November 16, 2009
Dear readers,
I would like to make a few comments and probably my last about this issue.
- Please I would like those who are Banubi by tribe to explain to the members what they understand by a Ugandan Nubian since this is just a debate. Brother Ahmed Katerega and I have heard our say on the issue and I think it will only be fair if they give us their version about this issue.
- Like I said, up to now I don’t know why the colonialists settled on calling the Sudanese who migrated to Uganda, under the watchful eye of captain Lugard,Nubians, because the whole term meant a mixture of different tribes that went through a certain procedure to become abanubi as I explained earlier on. Again, how can we compare the Nubians in Uganda with the true Nubians of upper Egypt, northern Sudan and the people residing in Nuba Hills in sudan.
- Hate-Love relationship between Nubians or Sudanese as they were called then and Buganda:
- In 1893 when the Baganda Muslims were dissatisfied with the British, the Sudanese or Nubians supported the former( Muslims) out of Muslim brotherhood. But the British acted swiftly to break this alliance by disarming all the Sudanese in Buganda and also deported their leader back to Sudan.
- Nubians initially did not want to be part of Buganda.They wanted to be independent of Buganda yet Bombo where the majority were staying had become part of Buganda’s crown land.For instance, at one time 50 Nubians refused to pay tax to the king of Buganda and as a result 4 of their leaders were arrested.The fact was that the Nubians did not want to go back to Sudan but at the same time they wanted to be independent of Buganda.BUT In the end, they accepted to be part of Buganda
- OLUNUBI spoken by the Banubi in Uganda as a language is some kind of modified Arabic and all the original speakers served under Gordon, Samuel Baker and Emin Pasha.The numerals are in Arabic.
- A muganda Muslim is not a Nubian and i think i explained this already. Just read the following links to follow all the details so far discussed on this issue:
http://semuwemba.wordpress.com/2009/11/14/who-is-a-nubian/
http://ugandansatheart.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/where-did-the-nubians-in-uganda-come-from/
6. Ahmed Katerega was also right about some Nubians in Kenya. The first Kenyan police was composed of mostly Nubians.In Uganda, the British intergrated them into the army after using them to fight in Bunyoro.
7. It is also a fact that most of the Nubians came to permanently stay in Uganda under Lugard Fredrick in 1891. Ahmed Katerega is also right that the original Nubians and their true ancestors may all be dead. What we have got now in Uganda is ‘diluted Banubi’ following the Nubian culture, religion(Islam) and dress.
I think the true or ‘CONCENTRATED Nubians’ lived in the north of Khartoum, up to the border with Egypt. While Nubian males here spoke Nubian languages at home, they tended to have a strong command of Arabic since they came from communities in which economically motivated migration to Egypt, and later to Khartoum and other Sudanese towns, was common. Most of the tribes in northern sudan(Darfurians, Nubians, Beja and Beni Amer) are all Muslims: the majority of Nuba are Muslims though their predescors were christians. The last Christian king of Nubia came to the throne early in the fourteenth century and was succeeded by a series of Moslem puppet kings imposed by the Mamluk Sultans of Egypt. They(xtian nubians) used to put black crosses on their foreheads.Nubian king Silko was the first Christian king.
For the sake of unity and promoting the spirit of feeling ‘Ugandan’, i suggest that we bury all this historical nonsense and tribal pride and accept the way things are. Having a Nubian as a Muslim brother is more important to me than how he or she came to be called a Nubian.
Byebyo ebyange
Abbey Semuwemba
Posted in Religion, culture, history |
November 14, 2009
Nubians started as a colonial army in Uganda recruited in the upper Nile region(South Sudan) by Emin Pasha before they were integrated into the civilian communities in Uganda.This happened way before the Mahdist rebellion in 1882.But they later qualified as a tribe since they developed a culture,language and religion. The original Nubians used to be called SUDANESE and were immigrants into Uganda who got integrated into the Uganda society as like any other immigrants.
They came as mercenaries to Uganda to fight alongside the British in Uganda and all the original Nubians were Muslims. The Nubian language is a variat of the Arabic.Islam was used as a determinant to recruit the tribes in the Nile region which some scholars came to call NUBINISATION. Emin Pasha Himself later converted to Islam.
Lugard hired or used the Nubians in 1891 to bring the whole of Uganda under British control.They were called ‘SUDANESE’ at that time when they entered into all sorts of agreements with Lugard.They were specifically used by the British to fight the Banyoro who had resisted the British rule. Majority of them eventually settled in Buganda where they were already military barracks particulalry in Bombo(Buganda) and some later intergrated into the east african army called King’s African Rifles in 1901. They contributed a lot to the first world war.
Eventually, land was given to them in Bombo under the Buganda Land Law of 1908.Other Numbians were settled in different parts of the country especially the north. Those who settled in Bombo became land owners under the Buganda government.They accepted to be intergrated into the Buganda system and pay allegiance to the Kabaka of Buganda. A nubian exheadman was appointed a gombolora chief and they had to pay tax to the Buganda government.
On that background, a muganda who converts to Islam is not a ‘Nubian’ though Muslim Baganda lived a ‘i love and i hate you’ relationship with the Banubi before the Nubian question was setlled by the British. To be honest, im still not sure whether to call BANUBI a tribe on its own because these were a mixture of different tribes. Its like calling the BASWAHILLI or BAKYOTALA a tribe on its own. Both these groups are identified with Islam. Most of the Kakwas, Luguburas,……. who converted to Islam as explained above came to called the NUBIANS. Some Nyoros were also Nubinised after the Nubians helped the British to defeat the Banyoro. I think this is how one of the ways how some Banyoro became Muslims. As for Amin and Kakwas, they are found in both Sudan and Uganda.
Posted in cultures, history |
November 14, 2009
Becoming a politician is not inborn or prophetic as in like Jesus or Muhammad born with unique features of prophecy. Anybody can become a politician if the situation warrants one to become one. Kazini was teacher but he has died a military officer. Late Kiggundu Sulaiman was a banker and researcher but he died a politician.The current chairman of the electoral commission,Dr.Badru Kiggundu was an academician in USA and later in Makerere university but now he is fully in politics.
Let me go back to the gist of this debate which is Muslims and how we have been marginalised politically in Uganda.During Iddil Amin,Uganda was admited as an islamic country at a conference in Lahore, pakistan in 1974 but Amin was just day dreaming. According to the 1958 consensus, i think muslims were not more than 5%. Because we are a minority, we need catholics and protestants at our side when making political decisons.This means that a muslim president or Vice president can act as a bridge between different religions in Uganda and does not need to turn Uganda into an Islamic state.Obviously Amin later messed this up but it makes sense.
Muslims in general do not discriminate people based on religions. In Senegal, there was a catholic president called Leopold Senghol but the majority of the population that voted for him were Muslims.In Tanzania, Nyerere was a catholic but muslims loved him in big numbers. Museveni1(1986-1998) was also loved by majority of Muslims.
Religion, culture and politics are like three brothers competing with one another.The link between religion and politics in Uganda can be explained in the earlier relationship between Sudan and Uganda during the rise of the Mahdi, a force that overpowered the British and Egyptians and later led to what we call ‘NUBIANS’ in Uganda. When the Acholi, Lugabara, Kakwa, banyoro and others were converted to Islam, they became BANUBI. Amin was a kakwa muslim which makes him a Nubian is some way.
In the 1950s, religion played apart in party membership and formation. DP was mainly dominated by catholics and it had a catholic Lawyer in Kiwanuka as its first leader.DP was originally supposed to be called christian Democratic party before the word christain was omitted.It also used people like archbisjop of Lubaga, Joseph Kiwanuka, to tap into Baganda and catholic support during the elections. I think Kiwanuka died in 1966, the same year Obote abolished kingdoms.
Uganda National Congress(UNC) and later UPC were dominated by protestants. 75% of the UNC central committee came from King’s College Budo School, a protestant school.74% of their branch chairman were protestants.Islam was not an influence but it once acted as a unifying factor for protestants and catholics when the British and Arabs were fighthing for influence in Buganda. The British later sided with protestants as the formal ascendasy or official religion for Buganda.
For UPC, it benefited from the 1961 elections because of its protestant base. The greater the precentage of protestants in adistrict, the higher the vote for UPC though DP benifited from this more than UPC. Nevertherless,UPC tried to move away from religion in the 1962 elections.
Unlike Muslims, protestants have produced national and traditional leaders that have helped to unite them. Most of the Kabakas have been protestants including the current one. Obote was a protestant and presided over cabinets dominated by protestants. Catholics have also continued to be atleast well representated because they are the majority in Uganda.Muslims were also united when Amin was in power but it was short lived because since then we have not been having strong national charcaters to unite us. That’s why atleast we need a strong Muslim Vice president or prime minister as things stand and it could benefit all of us if we get a good candidate.
AbbeyKibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Obote and UPC, Politics, Religion |
November 14, 2009
Posted in Obote and UPC |
November 12, 2009
Political murders happen all over the word including Uganda and in most cases such decisions are made by a few high profile people in the government. Obviously,brother Katerega as an NRM cadre will keep telling you otherwise. Kenya has got very good institutions such that even the murders of Tom Mboya in 1969 and J. M. Kariuki in 1975 did not cause any political instability.
Nevertheless,we can argumentatively make all murders happening between now and 2011 elections political murders because NRM/Museveni have lost popularity among the wanaichi but wishes to stay in power at all costs.There are several Ugandans who agree with Timothy Kalyegira’s version of Kazini’s death than those who look at it as a product of domestic violence. That’s why we need an independent comission of inquiry to investigate both Byran (Dr.Bukenya’s son) and Kazini’s death regardless of those who cheer brutality and murder of these NRM Generals.
Again I would like to say that all murders are about hate at some level. Even the guy who kills the cop trying to escape from a crime scene or riots- has hate in his heart. There must be a good reason why Mukyala Atim Dralu decided to bat Kazini’s head to death.At what point did she decide to kill him?
