Affirmative action also known as positive discrimination in the UK (United Kingdom) is the policy of favoring members of a disadvantaged group that suffer from discrimination either historically or within a culture. Affirmative action is used to bridge historical inequalities in areas like employment and pay, providing access to education, redressing past wrongs or promoting diversity. Affirmative actions varies from country to country, some countries use a quota system where a percentage of jobs must be reserved for people in a certain group. In countries where quotas are not used minority group members are given preference or special consideration during selection (see Wikipedia).
Paul Emong takes up this discussion in his 2014 thesis The Realisation of Human Rights for Disabled People in Higher Education in Uganda: A Critical Analysis Drawing on the UNConvention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, discussing affirmative action from a Ugandan point of view:
This 2016 article Affirmative action: NRM has something for every one discusses how affirmative action works in Uganda:
One of the sources of discrimination faced by the marginalised groups relates to the imbalances that exist between them and other groups in society, created by history, tradition and customs. Affirmative action is designed as a redress measure to those imbalances by governments mandating preferential treatment be accorded to the marginalised groups inform of targeted programmes, reservations or quotas in the distribution of services or resources. By so doing, affirmative action is aimed at remedying past intentional discrimination facing the marginalised, increasing their participation, and enhancing diversity in society. Its origin dates back to the US Executive Order 10925 issued by President, John F. Kennedy in the 1960s; mandating public policies intended to overcome the effects of past racial discrimination because the civil rights laws alone were not enough to remedy then the racial discrimination.
Whereas, how affirmative action is implemented and the aims appear obvious, how in actual sense it addresses the question of equality in society calls for critical scrutiny. Because, how an affirmative action policy or programme are framed and how the beneficiary groups are demarcated differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and as such providing different ways how affirmative action is tackling inequalities and as well its effect in a particular jurisdiction...
Affirmative action has been framed in three ways: Affirmative action as means of achieving substantive equality rather than a breach of equality guarantee; affirmative action as a breach of the right to equality (the formal equality); and affirmative action as an exception to the prohibition against discrimination (the 'derogation' approach).
Where affirmative action is framed as means of achieving substantive equality rather than a breach of equality, it is viewed as a facet to ameliorate the conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups. In this arrangement, the equality law is directs government to counter discrimination by developing programmes aimed at preventing discriminatory distinctions that impact adversely on the disadvantaged groups and these programmes are viewed as complimentary to the constitutional goal of achieving equality for all. Uganda for example, adopts this approach. In Uganda, affirmative action is a constitutional provision and the constitution further mandates parliament to enact laws to operate it. Consequently, largely Uganda‘s policy and legal framework on disability is based on affirmative action. Although, this framing of the affirmative action appears inconsistent with the expected merit based criterion, it is seen to be widening opportunities for the disadvantaged groups to participate in society and in particular for case of disabled people in Uganda access higher education.
Where affirmative action is seen as a breach of formal equality norm, like in Great Britain, where the equality law is firmly on the basis of equality of opportunity approach, the preferential treatment measures are therefore introduced by way of statutory exceptions. Such as a requirement to treat disabled people more favourably than non-disabled people in the direct discrimination provision, and on the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) provision. Even in such exceptions, for higher education, it is arguable that, rarely are higher education admission policies seen to be explicit on the affirmative action. So are commissioned reviews by government on admissions into higher education recommending affirmative action. In fact, these reviews, for example, the Schwartz report circumvents affirmative action issue by advising higher education to ensure 'equality of opportunity within the equality laws‘ during admissions and to minimise barriers to admission particularly related to disability. In employment, affirmative action is only limited to those who qualify for a job or promotion and is only applicable when there is a tie in the applicants competing and when one is disabled, the chance is given to the disabled person in question.
