Justice and Constitutional Affairs Minister Norbert Mao has finally spoken out about his controversial decision to contest for the position of Speaker of Uganda’s 12th Parliament, revealing that his primary objective was to challenge what he viewed as troubling leadership issues within the office previously occupied by Anita Among.
Mao’s remarks have reignited political debate across the country, with many now viewing his brief but highly publicized speakership bid in a different light. While some initially dismissed his candidacy as symbolic, the minister insists it was part of a broader effort to push for accountability at one of the country’s most powerful institutions.
Speaking candidly about the matter, Mao said he could no longer ignore the growing concerns being raised by different sections of society regarding the manner in which the Speaker’s office was being managed. According to him, the criticism had reached a level that demanded action rather than silence.
The Democratic Party president explained that concerns were not only coming from opposition politicians but also from civil society organizations and members of Parliament across the political divide. He said the growing dissatisfaction created an environment where challenging the status quo became necessary.
According to Mao, the Speaker’s office had become the center of numerous complaints, with many stakeholders expressing concern about how the institution was operating. He argued that leadership positions must remain accountable to the people and the democratic principles they are meant to uphold.
The minister stated that his intention was never driven by personal ambition or political rivalry. Instead, he wanted to draw attention to what he believed were serious governance concerns that could no longer be ignored by those entrusted with protecting democratic institutions.
Mao emphasized that when voices from civil society, legislators, and opposition leaders all begin raising similar concerns, responsible leaders have a duty to listen. He said ignoring such warnings would have amounted to neglecting his responsibility as a public servant.
In his view, contesting for the speakership became a way of sending a powerful message that no office should be beyond scrutiny, regardless of who occupies it. He argued that healthy democracies depend on strong institutions that can withstand criticism and demands for reform.
The veteran politician further remarked that the position of Speaker carries immense responsibility because it serves as the guardian of parliamentary independence and fairness. Any perception of misuse, he said, risks undermining public confidence in Parliament itself.
Mao noted that his candidacy was intended to spark a broader conversation about accountability within government institutions. He believes leaders should welcome oversight rather than view it as an attack on their authority.
His comments come months after Anita Among unexpectedly withdrew from the race for Speaker of the 12th Parliament, a move that dramatically altered the political landscape and opened the door for new leadership at Parliament.
Following her withdrawal, Jacob Oboth-Oboth emerged victorious and was elected Speaker, bringing an end to one of the most closely watched parliamentary contests in recent years.
Political analysts say Mao’s latest remarks provide fresh insight into the motivations behind his decision to enter the race, especially given that many observers had questioned whether he realistically expected to win.
Supporters of Mao argue that his challenge succeeded in drawing national attention to issues that were being discussed privately but rarely addressed publicly by senior political figures.
Critics, however, contend that his statements may deepen political divisions and reopen debates that many believed had been settled following the election of a new Speaker.
Despite differing opinions, Mao remains adamant that his intervention was necessary. He maintains that democratic institutions grow stronger when leaders are willing to challenge practices they believe are harmful to public trust.
The minister also stressed that accountability should never be interpreted as hostility toward individuals. Instead, he said it should be viewed as a commitment to ensuring that public offices function in accordance with the law and the expectations of citizens.
Observers note that Mao has long positioned himself as a vocal advocate for constitutionalism and institutional reform, making his explanation consistent with many of the positions he has taken throughout his political career.
As discussions surrounding parliamentary leadership continue, Mao’s remarks are likely to fuel renewed debate about transparency, oversight, and the role of elected leaders in holding powerful institutions accountable.
For now, the outspoken minister insists he has no regrets about entering the race, arguing that his mission was never solely about winning the Speaker’s chair but about challenging what he saw as a system in need of scrutiny, reform, and a renewed commitment to accountability.
About the Author