As part of the murder probe, police must investigate the friends of lady Atim to see if she had premeditated thoughts to murder the General.Her mobile phone must be in police safe custody by now to establish the people she has been in contact with for the last 6 months. MTN and other communication companies can help on this one.
The only problem is that government does not set commissions of enquiry for purposes of getting to the butoom of the matter. That’s why Kazini’s family and friends should do their own investigations.Most African governments are just corrupt. Anybody can murder anybody and get away with it.
When governments agree to set up official investigations, they usually hope to divert public criticism of human rights abuses. They hope either that public interest will have waned by the time the inquiry is complete or, better still, that the investigation will find in the government’s favour .
For instance,in 1986, the Museveni Government set up a Commission of Inquiry headed by Joseph Mulenga, to investigate human rights violations from the country’s independence in 1962 until it seized power. Up to now, we don’t know the conclusions and recommendations of the report. Yet if they had made everything public, probably some Ugandans, like Mr. Mulindwa Edward, would not have continued to accuse the NRA rebels of murdering people in Luwero and blame it on Obote 2 government. I think Mulenga later became our Attorney General in the same year. I wonder why he was given this post after heading such a sensitive enquiry.
Another example is when in June 1974, President Idi Amin Dada established a Commission of Inquiry chaired by an expatriate Pakistani judge,Justice Mohammed Saied, to look into the ‘disappearance’ of large numbers of Ugandans since his government came to power on 25 January 1971. But the report never came into public domain though the Commission concluded that the Public Safety Unit and the State Research Bureau, special security bodies set up by Amin, bore the main responsibility for the ‘disappearances’. It also criticized army officers for abuse of powers, as well as the activities of the military police and intelligence.
The bottom line here is that the currrent government should facilitate murder investigations into the country and reports from these enquiries should be made public.There is no point for the president to order for a probe into Bryan’s death and the public never gets to see anything in it.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Politics |
November 12, 2009
Kenya’s political stability rests on a balance within the military system, on the centralization of power within the state structure and on the neutralization of potential organized opposition.I dont know wther this is a good thing but atleast these guys are more stable than us. They have got less BIG BOYS in the army and executive than us.
The way Kenyata set up Kenya after independence has contributed to its stability.Moi weakened the government instiutions but Kibaki strengthened the principle of respect for institutions ever since he became a president.If he had not done this, probably the kikuyu and Luo would have finished each other indefinitely after the recently disputed presidential elctions.
Kenya has got more stable institutions than Uganda such that just a murder of a politician or army General cannot distabilise the government.Their army, for instance, is more stable than that of Uganda.A president cannot just use it anyhow as is the case in Uganda.I think this can be explained by the fact that Kenya has continued to embrace the British way of doing things up to now.
Until 1966 the army commander was a British officer. When he was replaced in December 1966 by Brigadier J. M. Ndolo(a LUO), the government continued to employ several British officers in advisory roles in each of the three battalions.
Again, unlike the Uganda army where since Obote 1 where the army was dominated by his tribesmate(the Langi and Acholi), in Kenya, ethnic balance within the army was addressed as soon as Kenyata took over as a means towards neutralizing the army politically. At independence the army was composed mainly of Kamba and Kalenjin tribesmen. After 1964 the government began recruting the Kikuyu into the army.On the otherhand,In Uganda, we have continued to have an army why people from one region are dominating. So, if a person like Salim Saleh or the president himself is murdered today, Uganda will be distabilised politically whether we like it or not.
Abbey
Posted in Politics, international |
October 30, 2009
Like I promised Ugandans, we are going to get a detailed evidence of how the 1980 elections were rigged by UPC .I found this topic very interesting because whatever means UPC used to steal the 1980 elections are the same means NRMO are now using to steal the presidential elections in Uganda. It shows that Ugandan leaders never learn anything from history and that makes us doomed. So how did Obote’s UPC steal the 1980 elections?
Obote while in exile in Tanzania wrote to Paul Muwanga ,who was then a cabinet minister under Binayisa’s government, to do everything possible to get UPC back to power even if it meant staging a coup. The letter is a public document which can be seen by anybody in various textbooks and is dated 06/02/1980. Muwanga ,Rwakasisi and group implemented this plan in July 1980 by getting rid of president Binaisa through a ‘coup d’état’. Before the 1980 elections were held, Muwanga wrote to the UPC tabliqs to start laying grounds for the rigging of the 1980 general elections and they awarded him handsomely. Muwanga’s letter is also public property to those who want it.
Another document written by Obote on 12/08/1980 reveals how Obote personally laid out the master plan as to how UPC would stop the election, or, if it was held, rig it, or seize power by military force if his party lost. This document is also public property if any one fancies it.
The appointment of the Electoral Commission was also strongly part of the process of rigging the 1980 elections. First, the military commission was full of UPC people and there were the ones that appointed the Electoral Commission (EC)- just like the current EC is full of people loyal to NRMO and Museveni. The few voices in the military commission who were anti-Obote like Yoweri Museveni could not change anything. Secondly, the chairman of the electoral Commission appointed by Muwanga and group was a strong UPC cadre called Kosea S.M. Kikira. Furthermore, the EC was both partisan and incompetent. Most of the people appointed did not have any experience in election monitoring apart from the chairman himself.
The military commission (MC) was the one that kept announcing the election programs instead of the EC as required by the constitution. The MC reached to the extent of dismissing the 14 DCs who had been appointed as Registration Returning officers by the EC, because they had refused to be comprised by UPC and Muwanga. Muwanga replaced them with 15 UPC members to pave a way for the rigging within the EC.
In addition, the MC interfered with the voter registration exercise such that a certain man who was acting as the UPM publicity secretary called George Grace Bakulu Mpagi, decided to challenge the irregularities in the courts of law. However, the judge came out with almost a similar ruling as the judges in the Besigye Vs Museveni cases of 2001 and 2006, when he said that everything was unlawful but his hands were tied.
The nomination exercise was also flawed and almost every electoral law was broken by the Muwanga and group for the sake of winning the 1980 elections. For example, polling stations in the 4 Kampala constituencies did not open until mid-day which broke the EC laws but was done with the intention of showing common wealth observers that the situation was the same all over the country where there were few observers.
As if that was not enough, UPC made violence and intimidation part of the rigging process just like we have got the Kakoza Mutale of NRMO. For instance, a rally organised by DP candidate,Mr.Anthony Ocaya was disrupted by the UPC gangs while he was campaigning in Gulu. Muwanga also wrote to the Kayihura of that time-directing him that potential DP candidates particularly: Martin Aliker , Hajji Akbar Nekyon, Yoweri Kyesimira and James Kaigiriza, be banned from speaking at public meetings and rallies.
UPC did a lot of things to rig the 1980 elections but the most embarrassing one was when Paul Muwanga stopped the returning officers from announcing the election results and he directed he alone was to announce the results and declare the elected candidates. He took over full control of the EC when he realised that UPC was losing to DP. Obote refutes this in his memoirs published in the monitor newspaper before his death but that was expected from a fulltime politician like him. Muwanga then released the doctored results after 18 hours to the EC whom he asked to announce them on the radio Uganda.
The question that bothers me from all this is that:’ why would Museveni employ the same tactics used by Obote to rig elections in 2001 and 2006 yet he was part of the MC and witnessed how the country went into decline after the rigging of the 1980 elections?’ Does this make Museveni a better politician than Obote or they are birds of the same feather.
Tulabye nyo banange.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
UK
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections |
October 30, 2009
1. It is true that USA has got no official language . It is again true that official languages are those designated by the law. However, a language can be considered to be de facto official language, meaning that although a language may have no official status in a particular country, it is the most commonly used language in that country and the one usually used in official settings. In other words, English is the de facto official language of the USA. It is considered the official language in practice if not in law. The US constitution and all federal legislation are also written in English. 30 of the US states already have got official languages. US naturalization laws standardize English.
2. It is also true that the US Senate voted in favour of making English the national language in 2006 according to the BBC(2006) (internet: available from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4996512.stm ). 83% of the population of USA speak English. What I’m trying to say is that English is both the ‘official’ and ‘national’ language of USA whether it is endorsed by the law or not. It has got the hallmarks of both an official and national language of USA. That’s why I stated in my earlier message that Ugandans don’t need government legislation if they want to support Luganda as the national language. All they need is to promote it in their homes and the rest will just be a piece of cake.
3. Swahilli is already one of the official languages of Uganda, but like I stated, the decision was just political. Swahili does not qualify to be an official language of Uganda if we are to look at the basis of an official language. English is rightly the No 1 official language of Uganda and Kenya and I hope this status quo remains forever.
4. It is true that Swahili has got a bigger following in Sub Sahara Africa than Luganda. On the other hand, Luganda is more spoken than Swahili in Uganda.Luganda is also spreading very fast in Rwanda and south Sudan. If we are looking for something national, then Luganda fits the bill very well.
5. In terms of technological advancement, both Swahili and Luganda are being technologically promoted in East Africa and Uganda respectively. Last year (2008), African software and language experts launched a project to translate Mozilla’s Firefox web browser into the local Ugandan language of Luganda.
6. A-China will always be on board with or without our people learning Chinese languages. China itself is promoting English for strategic reasons. Angola and DRC are some of the African countries that have got China as a strong key economic partner but they have got Portuguese and French as their official languages respectively. Angola president’s second visit to China in five months in December 2008 was an example of the strong partnership that exists between the two countries. Angola is now China’s largest-supplier of crude oil. The DRC government has also signed a series of landmark asset-backed deals with China, totaling around US$9.25 billion.
B-However, Language is a concern for foreign patent applicants. Both Chinese and English are the official languages of the Hong Kong SAR and it is only necessary to provide limited information in Chinese. In Hong Kong, traditional characters are still used, but in mainland China an application for a patent must be in simplified Chinese characters. Further, while some patent offices allow applicants to file in their own language and submit translations later, the Chinese Patent Office does not allow this.
