It is thus evident that a serious gap remains between the aspirations and principles expressed in formal legal instruments, including constitutions, on the one hand, and their practical application on the other. 3. What – or What More – can the APRM do on Ideological Disorientation? As noted earlier, the APRM already deals with these issues at length, thereby creating a solid basis for informed societal conversation around them. The APRM record on this bottleneck is thus a strong one. At the same time, a revamped APRM process can still add further value in at least three ways: 1. The analysis and recommendations in reviewed countries can be made more precise and specific. The relevant standards around this bottleneck offer specific and helpful guidance on policy and practice, but this is not being adhered to in all cases. Discriminatory provisions in legislation are an area that lend themselves to easy identification during APRM reviews. At present, recommendations tend to be general in nature, such as calling on states to increase the number of women in legislatures, or ensuing that all groups feel represented in government institutions at national and local levels. APRM analyses could note which clauses of which laws violate either the letter or spirit of which relevant governance standard that the country being reviewed has subscribed to. If the challenge is at the level of implementation or practice – as it often is – the review reports could identify the specific shortcomings and offer specific and detailed options for the country‘s consideration. 2. The APRM could assist in developing quantitative measurement techniques in this area. While much of the content dealt with by the APRM lends itself intuitively to qualitative methods (interviews, discourse analysis, etc.), quantifying them can be a useful tool for tracking progress. Relying on the representation of women in parliaments or other institutions provides a guide, but a crude and imperfect one. In cooperation with relevant institutions – such as the United Nations Development Programme or the Mo Ibrahim Foundation, and also some of the more capacitated statistical authorities in member countries – the APRM may explore the possibility of keeping a running database of gender or intergroup equality, which could be housed in the proposed APRM Knowledge Hub. Countries could fruitfully apply the statistics to their own policy debates and policy formulation. The APRM may need to reflect on its standards and codes for many reasons, including to give effect to Agenda 2063 and other emerging standards. Agenda 2063 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) represent large ‗macro-initiatives‘ that provide a useful yardstick against which to measure governance impact. It may be advisable to include in future reports some distinct commentary on how countries are doing in relation to Agenda 2063 and SDG targets, and identify specific governance successes (programmes and so on) that have made a contribution in this regard. The APRM may also need to reflect on some issues that have already come up under this bottleneck. This is a conceptual question to which this report does not presume to propose a solution, merely to flag it for future attention. For example, is it wrong for an African country to define itself by its religion? Is it acceptable for customary law in a state to discriminate against women? If not, should the APRM system take firm positions? Should it call for change or should it simply register a concern? All of these and similar questions need to be answered clearly and consistently – and those answers need to be anchored in the agreed standards themselves. Bottleneck 2: Interference with the private sector Concept President Museveni introduced this topic drawing on the experience of his own country when former President Idi Amin ―uprooted the Indian Community from Uganda in 1972‖, a community that President Museveni described as ―the entrepreneurial class‖.46 President Museveni used the concept of ―persecution‖ of the private sector as the real reason why natural resource-rich countries such as Uganda lagged far behind such successful Asian economies as South Korea and Singapore that lack comparable natural resource endowments. According to the President, the private sector is ―the engine for growth and must be nurtured, regulated and supported to ensure economic development in a country‖. At the same time, the President also recognises that the state has a role to play, not just in preparing the ground for the private 46 20 Discussion Paper, p. 2.