Generally, affirmative action attracts public criticism and legal challenge on grounds that it is not merit based. In particular reference to higher education, public criticisms surfaced in relation to the admission of women to public universities in Uganda and legal challenge in the US in relation to race- the cases of Regents of the University of California v Bakke, Grutter v Bollinger and Fisher V. University of Texas are classic examples. In the Bakke case, the High Court held that a preferential system of affirmative action that uses quotas constitutes reverse discrimination and is therefore invalid, but universities were still permitted to consider race as a factor in admissions. In Grutter, the Supreme Court upheld the right of a university to take race into account when deciding whether or not to allocate a student a place, but held that awarding applicants from ethnic minority extra points was unconstitutional. While in Fisher, the Supreme Court held that universities need more proof of the need for diversity before they can undertake an affirmative action. These judgments mean that although higher education institutions in the US are permitted to pursue affirmative action to achieve diversity on campus, the affirmative action policies should be narrow in their impact and must be justified in each instance as needed for diversity. This interpretation potentially limits the application of affirmative action in higher education. The limits of affirmative action is that, it does not clarify what public authorities ought to do to attain genuine equality i.e. non-discrimination. Affirmative action only mandates preferential treatment to be taken and actions to be followed thereafter in regards to removing further barriers after entry are not explicit within affirmative action scope. Therefore, affirmative action policy should be enhanced with other equality laws that promote equality of opportunity.
 |
| Blind woman assisted to match during a parade on women's day celebrations in Kololo. |
American political commentator, Tammy Bruce, said: “…and a growing number of our people, including minorities, who have not succumbed to the victim mentality, with the right incentives, have been, are, and will be doing well without patronising measures…..”.
This inspirational quote embodies the enduring and resilient spirit that human sees human beings overcoming challenges, fulfilling their potential and living dignified lives. It is not just a case of American sloganeering because here in Uganda, it is getting clearer that even the seemingly vulnerable only need a chance to fulfill their potential.
Indeed, affirmative action has been central to Uganda’s political and socio-economic odyssey over the last three decades. At the heart of the country’s recovery has been integrated a conscious push towards a more equitable, inclusive and egalitarian society.
The NRM (National Resistance Movement, the political party currently in power) government has provided a platform for women, youth, PWDs and other previously marginalised groups to participate in Uganda’s governance and to improve their lot. Article 32 of Uganda’s Constitution provides that: “…. the State shall take affirmative action in favour of groups marginalised on the basis of gender, age, disability or any other reason created by history, tradition or custom, for the purpose of redressing imbalances which exist against them”.
The Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development (MGLSD) is structured the way it is today to institutionalise equity by empowering previously marginalised groups. Under the Ministry are support institutions like the National Youth Council, National Women’s Council, National Council for Children, the Equal Opportunities Commission, the National Cultural Center and the Industrial Court, among others, to entrench political and socio-economic equity in Uganda.
Since the Ministry serves important and diverse segments of our society, government continues to scale-up its budgetary allocations. For instance, the social services budget grew by 39%, from sh45.848 in FY (financial year) 2013/14 to sh65.92 in FY2014/15.
Thus, the meteoric rise and contribution of women, for instance, to Uganda’s public affairs since 1986 is a direct outcome of the deliberate efforts to invest in and bring them to the fore. At tertiary education level, entrance by women was augmented by the 1.5 points ‘top-up’ to improve their numbers in public universities. This has developed and prepared more Ugandan women for leadership roles nationally, regionally and internationally.
And the figures ‘speak’ for themselves. The number of women in governance and leadership roles in Uganda has grown steadily over the last three decades. From 41 women in the National Resistance Council, to 52 in the Constituent Assembly, 99 in the eighth Parliament, we now have 129 female legislators. Elsewhere, over 70 women have held ministerial positions, since 1986. This is the NRM government, which according to FDC’s (Forum for Democratic Change, the main opposition to the NRM) presidential candidate, Dr. Kizza Besigye, has “betrayed women” – see The New Vision 30th December 30, 2015. How shameless!!!
Such ‘noise’ aside, the NRM’s resolve to empower women remains resolute. In fact, we have some roles exclusively ring-fenced for women, for instance within the local councils’ structure at all levels. Elsewhere, women continue to scale the heights in Uganda’s public service. Some of our best performing ministries, departments, agencies and local governments have empowered and result-oriented women serving there in managerial roles, including accounting officers.
