In present times, the talk of political prisoners is not so common, given that no formal structures have been built and developed for political prisons, just like the historical Bastilles in Paris and the Tower of London in England.
Since 2020, there have been frequent talks about political prisoners by the National Unity Platform (NUP), Uganda’s emerging opposition political party.
This has on several occasions been used to stage global anti-regime campaigns and protests pinning the NRM government for gross human rights violations and not upholding democratic values.
On the other hand, the Ugandan government has always come out to rebuke the accusations, calling them all sorts of names, from sickly politics to propaganda and sabotage.
This week, news about the release of detained NUP supporters flashed in the media and on the internet. However, this news was received with controversy at NUP headquarters, with the party president, Robert Kyagulanyi, alleging that several detainees were coerced into pleading guilty in exchange for their freedom from military detention.
It sounds weird for regime apologists to downplay Kyagulanyi’s allegations of the prisoners being coerced, manipulated, or forced into pleading guilty or any other form of negotiations with the regime for their freedom before asking for proof.
Could Kyagulanyi have proof or evidence justifying his allegations, or is it sabotage politics? Well, the internet is waiting for proof!
On the contrary, the State Minister for Youth, Balaam Barugahara, came out this week and dismissed claims made by the National Unity Platform (NUP) regarding the release of political prisoners.
Hon. Balaam refuted these claims, stating that the prisoners voluntarily admitted their guilt with no external pressure exerted on them. Who is playing which cards?
However, there is a wide range of activities that may result in political arrests or imprisonment, and as a result, political prisoners are often identified on a case-to-case basis by friendly governments or other outside observers. Therefore, the absence of formal built structures as political prisons does not mean an end to the issue of political prisoners, as many of these are all over the world languishing in prisons, according to Amnesty International.
Oppressive regimes often imprison their competitors, activists, or vocal and liberal dissidents. On the other hand, Amnesty International distinguishes between political prisoners and prisoners of conscience, with prisoners of conscience being explicitly identified as non-violent
However, political affiliation does not guarantee immunity against criminality for crimes specifically stated in penal codes.
On most occasions, humans tend to hide under political affiliations both in ruling governments (especially the corrupt) and in the opposition to commit crime and raise such defenses of political persecution.
So, is it the end of the beginning or the beginning of the end to these accusations and counter-accusations?