7. Fifty-five countries in the world have got English as their official language. So it’s not a delusional for any country to get on the band wagon anymore. So probably Rwanda is on the right track to promote English rather than the French. Again, the politics between the current Rwanda government and France are very complicated just like the tensions between Tutsi and Hutus. So I don’t want to read much into why Lunyarwanda did not directly replace French. Kagame is really making the right decisions so far. Remember Rwanda was the first to come up with the idea of free primary education before Uganda.
Abbey
Posted in Politics, kingdoms |
October 30, 2009
While I would like to agree that regional development is very important and I support every one to develop their regions, I can’t see how this can affect negatively the development of a capital city or commercial city such as Kampala. Kampala is apparently so jammed because there is nothing like public transport in that country. Brother Alhajji Sebagala who is the current mayor of the city, had promised commuter buses or city buses in his manifesto but I have never personally seen them. Oh, I only saw one while I was waiting for a taxi on Entebbe road near the mosque at Najjannankumbi this year. I saw one heading to Entebbe but they aren’t many. I’m sure of this
The increasing number of car users in Kampala is causing a lot of problems for everybody in the city and that is why we need an immediate introduction of public transport like commuter trains. Nevertheless, the population in Kampala will just keep growing despite the developments taking place anywhere else in the country. For instance, the population of London has been increasing despite the fact that UK has now got other larger cities such as Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool with almost everything which is in London. These other cities some times act as the ‘magnets of investment’ for themselves and later on London thus creating some form of parasitic relationship among cities.
In a similar vein, preference for public transportation is higher when commuters believe that it is less environmentally damaging than the car. At the moment, all the environmental activists like Ken Lukyamuzi have kept quite about the increased use of cars in Kampala and how much these old cars are destroying the environment. When I was in Kampala, I was surprised to find out that almost all the people I considered friends were driving or owning cars and they could do anything to make sure that I see their cars, but some of their cars were too old to be on the road but nobody cared. There is a lot of ‘showing off’ with cars and I think I understand where it is coming from. Basically, the issue of the environment and cars needs to be addressed because it is a reality.
All in all, the population in Kampala is not gonna go anywhere because of the introduction of public means of transport such as trains. Kampala will keep growing and expanding- whether the central government takes over the city management or not, or whether Soroti or Gulu becomes another city or not.
Kampala is similar to India’s Mumbai in a lot of ways. Mumbai has grown from an island city – or rather a city that grew out of the joining together of seven islands – into a vast urban agglomeration .Similarly Kampala is a product of joining together several hills though some people want to extend its boundaries for reasons best known to themselves.
The growth of other cities in India has neither reduced the population of Mumbai nor affected its development negatively. By 1990, Mumbai was the world’s sixth most populous metropolitan centre and it also generates more wealth, both through production from its industrial base, now mainly on the outskirts of the city, and from its service sector, than many cities in India put together. The city produces 10 per cent of India’s industrial output, handles 60 per cent of the maritime trade, accounts for 33 per cent of total income tax collection and 60 per cent of customs duty, and has the single largest share of the services sector. It registered an employment growth of 59 per cent between 1971-91.
Unlike Kampala, Mumbai is served by five railway corridors. All originate in the south of the city and then branch out to the north and north-east. The government there encouraged people to use public transport to beat the traffic jam such that an incredible 88 per cent of all travel in Mumbai is by bus and rail. This statistic in itself illustrates the popularity and the necessity of the public transport system, particularly the railways.
The trains can carry four times the traffic load of city buses in terms of passenger kilometres of travel. The local trains carry 5.5 million passengers every day. Although the normal capacity of each train is 1,700, at peak hours more than 4,000 people crowd onto them. On a typical day, according to the Mumbai Metro Planning Group study, Western Railways operate 923 trains and Central Railways 1,072 trains. During the peak period between 9 and 11 am, 118,000 passengers.
Please let us encourage our governments to start investing heavily in public transport such as commuter trains in cities or linking up cities because it will help reduce the problems in Kampala. I remember listening to Dr. Besigye one time on KFM when he was promising Ugandans a modern railway system across the country if elected in power. How is wish we had put him in state house and then start asking him about this.
Byebyo banange
Abbey
Posted in Politics, Trasport and communication |
October 30, 2009
Dear Ugandans,
Could some one do us a favour and send a detailed programe which was unveiled by the new Katikiro,J.B .Walusimbi. We would like to know how the growth of coffee in Buganda is going to be boosted. Uganda used to be a strong coffee grower and I remember my grandfather paying school fees for most of us because of coffee. New records show that Uganda’s Coffee exports jumped by 24% in 2007. According to the Uganda’s Coffee Development Authority, statistics point to a 24% year-on-year (y/y) increase in the volume of coffee exported in 2007 and a further 36% increase in revenues. According to the statement, reported by Reuters, total export volume increased from 2.17 million bags in 2006 to 2.7 million bags, with total earnings increasing from US$21.6 million to US$29.5 million.
Uganda’s coffee exports have performed strongly through 2007 on the back of better disease control, stronger prices, and an initiative to double production by 2015. High global coffee prices have helped to drive growth in export earnings for the sector, but poor productivity, a constrained supply of inputs, and infrastructure bottlenecks continue to hamper growth.
Coffee remains Uganda’s main export and its revival is indeed good news for an ailing current-account deficit. The documented, continued rise in production and value through the season marks a strong comeback for the crop and will also, if sustained, benefit the rural population, which relies heavily on this sector. This proves that the government made a mistake of asking people to cut their coffee trees to promote non-traditional crops in the 1990s.
Indeed coffee has been one of the external conditions that have supported Uganda’s strong currency. The continued strength of the shilling is supported by projected stronger export growth, remittances, and a near-60% expected rise in transfers to non-governmental organizations. With strong increases in these foreign-exchange earners and drivers, total foreign-exchange earnings increased by 22% in 2007. Implicit in the finance minister’s budget is strong expected growth in export earnings. Indeed, total exports are expected to rise 21% from US$1.4 billion to US$1.7 billion supported by a 34% increase in coffee export revenues and a 31% increase in non-coffee exports such as cotton, tobacco, tea, soap, fish, and horticultural products. However, the Ugandan shilling experienced some pressure and depreciated through the end of December 2007, but remained fairly level through January 2008.
Kenya is one area that has hampered with regional trade and stability. Kenya’s stock market and exchange rate took a significant, with all financial markets closing early on 3 January 2008, and the postponement of the tea and coffee auctions. The World Bank estimates that around 25% of Uganda and Rwanda’s GDP relies on the trade running through the corridor to the port of Mombasa, with Burundi’s reliance climbing to 33% of GDP. However, if aid flows continue to increase Uganda will expect to receive sizable support, given its favourable position with the international donor community.
It is my hope therefore that the new Katikiro of Buganda strongly supports Coffee growth in his newly availed development program.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
United Kingdom
Posted in Economics, Politics, culture |
October 30, 2009
I can’t understand how some Ugandans can develop and enjoy themselves in a federal arrangement like Canada but they could not support it at home. Uganda is a country with different ethnicity and welcoming federalism will provide a viable framework for people who can live together even as they maintain their diversity. The need to reconcile diversity (ethnic, religious, linguistic or others), while maintaining national unity has prompted a growing number of states to adopt or take a serious look at a federal political system. Switzerland, Canada and India are all run on federalism. Spain adopted it in 1978 while Belgium welcomed it with open hands in 1993(when Museveni had been in power for almost 6 years).The EU is also moving towards some form of federalism. So is our East African Community. Zanzibar is already a ‘special status federal arrangement’ within East Africa Federation or Tanzania.
The idea of federalism involves two different trends and aims: a concentration of power at a level above that of the state in order to tackle big issues like competition, monetary equilibrium and international relations; and a greater autonomy at local levels (state, regions), enabling them to choose what suits them best in matters close to their communities’ lives. It also involves mechanisms of cooperation among the different levels, so that concentration at the higher level helps to empower the levels below.
Yes, the federalism in Uganda may not be at Canada or USA level but there but it is undeniable that federalism and evaluation have been good friends. For instance, the founding Fathers of USA federalism, the Federalists, created unity out of a multiplicity of small states. They recognised the importance of the sovereignty of their states, but they knew that they needed a ‘national’ government to preserve their liberty and democracy. Is this possible in Uganda? Yes. Do we need to support it as Ugandans? Yes
All these noises some Baganda are making about secession or Buganda getting a ‘special- status- arrangement- federo’ as it was in the 1962 constitution are all symptoms of a country yearning for federalism. It has happened in Canada where some Ugandans are living and that’s how Quebec came about. Asymmetrical federalism or ‘special status arrangement’ is one of the strategies adopted by federal systems to satisfy the demand of national groups for political and cultural autonomy. Canada was perhaps the first modern federation to take recourse to ‘special –status-arrangement-federo’ way back in 1867 before most of us were even born. This was intended to accommodate the aspirations of the French speaking majority in Quebec province. Is this possible in Uganda for the central government to give Buganda ‘special status’ federalism? Yes
There were a lot of Kyanjos, Beti Kamyas and Nambozes in Quebec in the 1960s who were asking for secession from Canada as some Baganda are now asking for Buganda secession. Two attempts by the Canada Government to meet these demands, through the Meech Lake Accord in 1987 and Charlottetown Accord in 1992, failed because of strong opposition from the English speaking majority in the rest of Canada. This was the background of the Quebec referendum of October 1995 on the question of separation from Canada. Like the earlier referendum of 1980, this was also defeated but by a margin of only 1 per cent. Since then, the issue of Quebec nationalism appears to have been put on hold.
Now, most of the Baganda are only asking for federalism or ‘special status’ arrangement federalism not secession. Why can’t the Uganda or Museveni government subject this to a referendum (if they are democratic as they claim) or just grant it to Buganda if the rest of the regions aren’t interested. As far as I know, the north,Busoga and Toro welcome federalism apart from Bunyoro which has embraced just regional tier arrangement as Mirima Ford enlightened recently. Both Uganda and Canada are from the common colonial past.
