Uganda jumped five places in an international index released this week that measures the extent to which 142 countries adhere to the rule of law. This sounds like good news on the surface, but please hold on.
Uganda ranked 125th out of 142 countries in the World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index, up from 128th out of 140 countries last year; two countries – Kuwait and Montenegro – were added to the index this year.
Uganda’s ‘improvement’ came despite the introduction of an anti-gay law so notorious that its largest lender – not the most scrupulous of organisations – found its conscience and froze new funding in protest.
Related: World Bank’s loan freeze tests its supposed non-political stance
Meanwhile, the United States this week issued a warning to American companies considering doing business in Uganda about the country’s ‘endemic corruption’ and the government’s continued disregard for various human rights and institutional checks and balances – essentially arguing that the rule of law in Uganda has slipped. (One can’t help thinking that this was a welcome distraction in Foggy Bottom, where many are reportedly frustrated by their president’s dour support for one of two unsavoury belligerents in a recently erupted perpetual conflict.)
The bad news is that the rule of law has deteriorated in 82 countries this year and improved in only 58 – the sixth year in a row that the number of countries in which the rule of law has deteriorated outnumbers those where it has improved. The findings are detailed in a report published this week by the World Justice Project, a US-based nonprofit.
WJP said the global downturn in the rule of law, which began in 2016 when “authoritarian trends pushed the world into a rule of law recession” and was worsened by the coronavirus, has affected 78 per cent of the countries it tracks. However, for the third year in a row, the majority share of countries slipping in the rule of law has declined.
Rule of law, as defined by the project, is a durable system that provides accountability for both government and private actors; a just law that is clear, public, stable, evenly applied, and protects property and human rights; relies on open government in which the processes of law enforcement and adjudication are fair, accessible, and efficient; and provides accessible and impartial justice.
In short, it is accountable government, good laws, good process, and access to justice. The four principles are then developed into the eight factors, further expanded into 44 indicators that make up the index’s building blocks: constraints on government power, absence of corruption, open government, fundamental rights, public order and security, regulatory enforcement, civil justice, and criminal justice.
In 2023, the weakening of the rule of law was the result of governments loosening constraints on their power and weakening fundamental human rights, as well as weakening civil and criminal justice. In all countries where the rule of law has deteriorated, 77 per cent have seen a decline in the four indicators.
European countries once again dominate the index, with the Nordic countries of Denmark, Norway, Finland, and Sweden remaining at the top. The Netherlands dropped to seventh, while Germany and Luxembourg moved up one place to fifth and sixth respectively, but these are technical jumps; the three countries have the same overall score of 0.83, as does New Zealand in eighth place. Estonia and Ireland complete the top ten.
At the bottom of the scale, from lowest to highest, Venezuela scores 0.26, Cambodia 0.31, and Afghanistan 0.32.
Countries are given a score between zero and one, with one representing the strongest adherence to the rule of law. Denmark scored 0.9 this year, the same as last year. Uganda scored 0.39, also unchanged from last year.
Bulgaria, Honduras, Kenya, Slovenia, and Jordan saw the biggest improvements in the rule of law, increasing their scores by 1.7 per cent (Bulgaria), 1.6 per cent (the next three), and 1.4 per cent respectively. The biggest deterioration was in Sudan, down 7.4 percent, followed by Mali (down 5.3 per cent), the Islamic Republic of Iran (5 per cent), Nicaragua (4 per cent), and Afghanistan (4 per cent).
Rwanda is the top sub-Saharan African country in 41st place, followed, unsurprisingly, by Namibia in 44th, Mauritius in 46th, Botswana in 51st and South Africa in 56th.
Tanzania and Kenya are ranked 98th and 101st respectively.
| Issue | 2023 | 2022 | Global rank (2022) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constraints on government powers | 0.39 | 0.38 | 114 (115) |
| Absence of corruption | 0.26 | 0.27 | 135 (133) |
| Open government | 0.39 | 0.38 | 112 (112) |
| Fundamental rights | 0.35 | 0.34 | 129 (127) |
| Order and security | 0.57 | 0.59 | 128 (126) |
| Regulatory enforcement | 0.43 | 0.42 | 111 (111) |
| Civil justice | 0.42 | 0.42 | 115 (117) |
| Criminal justice | 0.32 | 0.32 | 119 (116) |
| Overall index score | 0.39 | 0.39 | 125 out of 142 (128 out of 140) |
Ugandan government officials are considered particularly corrupt – i.e. prone to using their public office for private gain – even for sub-Saharan Africa, where Uganda ranks 31st out of 34 countries, ahead of Cameroon, Gabon, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Parliament is ranked as the most corrupt institution, with a score of only 0.2 out of 1, while the judiciary has the highest score of 0.34.
The country also scores poorly on fundamental rights, again ranking 31st in sub-Saharan Africa. While Uganda scores well on freedom of religion (0.6), the index notes that the right to privacy barely exists in Uganda, with a score of 0.05, the same as last year. The score for the right to life and security rose marginally from 0.16 to 0.18, which is still dismal.
WJP doesn’t explain the low score for the right to privacy, but the US state department’s report on human rights in Uganda should suffice; it mentions arbitrary and unlawful interference with privacy, family, home, and correspondence by government agents, controls on the internet and social media, and the government’s abuse of anti-terrorism laws to monitor any electronic communication it wishes.
What’s more, a recent law, which various parliaments are only too happy to recycle, makes it everyone’s business to monitor the intimate or, one might say, private lives of consenting adults, requiring them to inform the authorities if they are suspected of engaging in behaviour that in practice harms no one.
The survey collected data using questionnaires based on the index’s conceptual framework. Respondents included 24 local experts from each country – the 17 local experts listed in the report are all lawyers (the rest requested anonymity) – and members of the public.
In Uganda, Kantar Public East Africa – a market data company based in Nairobi – surveyed 1,062 respondents in Kampala, Nansana, and Kira. The limitations of this sample, and of the 17 lawyers selected from Kampala-based firms and organisations, are obvious: Kampala and Wakiso are opposition strongholds. So if anyone were to dismiss WJP’s conclusions about the rule of law in Uganda as not nationally representative and biased towards the opposition, they would be right.
The survey was conducted between February and June.
