi-dominant party system.
Any assessment of a hypothetical Mao bid must therefore move beyond personalities and confront structural realities: the consolidation of power within the NRM, the growing institutional weight of Speaker Anita Among, and the precedents set by earlier speakership battles, most notably the turbulent Oulanyah– Kadaga contest.
THE SPEAKERSHIP AS AN INSTITUTIONAL PIVOT
The Constitution casts the Speaker as a guardian of parliamentary independence, charged with presiding over debate and ensuring procedural fairness across party lines. In theory, the office buffers the legislature from executive dominance.
In practice, it has increasingly become a space where ruling-party negotiations and executive preferences intersect with parliamentary procedure. This dynamic is characteristic of dominant-party systems, where electoral competition exists alongside entrenched incumbency.
Control of agenda-setting, committee assignments, and disciplinary mechanisms gives the Speaker influence that extends far beyond ceremonial duties. Speakership elections, in this context, are moments of internal recalibration rather than neutral institutional exercises.
NORBERT MAO: CREDENTIALS AND CONSTRAINTS
Norbert Mao occupies a distinctive place in Uganda’s political landscape. A long-time opposition figure and president of the Democratic Party, his career has been shaped by constitutional advocacy, decentralisation discourse, and governance reform.
His legal background and experience as a former district chairperson give him the procedural fluency expected of a Speaker. Yet parliamentary politics are not decided by credentials alone.
Mao’s recent rapprochement with the ruling establishment complicates his positioning. To some, it signals pragmatic bridge-building in a polarised legislature. To others, it raises questions of alignment and trust.
A Mao speakership would thus be read less as a neutral appointment and more as a signal about how permeable the boundary between opposition identity and ruling-party accommodation has become.
His challenge would not simply be to win votes, but to persuade entrenched NRM networks that his leadership would not introduce uncertainty into a system that prizes predictability and internal discipline.
THE OULANYAH–KADAGA PRECEDENT
The late Jacob Oulanyah’s victory over Rebecca Kadaga remains instructive. That contest exposed how speakership battles can serve as proxies for deeper factional struggles within the NRM, revealing regional alignments, generational tensions, and succession anxieties.
It also demonstrated how executive preference can shape parliamentary outcomes without formally overriding constitutional procedure. The lesson was clear: speakership elections in Uganda are procedurally democratic, but the field of viable candidates is structured by internal party consensus. The arena is managed, not open.
ANITA AMONG AND THE LOGIC OF CONSOLIDATION
Since assuming office, Anita Among has moved beyond the perception of a transitional figure to become a central political actor in her own right. Her leadership style, described by supporters and critics alike as assertive and disciplined, has helped her manage caucus cohesion and maintain visibility within the ruling party’s strategic orbit.
Her rise coincides with a broader pattern of incumbency consolidation. In dominant- party systems, incumbents who successfully embed themselves within organisational and patronage networks accumulate resilience against challengers.
Among’s conduct during the most recent electoral cycle reinforced perceptions of loyalty and institutional reliability, qualities that carry significant weight in internal calculations.
This shifts the terrain for any challenger. Unlike the Oulanyah–Kadaga race, which pitted two insiders against each other, a Mao bid would confront an incumbent whose authority is still expanding. The imbalance lies not just in party affiliation, but in network depth.
PREDICTABILITY OVER EXPERIMENT
President Yoweri Museveni’s long tenure has consistently prioritised institutional predictability. From this perspective, the Speakership is too consequential to be left to volatile contestation.
Executive preferences may not dictate outcomes outright, but they shape the boundaries of acceptable competition. A Mao speakership would only become viable if framed as reinforcing, not unsettling, the prevailing equilibrium. In dominant-party systems, compatibility often outweighs innovation.
WHAT THE CONTEST REVEALS
The emerging dynamics favour consolidation over recalibration. Anita Among embodies continuity and embeddedness; Norbert Mao represents symbolic broadening and negotiated repositioning.
Both have political logic, but Uganda’s current architecture has historically favoured the former. If a contest materialises, it is likely to be decided less by public debate than by private arithmetic within the ruling elite.
Parliamentary voting may suggest openness, but the decisive negotiations will occur within the invisible architecture of party consensus. The Speakership, then, remains a barometer of Uganda’s political order.
It reflects not only who presides over Parliament, but how power circulates within the state. A Mao bid would test the permeability of established networks; an Among continuation would affirm the consolidation of incumbency. Either outcome would reveal more about the system itself than about the individuals at its centre.
About the Author