What happened in Canada can happen in Uganda. Both these countries are diverse and plural societies faced with demands from constituent parts for greater autonomy or self-determination. The only differences I see between Uganda and Canada but they are negligible are: Canada is a parliamentary and federal democracy while Uganda is not but that can be sorted out. Canada has got institutionalized judicial reviews on constitutional matters while Uganda’s judicial reviews are put in place when it is necessary. That’s why we keep calling the constitutional reviews commissions as sempebwa and Odoki.
Byebyo ebyange
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in federalism in Uganda |
October 30, 2009
As far as I know, Black mambas were in existence during Obote 2 as has been the case in Museveni’s government too . Whatever Obote did during his reign, Museveni can do better. When president Museveni sent the ‘black mambas’ in the case of Dr.Kiiza Besigye and other PRA suspects Vs the state of Uganda during the 2006 presidential elections , and black mambas surrounded the court, he was just polishing what he had been taught by his political master, Milton Obote.
Similarly,when Obote stole the 1980 elections just like most political thieves, he started manipulating the judiciary as a way of keeping himself in power. Lawyers who tried to represent people in courts were either intimidated, detained or killed. For example, Cprian Kawoya was abducted from the high court while the court was in session and later murdered by Obote’s ‘black mambas’. Other lawyers killed or tortured under similar circumstances include: Hon. George Bamuturaki, Gideon Mutanga, Sewava Sempala,e.t.c.
Another incident is when Barak Kirya was acquitted of treason charges in Dec 1984, he was rearrested in the same way Dr. Besigye was rearrested and taken back to Luzira Prison. Kirya just like Besigye was co-accused with others on treason charges( who included captain Mark Kodili, major Hussain Ada, Captain Sajjad Soori, Frank Kivumbi and James Balamu), who were also acquitted by the judge but the Obote’s ‘black mambas’ surrounded the court and these guys could not leave the court room. They were eventually forced out and taken back to Luzira prison.
So Ugandans, the black mambas you saw in 2006 who surrounded the high court did not start with president Museveni. He is doing exactly what Obote used to. We shall see all these things as we continue throughout this year and see how UPC and NRM are now similar in the way they approach national issues. The man (Matsiko) who wrote an article in the monitor about the similarities between NRMO and UPC did not just dream about these things. We have got UPC 111 now in Uganda.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
An article written in 2008 before the Buganda riots
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections, FDC, Politics |
October 30, 2009
Dear patriots,
Besigye has already proved himself more than any body else that he can take anything thrown at home. I can’t see General Mugisha Mutu, Mao Robert, Mr.Amanya Mushega or Otunnu Olara take up all this ‘Museveni’ heat when the kitchen gets hot. Mutu is the FDC national mobiliser and in that position he should have waged a lot of swords against the regime in power but he has not done enough. I don’t know whether this was a strategy agreed between him and Besigye as a way of keeping the limelight on the party president, but for me, he has been disappointing enough.Olara Otunnu is not known by majority of Ugandans despite his international profile but he can play a part in the 2011 elections.
Mutu and Mushega have not used the leverage they have got on president Museveni to shake him up. Just writing carefully selected words in the newspapers is not enough. Actually, Mr. Ruzindana has done more work for FDC than Mushega by keeping FDC in the media at least every month. Mr.Ruzindana and Ms.Anne Mugisha have done an incredible job. It’s not easy job to sit down and research what you are going to write week in and out. Most of Ruzindana’s articles are well researched and he deserves a pat at the back.
Besigye is such a very important figure for FDC and they should make sure that they keep him till when that party gets to a better level that allows the likes of Abdu Katuntu, Semujju Nganda, Wafula Oggutu, Otto and others to easily stand for party presidency or nominated for presidential candidate.
The first time I watched Dr.Besigye speak on TV was like listening to Adolf Hitler giving a speech. Besigye’s voice is so unique and it just takes your attention whether you like it or not. It’s unfortunate we can no longer listen to Monitor FM audios which used to be on their website. Hitler was great in the way he could put the audience in his palms before he even starts a speech. Besigye can become a great leader if Ugandans in the army and elsewhere give him a chance to become the president of Uganda in 2011. Besigye is very charismatic and this can be seen in his speeches that we can watch today on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giEoqo5Wp_4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLD7YdOm0UU
It’s unfortunate that unlike Hitler, Besigye has not been able to inspire his followers to gladly follow him to their deaths. That’s why he has lost the likes of Beti Kamya and Michael Senyonjo to supposedly DP.
Besigye is a very dynamic and powerful public speaker, which is what got so many to follow him in both 2001 and 2006. I will give him credit for that and that’s about the best thing I can say about him. I believe that Besigye is a brilliant leader. He could have been one of the most important and glorious historical president if NRM had accepted defeat and not went behind the back door to rig the elections in 2006.
People some times attribute Besigye’s toughness in the speeches to the Personal hatred he has got against Museveni but I don’t think there is anything in it. The only hatred between these two people is political and not any personal feuds.
Some people have attributed the rise of Mao in the race as the ‘Obama’ of Uganda. There wont be any ‘Obama’ for Uganda in the next 15 years. Uganda is not like USA where you can become a president because you are genius or just charismatic or something. To become a Uganda president now, you first of all need the army and media behind you. You also need a strong network of people behind you within the army and the executive. If Uganda was like USA, then almost a half of UAH members are all capable of becoming presidents because we have got a lot of brilliant minds on that forum.
In a nutshell, it is my prayer that FDC stick with Besigye as the presidential candidate in 2011. The moment Besigye is out, that party can as well have a funeral. They need him for the time being till when they have sorted themselves out. Obviously, all NRMO people are working hard behind the scenes to see Besigye out and it will make their day if Besigye is not a presidential candidate anymore. Please stick with Besigye for just ONE MORE TIME.
Abbey
Posted in FDC |
October 26, 2009
Dear people,
The government needs to do more to prepare us for the East African federation. One of the things they need to do is to sort out the acceptable system of governance in their own respective countries. Uganda should become a federal state before it even thinks of establishing itself as a power in the East Africa federation. I wrote about this issue some time two years ago in the Monitor newspaper and on UAH about why the EAC collapsed and how we can make the current East African federation work afterall Uganda,Kenya, Tanganyika and Zanzibar had developed common services and institutions since the 1920s.Matters such as posts and telecommunications, harbours, railways and currency were run jointly.
Nyerere was one of those that tried very hard to push this idea of East Africa federation without doing enough research on the subject and encouraging countries to sort out their houses first.He was even prepared to delay his country´s independence if the four countries of East Africa could come to independence at the same time and form a federation. But the whole thing failed lateron after independence during Amin’s reign because the leaders concerned never gave it a goood foundation.Mr..Kategeya should have people like Dan Nabudele on his team since the later already has enormous experience about this project. As a lawyer by profession,Nabudere was brought in by Nyerere to advise Zanzibar’s Karume on the draft submitted by Tanganyika.
Abbey
Posted in Politics, federalism in Uganda |
October 26, 2009
Dear readers,
Africa is all about culture and traditions. Politics in Africa are embedded in the cultural institutions. When religion was introduced on the scene in Africa, it also joined the equation of things. Therefore, anybody knocking on your door and starts telling you that you can separate culture and religion from politics, just send them away because they will be pulling a blanket over your eyes.
When UPC and Obote wanted to defeat DP and Kiwanuka in the 1960s, it is alleged that Obote organized several meetings with the representatives of the Kabaka. These representatives of the Kabaka clandestinely called themselves the KAKAMEGA CLUB OF BUGANDA and are the ones that had started up the KY party. S.K.Masembe Kabali who was the main founder of the KY party was himself not a member of the Kakamega club but he again had to consult with Mengo before he launched his party.
All political leaders in Uganda have made it where they are with Mengo’s approval and this is a historical fact:
- Besigye or Mao will never be a president of Uganda without Buganda’s support.For instance, when Mao Knelt for Kabaka Mutebi while the king was touring Masaka, he scored more political points than somebody who held several rallies in Buganda villages in Masaka
- Obote would never have become a prime minister in 1962 and later a president of Uganda without Buganda’s support.The KY-UPC alliance set the presidential foundation for him.
- KY would not have been a force in Uganda politics in 1961 without Mengo support. When in May 1961, Masembe, a retired prison officer and wealthy land landowner, was planning to launch his KY party, he had to visit mengo for approval and the Kabaka advised him to consult the friends in Kakamega club.
- DP’s Ben Kiwanuka would never have won the elections in March 1961 if it had not captured 20 of the 21 seats within the Buganda kingdom. Again Kiwanuka did not last long because he had no Mengo/Kabaka blessings.
- Museveni would never have become a president of Uganda without Buganda’s support. Actually, if Buganda pulls a full plug on him in 2011, then he will just have to lead us by force. That is the truths.All NRM cadres know this and are monitoring the situation very critically. The recent Museveni press briefings published in the Bukedde Newspaper about some updates on his dialogue with Kabaka was some form of a boost for NRM cadres. He threw them a life line to spread NRM evangilism in Buganda/
Buganda is not just a cultural kingdom despite those clauses in the 1995 constitution. Nobody should deceive you on this. Mengo remains a pure political center aleast for now. People don’t go there to learn how to speak Luganda; dance traditional dances such as NANKASA or AMAGUNJU; or whatever one thinks is cultural in one’s mind. When Kabaka makes Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba one of his ministers today, it means I’m going to Mengo to play Buganda politics because Mengo has always been political.
Similarly, FDC’s Dr. Besigye is tapping into mengo politics by sending his delegation there before he starts his Buganda tour. Besigye needs Mengo’s blessing by all means.If the people of Buganda give him their full blessings all the way till 2011, then he will be a few inches away from state house provided other factors remain constant.
Byebyo banange
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Politics, culture, federalism in Uganda, history |
October 16, 2009
I would like to thank all Ugandans who responded to my original article about sports in Uganda and I hope that the government listens to us and sort out the sports problems which are mainly caused by inadequate funding. Politicians only remember sports when it is putting them in the lime light. For instance, president Museveni ’stole the show’ when he hosted a function for the successful 2006 Commonwealth Games team in April 2006.
