"When the powerful are humiliated by those entrusted to serve the public, what then becomes of the ordinary citizen who possesses neither influence, wealth, nor status?"

The events surrounding the arrest and public display of former Kampala lord mayor and senior advocate Erias Lukwago have once again thrust Uganda into a profound constitutional conversation. While public discourse has largely focused on personalities, political loyalties, and immediate events, the real issue before the nation is far more significant: the relationship between power and law in a constitutional democracy.

Reports indicate that the incident followed attempts to serve legal processes connected to Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba, who subsequently made public statements on social media questioning the authority of anyone to summon him, reportedly stating that only President Yoweri Museveni could do so. The significance of such statements extends beyond the realm of political rhetoric. They raise fundamental questions about constitutional order, the independence of legal institutions, and the place of public officials within the framework of the law.

The essence of constitutionalism is that public authority is exercised under law, not above it. In a republic, no office—whether military, political, judicial, or administrative—derives legitimacy from personal stature. Legitimacy flows from a constitutional mandate. The moment any office appears insulated from legal scrutiny, the social contract between citizens and the state begins to weaken.

The concern is therefore not merely that a prominent political figure was subjected to degrading treatment. Nor is it simply about controversial social media posts. The concern is the symbolism embedded within these developments. Symbols matter in politics because they communicate the boundaries of acceptable conduct. When a senior military officer publicly dismisses the authority of legal processes, many citizens are left wondering whether legal accountability remains equally applicable to all.

A constitutional democracy survives not because power exists, but because power is restrained. Indeed, the greatest achievement of modern democratic governance is not the creation of authority but its limitation. Courts exist to review executive actions. Legislatures exist to oversee public institutions. Citizens possess rights precisely because governments are not meant to exercise unlimited discretion.

It is within this context that many Ugandans have expressed concern. If a senior lawyer, former Member of Parliament, and former Lord Mayor can be arrested or humiliated amidst attempts to pursue legal remedies, what confidence should the ordinary citizen place in the institutions meant to protect them?

The market vendor in Arua, the farmer in Nebbi, the student in Makerere, and the teacher in Yumbe do not possess political influence, legal teams, media attention, or national recognition. Their security depends entirely upon the strength and impartiality of public institutions. Consequently, when prominent figures appear vulnerable to arbitrary treatment, ordinary citizens naturally perceive themselves as even more exposed.

This is not a question of political affiliation. It is a question of state legitimacy.

History consistently demonstrates that societies do not descend into democratic decline overnight. Rather, decline often begins when extraordinary powers become normalised, when accountability is portrayed as disrespect, and when criticism is interpreted as disloyalty. The gradual erosion of institutional norms frequently precedes the erosion of rights themselves.

The irony is that strong institutions ultimately serve those in power just as much as they serve those outside power. Political leaders, military commanders, and public officials come and go. Institutions remain. A nation that weakens its institutions for temporary political advantage often discovers that future generations inherit the consequences.

The conduct of public officials, especially those entrusted with national security, carries enormous symbolic weight. Their words shape public perceptions, while their actions influence public trust. For this reason, leadership demands not only authority but restraint; not only strength but humility; not only command but accountability.

Uganda stands at an important historical moment. The nation is approaching another electoral cycle amid growing public debate regarding governance, accountability, and democratic participation. At such a time, the country needs institutions that inspire confidence rather than fear, dialogue rather than intimidation, and constitutional fidelity rather than personal supremacy.

The path forward requires courage from all sectors of society.

The judiciary must remain steadfast in defending its independence and authority. Parliament must exercise meaningful oversight over public institutions regardless of political considerations. Civil society organisations must continue advocating for constitutional rights and civic education. Religious leaders, cultural institutions, academics, lawyers, journalists, and students must foster a culture where respect for the law transcends partisan interests.

Most importantly, citizens themselves must refuse to become spectators in matters of constitutional governance. Democracy is not sustained by constitutions alone. It is sustained by citizens who insist that constitutional principles be respected.

The challenge before Uganda is therefore larger than any individual dispute. It is whether the nation will reaffirm a foundational democratic principle: that no person is above the law and no citizen is beneath its protection.

For when public authority begins to speak as though it stands above legal accountability, democracy itself becomes vulnerable. And when the powerful are humiliated by those entrusted to serve the public, the ordinary citizen is compelled to ask a question that no democratic society should ever ignore:

If the law cannot protect the prominent, who will protect the powerless?

The answer to that question will define not only the fate of today's political actors but also the future of Uganda's democracy itself. The time has come for all stakeholders—government, opposition, security agencies, civil society, and citizens—to recommit themselves to the principles of constitutionalism, human dignity, and the rule of law.

Nations are not ultimately remembered for the power they wield, but for the justice they uphold.

Photo Credit: Wikipedia