NRM also strives to positively harness youth dynamism and energy for development. The on-going Youth Livelihoods Project (YLP), for instance, will receive up sh265b, by the end of its initial five-year span in 2019. The project provides practical business skills and start-up capital for Ugandans aged between 18 and 30 years to empower them earn a living. By end of FY 2014/2015, sh54.4b had been disbursed with over 70,000 youth beneficiaries countrywide.
Youth projects started from this financial out-lay created over 2.5 million jobs, including casual, temporary and permanent engagements. The projection, therefore, is that by 2020, well over 10 million youth will be deriving gainful employment with direct and indirect livelihoods from the YLP.
Still under the MGLSD, the NRM government has kick-started a Uganda Women Entrepreneurship Programme (UWEP) with an initial investment of sh50b. UWEP is specifically tailored towards supporting sustainable enterprise development among women in farming and other informal ventures.
Elsewhere, child welfare is benefiting tremendously from government’s investment in social support services. In just FY 2014/2015, MGLSD removed 1,250 children from the streets compared to the 751 in the previous FY. Five remand homes have been refurbished and equipped modern house-hold equipment to create a suitable environment for child rehabilitation.
Through development partnerships, a toll-free Uganda child helpline number 116 has been created to ease reporting of child abuses. As a result, 338,058 reports were registered in the FY 2014/2015. About 93,830 children were provided with guidance on reporting abuse to community leaders, the Police and teachers. Another 33,827 orphans and other vulnerable children were supported to access essential social services.
In FY 2014/15, sh3b was allocated as special grant for People With Disabilities (PWDs), part of which was used to equip 180 PWDs with employable skills. The areas of focus were carpentry, cosmetology, craft making, metal works and tailoring. The Government has also catered for education for children with disabilities.
For instance, schools for the deaf, including Salaam Mukono, Mbale, Wakiso and Lalo in Lira districts have been constructed. The NRM ensures that educated PWDs contribute to national development by, among others, having them represented in Uganda’s governance structures at all levels, including Parliament.
Elderly citizens remain part of the NRM government’s affirmative action interventions. Through the Social Assistance Grants for Empowerment (SAGE), up to sh2.75b is paid out to senior citizens, under a pilot scheme to enable them afford basics of life without bearing the indignity of begging. The feed-back is so encouraging that the Government is moving to mobilise more funds progressively expand the roll-out and coverage of SAGE in Uganda.
The Government has also formed councils for the elderly within the Local Government set-up to tap into the wisdom and vast knowledge of our senior citizens. This is because Uganda’s development is linked to culture and lessons drawn from the past and our rich heritage. Uganda’s tourism, for instance, is increasingly constructed around our unique features and culture. It is the reason the Government now ensures that elders and communities have a stake in tourism development and share-in the resources generated.
The NRM remains committed to the above and more interventions to ensure that all citizens have an equitable stake in the affairs of Uganda. The new UWEP is to be further strengthened with a bigger component for of rural women. Another programme, ‘Green Jobs’ is in the offing under MGLSD to run alongside YLP and UWEP to tackle the specific residual cases unemployment in Uganda’s informal sector.
The Special Needs and Inclusive Education Programme is to be scaled-up to improve access and completion of education by children with disabilities. Integration of PWDs continues and will eventually be a component all government programmes. The National Plan of Action for Older Persons is to be fully operationalised.
One reason NRM is a mass party in Uganda is because our record is Tammy Bruce in practice. This is why a recent media opinion poll which estimated NRM and President Museveni’s support at 60% was right and wrong. Right, because he will win the election - and wrong, because the support exceeds the 60% projection. The lie by Dr. Kizza at a campaign rally in Arua - that NRM has ignored women in Uganda will be haunting him by February 19, 2016.Affirmative action, the granting of places under a quota or allocation system is a way of ensuring the people of Uganda are given a more level playing field. This is important to historically disadvantaged people like PWDs. It should make it possible for PWDs to be more favorably considered.
No comments :
Post a Comment