The government has remained detached from sports as far as I can remember. NCS is inadequately funded. The UOC is independent of government funds because it is funded by the Olympic solidarity. Only five athletic clubs are recognised in the country of almost 31 million people. Some Athletes decide not to return to Uganda when they go for training or conferences abroad because they see no future of sports in the country( as was the case in 1998 when two of them decided to remain in USA and sought asylum).
Organisations like The uganda Amateur Athletic Foundation(UAAF) are totally reliant on the poorly funded NCS though they sometimes get help from big compnaies such as MTN.
Football is the best sport in the world. For me, it’s my best entertainment at the moment and i’m happy that my team(Chelsea FC) are doing well in the premiership.
Back in Uganda, the Federation Uganda Football Association (FUFA) where my former headmaster, Hajji Abbasi Kawase Mukasa in an influence, is one of the most illequipped and corrupt organisations in the country. Football and other sports is a big force in schools like Kibuli S.S because the admnistration there has got a budget for sports and they put too much effort in it. Sadly,I hear that sports in Kibuli S.S have declined ever since Hajji Kawase Mukasa was replaced as Headmaster.
Big national clubs such as Villa, Express and KCC are mainly funded by their companies and not the government or NCS. For instance, KCC is funded by Kampala City Council while Maji FC is funded by National Water Company.
Some people have tried to ‘clean’ FUFA by forming pressure groups such as ‘Save Our Soccer’ but they have had little impact. Some time in 2005, FUFA had to be suspended by FIFA till when Elections were held and Lawrence Mulindwa was elected as the new FUFA boss. FUFA has not been able to maintain good coaches such that the national coach had to be sacked in 2006 and compesated to the tune of $3500. Sports minister then, Charles Bakkabulindi, oversaw everything.
The truth is that there is no adequate funds to pay professional footballers, referees, and sports workers. Sport is almost dead in Uganda and few people are bothered with it. As for Boxing, I think it is one of the least funded sport in Uganda at the moment. The Uganda Amateur Boxing Federation had to withdraw from the Kings Cup organized by the International Boxing Association because there was no money to fund the whole thing.
Let’s hope that the next government, probably Besigye’s FDC, will look into this issue and galvanize sports again in Uganda.
Byebyo ebyange
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Uncategorized |
October 13, 2009
Dear readers,
Yes, there is a lot of literature to back up arguments that radio RTLM was responsible for the Rwanda genocide but like i said two weeks ago, a genocide has never happened anywhere I know in the world unless it is supported and caused by the government in power. So this thing of a radio caused the genocide is an escape route for those who are supposed to prevent it in the first place. In the case of the Rwanda genocide, the United Nations and other big nations sponsored a lot of research after the genocide that supported your view because it gave them escape routes for their responsibilities. Former president of USA, Bill Clinton, may be a darling to Africans but he stood aside and watched while Rwandese were butchering one another and this will never be forgotten.
RTLM may have been the key thing that helped transform the genocide from a state-led campaign into a nationwide project but media alone cannot account for citizen mobilization during the genocide . The same thing can be said of CBSfm radio during the 11th September riots in Kampala. There were underlying causes that made the youths to protest or riot last month and these are the ones that the government in power needs to address instead of blaming it all on the media or bimeeza.
Several people have biasely blamed RTLM for the genocide in Rwanda but it should not be forgotten that military officials had separate communication networks, and moderate Rwandans were not convinced by such broadcasts .It’s the governments in power that push people to kill and hate each other by continuously dividing the population. For instance, if the Banyara and Baluli had for years accepted to be under the Buganda sphere of influence, what the hell could attempt a national leader to awaken up and support historical grievances within this community. It still beats my understanding up to now. National leaders should instead work towards uniting all people they lead and resist any temptations to divide them. It never occurred to me that one could be called Semuwemba when he is actually a Mukoki or munyala or mululi ( and not real muganda) until when I started reading the so called ethnic propaganda in newspapers and on this forum.
During the Rwandan genocide, radio RTLM did not reach all areas of Rwanda where violence occurred and very few people had access to it. This is backed up by United Nations statistics that indicate that less than 10 percent of the Rwandan population in 1994 owned radio transmitters yet the genocide spread like fire. RTLM broadcasted in very few rural areas despite the fact that more than 90% of the Rwandan population was in rural areas.
Similarly, after Buganda/Uganda radio CBS was cut of air on 11th September, riots continued for another day in different parts of the country.I don’t think a man in Luwero was ordered to riot by CBS other than their own individual convinctions that something needs to be done to express their hunger towards the government. Probably, if CBSfm had remained open, the Kabaka or the Katikiro would have had a voice to call upon the youths to stop doing silly things like torching Banyankole businesses or forcing non-baganda to sing the Buganda national anthem.These things were not thought through by those concened. The government just acted on impulse and in the process ended up disregarding the laws in place about radio closures.
All in all, governments have a got a responsibility to ensure that media freedom is protected.The media has also got a responsibility to self regulate and follow the laws of the land. The state have also got a responsibility to serve the people they lead fairly because unfairness normally leads to packaged bitterness among the population. This bitterness can sometimes come out as a volcano if people have been pushed so much on the walls. I think this explains the riots on september 11th in Uganda. The whole thing had nothing to do with radios or Bimeza in Uganda. That is the truths.
Byebyo ebyange
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Riots and genocide, kingdoms |
September 30, 2009
Dear readers,
I know the president is very angry at the moment but leaders of the independent media council should have come out sooner and put their cards on the table when the five radio stations were closed and Bimeza were banned. This is the meaning of promoting institutions. Just holding a public dialogue is not enough and may not achieve that much under the current political environment.
The government brought in the Press and Journalists Act (1995) and a major point of contention under this legislation was the provision on regulating media practice by restricting it to journalists only. I believe journalists have been self regulating ever since this act came into place but as a young media in Uganda, the state should not be so strong on where mistakes are made by the media houses.
The banning of Bimeeza has been on the cards for a long time and measures should have been in place from the independent council on how to protect this big part of journalism. In 2002 the government threatened to ban bimeeza, claiming that during these public debates and talk shows people were not observing ethical standards and that the broadcast licences issued were being misused. Media houses responded by starting to hold these debates within their premises apart from radio one which continued to hold public debates at its drinking joint (Club Obligato). CBS has been observing these laws very well and sometimes they could interrupt callers who appeared abusive to the president or NRMO but obviously this has not been enough. Iam reliably informed that CBS were not breaking any laws on the day of the riots. Soldiers just acted on impulse to switch off some of these stations because of what was going on, and now the president is using them as bargaining chips during his dialogues or predicted meetings with Kabaka.
Ebimeza have been banned because they are dominated by the opposition and human rights activists despite being few in numbers compared to NRM cadres. In all honesty, I think Mr.Museveni needs more of these Bimeza now than before if he can get better NRM cadres out there to sell him. The only reason he has banned them is because NRM cadres are not doing a good job. The opposition seems to have some leverage in this department and this is not good in his books.
I think the regular use of YouTube to communicate to Ugandans in diaspora is a direct result of the closure of radio stations (CBS FM and SUUBI FM).Ugandans abroad have been listening to Suubi FM online and they are missing this. People are now finding other ways of communicating to others and this is going to lead to a lot of underground rumours (OLUGAMBO) as it happened after the 1966 crisis when Obote abolished kingdoms.
The truth is that Ugandans in general are missing programmes like: Ekimeeza and Spectrum of Radio One; Capital Gang of Capital radio; Parliament Yammwe, Kiriza oba Gana and Mambo Bado of Central Broadcasting Service; Simbawo Akati and Gasimbagane ne Banamawulire of Simba FM; Hard Talk of Monitor FM; Katuhurirane of Radio West, and others. Banning all these programmes by the state was unnecessary because it drives all this communication underground which can be dangerous.
Please the government needs to accept the media as a public sphere, where all voices can be heard. Now my grandfather is missing CBS fm and his rights have been violated by the very state that is supposed to protect them. He finds other stations boring and his rights are not even fought for by the likes of vice president who supported its closure.
Please I ask the president to reconsider and reopen up CBSFM and other stations since we are told he is the only man who can do so. Bimeeza should also be allowed back on radio stations because this is some form of therapy to some Ugandans frustrated with the system.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
United Kingdom
Posted in Entertainment, Politics, Presidency, Riots and genocide |
September 30, 2009
Dear readers,
The solution lies in president Museveni or whoever becomes the president in 2011 to start listening to the people they lead.All this arrogance of ‘i can do anything i want as long as I’m in power‘ should stop.Suharto (who came to power in 1966 in Indonesia) also had almost similar media measures as Museveni has put up in Uganda but he was brought down after three decades in power.
For instance,the Kedaulatan Rakyat daily in Yogyakarta was once ordered by telephone (typical in the then popular ‘telephone culture’) not to print reports about the collapse of a stage built over a swimming pool belonging to a bupati (regency head), who had been hosting a traditional ceremonial meal. The incident was caused by a live concert given by a group performing dangdut, a popular local style of music. The second case, also involving the Kedaulatan Rakyat, was a ban on printing news about a plane which crashed in Klaten, a town close to Yogyakarta. They were never told the reason behind the ban.
Suharto did everything in his powers to intimidate the media as we are witnessing today in Uganda but as they say:’even good or bad things come to an end’. As long as a leader does not respect the wishes of the people they lead, then you know we have got a problem.If people want their CBS and its representing the views of the people, then this should not be a problem
Radios were not spared either during Suharto:
1. The editor of CDBS FM in Bali was summoned by the local prosecutor’s office; he was even told to report to that office every day for a period of time. This was due to a prediction by the station that unrest would occur during the forthcoming elections (1997).
I can see this happening to any of the media outlets in Uganda before the 2011 elections. I put my money on Mwenda’s independent after that cartoon trouble that has led to Mwenda being charged with sedition
2. Periodically, the officials from min of information summoned representatives of all private radio stations and informed them of violations. They once accused Radio Arbes and SIPP, its sister station, of misdemeanors without giving a clear explanation or writing an official letter.
This has already happened in Uganda. The govt threatened to ban bimeza in 2002. Several FM presenters have been summoned to the police stations and by the people from the Broadcasting corporation.Radio licences have been revoked every now and then
3.Radio station Dikara Bawana was charged with producing a program that contravened the SARA doctrine. SARA stands for Suku,Agama, Ras, dan Antar Golongan, which means, ‘Ethnicity, Religion, Race, and Groups’. Any discussion of these four issues constituted a very serious taboo on the Indonesia media scene.
I think we have already seen this in Uganda. You discuss federalism as a Baganda wish only may land one in trouble because the 1995 constitution bans journalists from discussing issues that promote any form of tribalism.
The Suharto administration was very serious but the media especially the local ones resisted all these intimidation measures till when the regime was booted out of power.
Posted in Entertainment, Riots and genocide, kingdoms |
September 30, 2009
Dear good people,
What happened to our brothers and sisters in Rwanda is regrettable and hope it never happens in Uganda but so many factors led to the genocide in Rwanda, and therefore it cannot be compared to CBS and the recent riots.It cannot be entirely the propaganda spread by the radio RTLM alone that caused the genocide in Rwanda.
That said, there is some evidence of conditional media effects and that Radio RTLM catalyzed a small number of individuals and incidents of violence, framed public choice, and reinforced messages that many individuals received during face-to-face mobilization.
On the other hand, i have received information that on the day of the riots in Uganda, CBS radio broadcasts were not racist or tribalist in nature or openly inflammatory as was the case during the Rwanda genocide. But if there is any presenter or moderator of CBS or Suubi FM who was calling Baganda/Ugandans to slaughter Banyankole, then he or she deserves punishment.
The problem with policy makers in Africa is generalizing debates on genocide.In policy circles, debates on how to contain the genocide often focus on jamming the radio which is not right. Genocides are caused mainly by long term problems in the country which leaders tend to ignore for a long time. Just closing a radio station does not remove these problems. Without sounding seditious, i think you all know why some Ugandans feel aggrieved by the Banyankole in Uganda right now. The leaders need to address the root causes of this and probably radio stations will have no reason to talk or discuss about it anymore.Closing a station just burries the issue in people’s minds and hearts.
Again, in comparison to Rwanda,Radio-Télévision Libredes Milles Collines (RTLM), which began broadcasting in July 1993, was owned and controlled by Hutu hard-liners within the ruling regime who ultimately organized the genocidal violence . Before the genocide,RTLM broadcast a steady digest of belligerent, nationalist, antirebel, and often openly inflammatory statements. During the genocide, RTLM announcers encouraged listeners to fight, and in some cases, the announcers broadcast names of individuals and places, which were subsequently attacked by citizen bands.
CBS on the other hand is a radio which is privately owned and nobody in the ruling party(NRMO) has got a stake in it. It is easy to control and close if the government wants to.It only encouraged people to go and attend the Kayunga function in big numbers and i see nothing wrong with this. This was all politics, my friend.
During and before the genocide in Rwanda,Rwandans could listen to the more state-owned station, Radio Rwanda. The government of Rwanda was mainly responsible for the genocide as they promoted the killing of the Tutsis. If the govt had no stake in it, then this genocide would not have taken place. So how can a genocide take place in Uganda if the state does not want it to take place.They have got all the mechanism to stop it from happening. So CBS should be the least problem for anybody in Uganda. It’s just CBS gets more audience than the state owned radio, Radio Uganda, and probably the government does not like it.
Let us also not forget that the Tutsi-led rebels, who were fighting the government in a war that began in 1990, operated a station called Radio Muhabur.I’m yet to find out whether their radio also promoted genocide but all indications are that a genocide is mainly caused by the government in power as was the case in Rwanda. Radio stations have got a responsibility to report what’s happening during a genocide or riots and probably this is what CBS, was doing on ,9th,10th and 11th September 2009.
Nze bwendaba
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Entertainment, Riots and genocide, federalism in Uganda, international |
September 30, 2009
Yes, Savimbi’s clandestine radio played an important role in the 30-year war in Angola.It provided UNITA rebels broadcasting, provided a means of recruiting supporters, sustaining rebellion and appealing for external support . This is totally different from CBS since Buganda is not in some form of armed struggle against the government. However, CBS can be used by the Kingdom and the state to communicate important messages to Ugandans as has been the case for a long time.
What is similar here is how radio stations in Uganda owned by the state and NRM people do not say so much bad things against the governemt in power or the president. Radi stations owned by the likes of the vice president and others always refrain from criticizing government violations such as corruption and censorship. This was the same during UNITA days when the Angola state owned radio publicized Savimbi’s human rights abuses only without saying anything bad against the state. We need to strike a balance here if journalism is to be respected as a professional in Uganda.This imbalance has made people to stop listening to state owned radios.
As with other clandestine broadcasters, Savimbi’s station did not reveal the location of the transmitter relaying its programmes. In this case, however, the main reason for concealment was UNITA’s alliance with South Africa, which provided the rebels with a secure base to carry on their propaganda war as well as the military means to rebuild their guerrilla forces, which had been largely destroyed by Angolan and Cuban troops three years earlier.
On the otherhand, CBS radio is not a clandestine radio at all. It’s purposes are well published and it had a licence to carry its duties officially in Uganda before it was revoked 2 weeks ago.
Lastly, Savimbi’s Voice of the Resistance of the Black Cockerel (VRBC or VORGAN) served as the main propaganda channel for his National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA) in its 30-year war against the governing Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA). On the other hand, I highly doubt whether the Kabaka is using CBS for Buganda to secede from Uganda or fight for buganda independence because this will be breaking the rules or the Press Act 1995 as written in the Uganda constitution.Yes, Some Baganda may raise this issue but majority of Baganda are agitating for federalism and this is where I fall.
Byebyo munange
Abbey
Posted in Politics, Riots and genocide, kingdoms |
September 28, 2009
Posted in Entertainment, international |
September 28, 2009
Dear Ugandans,
I don’t know whether Besigye is right that Kabaka can have political power or not. I’m still thinking about it. All I know is that president Museveni has now got unbridled political power in Uganda such that nobody can stop him from doing anything he wants and that is why we need to all struggle to get federalism in the country. I feel let down by our some of our brothers in Bunyoro who claim that they want the regional tier, a system or a deal which was negotiated between former Katikilo of Buganda, Mulyanyamuri Semogerere, and the central government, without Bunyoro’s input. The people who negotiated this thing don’t want it and that would have been enough for Bunyoro to back off.
What is federalism?
Federalism is a mode of political organization that unites independent states within a larger political framework while still allowing each state to maintain its own political integrity (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1994, vol. 4, p. 712). While the distribution of power between states and the federal authority will vary from system to system, all federal systems preserve the ability of state governments to decide matters of local importance without interference from the federal superstructure.
In the American system, for example, the states are considered to be the source of political power; it is the states that call the federal government into existence, and it is the states that have the right to legislate on matters of local concern. I think this is what Besigye meant when he said that Buganda will determine its own constitutional rule under a federal arrangement.
So, If we are to have federo in Uganda as supported by Besigye and asked by Mengo, the federal government headed by Museveni or any president will enjoy delegated power, i.e., power that the states hand over to the federal government for the purpose of dealing with issues of national scope. This can only be a good thing because it will stop any president from standing in a national parliament and make announcements like ‘any civilian found attacking another civilian or security operative will be short’’ or ‘ I don’t kneel for fellow human beings’.
Media in Uganda
The media is all living in fear because they fear running anything against NRM or the president, and I have no doubt they would shut any radio or newspaper down in a heartbeat in the pretext of protecting “national security” – the age old catchall bullshit excuse for doing whatever they damn please.
Fascism in NRMO
As history frighteningly and repeatedly demonstrates, unchecked government power invariably leads to fascism and totalitarianism – a fact realized by millions of Germans, Russians, and Chinese in the 20th century. In Uganda, we had fascist parties like UPC but we never learnt from it because all signs are that NRMO has overnight turned into a UPC plus.
One of the common characteristics of fascist movements is totalitarian ambitions and this is where NRMO has headed very fast without any breakers on the paddle. For instance, although Hitler had not revealed the full extent of his totalitarian aims before he came to power, as Führer (“Leader”) of the Third Reich, he attempted not only to control all political power but also to dominate many institutions. Similarly, we have been telling Ugandans that president Museveni is dominating institutions in the country and something needs to be done. Now look where we are at the moment. The signs were there for everybody to see but we ignored them.
Again, before they came to power, Hitler and Mussolini, despite their dislike of democracy, were willing to engage in electoral politics and give the appearance of submitting to democratic procedures. When Hitler was appointed chancellor in 1933, he abandoned his military uniform for a civilian suit and bowed profusely to President Paul von Hindenburg in public ceremonies. In 1923 Mussolini proposed an electoral reform, known as the Acerbo Law, which gave two-thirds of the seats in Parliament to the party that received the largest number of votes. Although Mussolini insisted that he wanted to save Parliament rather than undermine it, the Acerbo Law enabled the Fascists to take control of Parliament the following year and impose a dictatorship.
This is no different from the time when Museveni came to power and we all welcomed him with open hands. He started the LC system in Uganda and he also started as a democrat, at least on the face of things. Probably, this is how most of us were duped into singing this movement fallacy. Baganda supported and loved Museveni because they believed that he was gonna restore our ‘ebyafe’. Instead, he has played games with them for 23 years. Yet the longer he takes to resolve this political problem, the more his ratings will slip — diminishing his power to achieve anything.
Now we are in state where by to criticize Museveni’s pernicious power is the most egregious societal taboo in Uganda. Actually, I have turned this statement into my email signature for a while. One risks being beaten up, tortured, imprisoned or even probably killed just to be anti-Museveni and I don’t think this is right.
Byebyo banange
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Politics, federalism in Uganda, kingdoms |
September 4, 2009
Ugandans,
I’m happy that some of you have put in the bin the myth that FDC is the same as NRM based on membership. So let’s move on to the next level some people have raised which is about ‘same policies’ between them. I wish to say that this is also a very wrong assumption and I hinted on it in my last paragraph in the link : http://semuwemba.wordpress.com/2009/06/13/fdc-is-different-from-nrm/.
The fact still remains that FDC policies are different from NRM. For instance, the FDC election manifesto 2006 was talking about “Delivering Social Security for All” and they promised “strategies to ensure sustainable incomes for senior citizens …who have no pension cover…..They will have a monthly stipend provided by the state”. This wasn’t in the NRMO manifesto but instead they(NRMO) promised ‘prosperity for all’ or ‘ Bonna Baggagawale’ which Dr. Besigye was criticising recently while in Busoga.
I must also mention that NRM has been copying FDC and Besigye’s policies since 2001 when Besigye stood as an independent. They copied the ‘delivering the social security for all’ (FDC, 2006) and ‘getting rid of graduation tax’ (Besigye, 2001) policies. If NRMO manifesto or policies was an essay, they could easily have been accused of plagiarism because they don’t reference the sources where they get their policies from.
Mr. Augustine Ruzindana also recently wrote something interesting which got pro-federalists like me smiling. I think he was responding to some UAH members who asked for FDC’s proposed draft on federalism. In his article on September 4, 2009, he wrote:’….. Finally, in my last article the allusion to the FDC position on federalism has resulted in demands for documentation. After explaining that in a federal system each state/region/province would have a constitution providing for qualifications for leadership I concluded as follows: “The FDC has worked out an arrangement the various regions would have such constitutions”. This was already stated in the 2006 FDC election manifesto, page 9, thus: “The FDC will uphold the aspirations of Uganda in respect of a Federal System of governance as contained in the Justice Odoki and Prof Sempebwa Constitutional Reports. We…”.
“Within the first year of the FDC Government, we will institute a genuine dialogue for the establishment of a Federal System of Governance”. Anyway, I still think Mr. Ruzindana should avail us with a detailed document about federalism to put our minds at rest.
The NRM manifesto of 2006 was talking about issues such as: professionalising the army and police force, women emancipation, UPE and USE, industrialisation of Uganda……. and more ‘paper lies’. UPE and USE are functional but not effective. They still need more planning and improvement provided donors don’t pull out of the deal.
Having said this, I don’t see any thing wrong with parties having some similarity in policies. For instance, I would love FDC to come up with a better planned UPE or USE program than that of NRMO. Policies are designed using empirical data and opinions among the Uganda population. Then after a policy has been implemented by the party in power, the people responsible look at the results to determine whether the policies were efficacious. It is not easy to tell whether the results were CAUSED by the policy, but there is a STRONG correlation that a bad policy will always produce bad results. With UPE, I think the policy itself is ok, its just that it was either not well planned or wrongly implemented. Another problem is that most of Museveni’s policies are based on prejudices and fears and not on results.
Nze bwendaba
Abbey
Posted in FDC, Politics |
August 23, 2009
Dear Ugandans,
As a lover of football particularly the premier league, I feel disturbed that our governments in Uganda have not taken sports very seriously since independence. Sports in Uganda are not taken so seriously by the government because they say there have got to put money in other more pressing areas such as health and roads. Unfortunately, even the other ‘pressing issues’ like poverty alleviation, health or infrastructure, have not improved so much from the government funding due to poor leadership and corruption.
The British colonialists gave us a good foundation in sports by forming the first international sports organization in 1954 called The Ugandan Olympic Committee (UOC) . This gave us a chance to Ugandans to participate in the Olympics in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, in 1956. The Olympics Movement in Uganda was started by a Cambridge graduate called Richard N. Posnett, who arrived in Uganda in 1941 and he was the first chairman of the UOC until he left the country in 1958.
Since 1956, we have participated in all subsequent Olympic Games, with the exception of 1976, when most African countries did not participate as a protest against New Zealand’s continued rugby contact with apartheid South Africa. Iddil Amin despite his dictatorial policies,put a lot of effort in sports such that we ended up having about 32 representatives Uganda in the Olympics compared to any other time. There was also a lot of boxing during Amin’s time and we registered some success in 1972 when John Aku-Bua won the gold medal in the 400-m hurdles in Munich. Yes in 2006 under president Museveni, we were represented by about 49 athletes but most of the funding was not from the government.
The UOC is apparently independent of government aid, but are reliant on the Olympic Solidarity Fund. This is where they get the money to pay for their staff and most of their activities. The UOC does not receive funding from the government, but there is provision to appeal to the government for funds to finance its participation if necessary.
Uganda had no representatives in the Paralympics mainly due to lack of funds, though it did have one disabled athlete compete in the 2006 Commonwealth Games.
When Mutesa 2 was the president of Uganda,the Ministry of Education and Sports was established in 1962 as the overall governing body of sport and physical education in Uganda but several ministers would feel as if they are being demoted when they are given this ministry, mainly because there is no money in it. In June 1964,the Ministry of Education and Sports established the National Council of Sports (NCS) by an Act of Parliament. The NCS is funded with grants from the government, loans from the government, or any monies generated by the government. It is responsible for financing the organization and administration of sport, financing the training of sports coaches, providing facilities and equipment, financing local and international activities, and financing the training and preparation of sportsmen and sportswomen for the Olympic Games, the Commonwealth . With all these activities, the NCS has been getting a lukewarm reception from the Museveni government to finance their activities. They only get a grant of Sh150 million from the government which is clearly not enough to fund even a quarter of their activities.
Then we have always got a problem of politicians who just want to use sports to push their hideen agendas because theydon’t have sports at heart. For instance, late Obote tried to play his fascist politics between the UOC and NCS in 1965 which led to a lot of conflicts in relation to areas of responsibility. Therefore,in November 1965, the NCS used its new political power as an arm of government to take over the UOC and make it a subsidiary of the NCS. This adversely affected the role of the UOC as an independent body affiliated with the IOC. However, Iddil Amin sorted out this problem out by eventually reaffirming the independence of the UOC in October 1975 ,in conjunction with the constitution of the IOC (IOC, 1980) .
Under Museveni, the same story of little funding and more politics has continued when it comes to sports such that even the draft by the former minister of sports, Dr. Khiddu Makubuya, in 2004 which aimed at improving the funding of sports in Uganda has not been that effective as expected. We have not had so many medalists under Museveni apart from Dorcus Inzikuru, the women’s 2005 world champion and 2006 Commonwealth champion in the 3,000-m steeplechase, and Boniface Kiprop, the 2006 men’s 10,000-m Commonwealth champion.
People like Ouma Kassimu would not have been known in boxing if he had not deserted the army to go and push his dreams from USA. Ouma was one of the NRA child soldiers used by NRA to fight the Obote dictatorship from Uganda. If Ouma had remained in Uganda where there are little funds for sports, he would not have probably won the boxing world title in 2005.
I therefore appeal to the government to start putting money into sports and support the few academies in the country like the ones started by Vice president,Dr. Gilbert Bukenya and my Kibuli OB,Mujibu Kasule. Ugandans should be able to watch their teams on TV other than watching the premier league alone. I Love Chelsea FC but I would also love to watch Express FC from my sitting room in England without the need to travel to Uganda.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Sports, history |
August 21, 2009
Obote 2 and Amin both banned the guild offices at Makerere University because they looked at them as power threats. Under Obote 2 the student Guild was abolished because UPC had lost popularity at Makerere. Therefore, The Guild was abolished in 1981, the then Guild President Mr Opiyo Oloya was driven into exile. After the Guild was abolished in 1981, the UPC leaders named Mr Mbaine-a Munyankole doing Bachelor of Commerce as the new chairman.
The Obote army intimidated and killed a lot of students at Makerere university in the 1980s purely because they wanted to devise ways of either UPC dominating the Guild or closing it altogether if UPC couldn’t have it. At one time, one George Bwanika was shot and damped in Namanve forests. UPC used the offices of the then Dean of students, George Kihuguru and the Deputy Vice chancellor,Gingera-Pinycwa, to plung the whole university into chaos with the help of obviously the army.
On 20th February 1981, Obote invited some UPC student supporters and Mr.Kihuguru for a meeting at state house and this is where they devised the plan to get rid of the then Guild president, Opiyo Oloya. I think this guy is now writing for the New Vision as I have read several articles authored by him in that paper. After this meeting, UPC students broke into the offices of the Guild, looted files, beat up the Guild officials and announced that they had overtaken Opiyo’s government. The whole thing was done in Amin style and then you wonder where Idd Amin learnt these coup tactics from.
Before Opiyo, there was a UPC Guild president in the names of Welikhe Watuwa who was the first to abrogate the constitution of the Guild(just like Obote did in 1966)-because he(Welikhe) was simply a fascist or rather neo-fascist. So a resolution of vote of no confidence was introduced and
tabled in the Guild General Assembly to boot him out. Opiyo Oloya was the one that was elected to replace Welikhe and in the press release of 6th Dec 1980, Opiyo warned that the majority of students he represented wouldn’t recognise any govt that would come in power illegally or fraud.So when UPC stole the election, they booted him out and that’s how he ended up in
Canada.
UPC used also used to steal guild elections at Makerere university. Ogenga otunnu was Guild President 1982-3, and was succeeded by Okuraba who was also rigged for by the same machinery. The late Paulo Muwanga rigged for Badru Ssebyala.
UPC is a party that trained and started rigging in Uganda. They rigged the 1980 elections because they wanted Obote to become the president of Ugandaby all means.For instance, Museveni who was in Uganda People’s Movement(UPM) in 1980, is quoted to have said that “Kategaya was a very bad UPC. He even stole our votes. He stole eight. He told us. He voted eight times”.
Probably Museveni learned all the tactics of rigging elections while still a member of UPC because he also been taken to court for the same after the 2001 and 2006 elections.
Abbey
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections, Obote and UPC |
August 19, 2009
The problem with some UPC supporters is that they just take things at face value without critically analysing issues. Now let us analyse the internal dynamics of the war before they start comparing the silly Joseph Kony war and the NRA war (1980-86) again.
First of all, there is a difference between the conventional war and an irregular war (guerrilla war). Conventional wars have clear front lines in which attacks take place mostly from barricades and stable positions. Violence against civilians and combatants takes place in clearly distinguished spaces. Civilians are generally isolated from the battlefield: while some may live close to the frontlines, or even go there to visit combatants, their life is somewhat independent from the events taking place in it. The American Civil war (1861-1865) was a typical example of a conventional civil war. We have not had that kind of war in Uganda history since independence.
In Guerrilla wars (like Luwero Triangle), such a clear spatial distinction between battlefield and non-battlefield areas is lacking, as the war takes place unevenly all over the territory. In consequence, there is a greater mingling of civilians and combatants. So despite the fact that it is called the Luwero Triangle war, civilians were killed in other parts of the country as well. The battle lines were not limited in Luwero.
Civilians are killed in a guerrilla war when, for example, civilians hide potential victims, they help them to flee to other places; they give false indications to the groups, remain silent, or even engage in violent confrontation with the group. Going by this explanation, it is so likely that the Obote men or UNLA would be the one to exert violence on the civilian population during the Luwero Triangle war. Several people were killed between 1980 and 1985 because they were thought to be ‘Bayekela’ (rebels) or helping the ‘bayekela’. Obote had no support from Buganda where most of the killing took place. He had ‘lost’ an election in 1980 but he decided to impose himself on the people of Uganda. So the aggrieved party here were the people of Uganda.
In Kony’s case, civilians in the north are most likely killed by the rebels because of non-cooperation with an enemy or occupier (NRMO government), civilian disobedience, and ideological opposition- “civilian defence”. Actually, the war in northern Uganda is one of the trickiest civil wars in the world. It is very difficult to know who is doing the more killing between LRA and UPDF but my bet would be on LRA because they don’t have enough support where they are fighting from.
The difference between the Joseph Kony war or LRA war and Luwero Triangle war is that Joseph Kony failed to mobilise majority of the population in the north to support his cause unlike museveni who convinced majority of the population in the south of Uganda to support his cause to get rid of Obote dictatorship. Where there is a high level of mobilization of the population, armed groups are prone to target civilians in order to sweep the rears of potentially challenging enemies.
In a nutshell, there is no justification for the LRA war and that is why it is bound to end in failure. The best Kony can get out of this situation is saving his own skin. I know Mr. Matek,one of the UPC supporters, does not agree with us on this one but it is the truth.
Abbey
Posted in luwero war after 1980 'theft' |
August 19, 2009
Dear Ugandans,
If you follow the speech made by Sir Andrew Cohen, the former Governor of Uganda at a joint meeting of the Royal African Society and the Royal Empire Society in 1957 before he handed the tools of leadership to Sir Frederick Crawford, then you will realise that Obote 1 inherited a good future plan from the British after our independence. Whether he implemented it well or not, that is another issue. I stand to be corrected with facts if I’m wrong on this.
Uganda under Governor Cohen had a five-year development programme, from 1955 to 1960, involving capital expenditure of some £30m by the Government and another £8m to £10m for the Uganda Electricity Board. Frederick extended this programme though the independence in 1962 caught up with him. So Obote took over and continued with the program implementation.
Under Cohen, agricultural organisations and farm institutes were introduced under the aegis of Agricultural Enterprises Ltd.,a subsidiary of the State-owned Uganda Development Corporation.These things did not start with Obote as they were already being implemented. The mining industry was already functional when Obote took over .The textile factory and Kilembe copper and cobalt mine were in production. Other projects are going forward.
The Uganda Development (UDC) was set up with the aim of bringing private enterprise into partnership in these important projects. Things like electricity, road and railway construction and rural and urban water supplies were already in place when Obote took over.
Cooperatives which Museveni killed were introduced during the British time and Obote just strengthened the implementation process. This was a process intended to help Africans to play a larger part in trade and commerce. So long as commerce was mainly confined to Asians and Europeans there was a state of unbalance which held back the country. There were already 1,300 co-operative societies in Uganda before Cohen handed the administration to another governor. Their total turnover was £4 m a year. There were ten co-operative-owned ginneries. The Bugisu co-operative union, the biggest in the country, was playing a large part in the marketing of the arabika coffee. Also there were technical institutes put in place for the advancement of Africans in trade. The Public Service Commission was set up with the task of promoting the appointment of local people and the maintenance of standards in the civil service. Scholarships were set up and educational colleges built to get qualified people for the jobs. Regardless of the above, I think Uganda benefitted a lot from Obote’s first presidency economically though he made political blunders along the way which are haunting UPC up to now particularly attacking the Lubili in Mengo.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
United Kingdom
Posted in Obote and UPC, history |
August 6, 2009
Dear Ugandans,
1.UPC was the first party to ban political parties in Uganda under Obote 1 in 1968 under the famous Lugogo ceremony.
2. Yes, it is true that UPC were more experienced in politics than any other group in Uganda and that’s why i called them the ‘tigers’ (1960-1980). They wanted to use their ‘tigerish’ status in 1980 elections but a few Ugandans under the leadership of Museveni decided to take the bull by its horns and kicked them out of the ring. Since then, all peaceful Ugandans have been working towards weakening them further and restricting them to ‘Uganda House’.However, it would be credible to franchise one of the chains of restaurants in England called’ Tiger Tiger’ on one of the floors at ‘Uganda House’ for the sake of remembering the UPC of 1960s.
3.Since I’m not a politician, I’m gonna be honest with UPC supporters:when Museveni banned political parties in 1986, he was targeting mainly one group and that was UPC.Trust me, i would have done the same during that time if i was the president of this country. NRM were still ‘young’ in politics and needed to learn on the job to stabilize the country. Guys likeDr. Besigye, Tumwine, Rwomushana, Salim Saleh,…….. and Museveni himself were so young when they took over offices in 1986. Therefore, they needed no disturbances from the experienced groups such as UPC. If UPC was not around or already weak at that time, i can bet you, with all my heart, that Museveni and group would not have banned political parties in Uganda in 1986. Parties were released when everybody was sure that UPC were in a ‘nursing home’ somewhere. Most of their young cadres had left the country after the fall of Obote 2 and gone abroad to start new lives, and several of them are still living abroad. So most Ugandans are not worried about them. They don’t want to come back to Uganda because they have become comfortable abroad with some career jobs or something like that. Even the few Ochienos(like my brother,Joseph Ochieno, in London here) who make trips back home every now and then, don’t wanna leave Europe indefinitely.Ochieno went back to contest for some post in the last UPC delegates conference but he immediately came back to the UK as soon as he realised that there is less hope for him in Uganda
4.There was nothing in Moshi like ‘locking out’ as in like stopping Ugandans to attend the conference. Please, brother Ochieno, stop misleading readers. UPC wanted to cheat in the conference by bringing their majority in exile in TZ to the conference. So they had to be stopped because each group was asked to send in two representatives. However, UPC again went for their plan B of ‘cheating’ by creating bogus groups under different UPC leaders which represented them in the conference.
5.UPC or Obote’s men were ready to dominate the military Commission(MC) and UNLA as the latter was under the direct control of the former.MC comprised mainly of UPC ‘TABLIQS’ such as: Paulo Muwanga(UPC) as the chairman,Col Zedi Maruru(UPC) as its secretary, Tito Okello(UPC), Oyite Ojok(UPC), Colonel Omaria(UPC) and others. ‘Musajja watu’, Museveni, who has now turned into ‘Gusajja wattu’, was only sneaked into the position of Vice chairman of MC at the intervention of Nyerere. Obote was controlling the MC and UNLA using a remote control in his sitting room in TZ.
Byebyo
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections, Moshi conference 1979 |
August 6, 2009
Dear readers,
The reason why I think that banning political parties, particularly UPC, was justified could be found on why Binaisa lost his presidency. If Binaisa had started by banning political parties, rather UPC, he would have lasted in that presidency as probably Museveni. You cannot organise elections in an environment that was as volatile as Binaisa and Lule’s Uganda yet they both never had armies of their own. So in terms of political strategy, Museveni and his ‘friends’ were right to ban political parties when they had just come to power in 1986. Museveni knew that at some point political space or multi partism would have to be opened up and that’s what happened in 2004.
Several groups or parties cropped up during Binaisa and this made him not to concentrate on stabilising the country first before thinking of his leadership. His leadership was threatened from the beginning due to these unbanned political groups, among which included the following:
- Uganda National Union (UNU): This was headed by Lameck Ntambi(RIP) who called on Binaisa to resign or risk being denied aid by ‘friendly countries’.
- Obote in TZ: this guy was in TZ and he kept reminding Binaisa he was coming home to stand for presidential elections as if there were no other UPC candidates in Uganda. If he had banned UPC for some time, Obote would have become weaker and probably UPC would have considered him a liability to their resources in the process of reorganising their party
- DP: This also created a problem for Binaisa as they kept fighting for multipartism instead of the so called UNLF umbrella.
- The UPC ‘gang of four’: this included Paulo Muwanga, Professor Dan Nabudere, Professor Yash Tandon, Omwony Ajwok and Edward Rugumayo. These guys used the NCC to mobilise against Binaisa and Lule big time because they wanted to prepare for Obote’s return.
- Museveni and his FRONASA: these were also ready to strike him any time they sensed any weakness or loophole anywhere.
Binaisa later realised that he should have put a stop to this political party nonsense in the first place but it was rather too late. In April 1980, Binaisa addressed a meeting of UNLF district chairmen and activists at Makerere University and said that all elections would be held under the UNLF umbrella.
On hearing this, DP was the first to send a delegation led by Semogerere Paulo, and included guys like professor Kyalwazi, Evaristo Nyanzi( probably not the one who knelt for Museveni b’se of ministerial appointment), Henry Semukutu and others , to have a 1:1 with Binaisa about Multipartism. Now you see how the man was not concentrating on other issues apart from ‘BIBINA’, consolidating his leadership and politics.
The UPC group under Luwuriza-Kirunda and notorious Rwakasisi also addressed a press conference some time later opposing Binaisa on this because they knew that it was their ticket to bring Obote back and possibly lead Uganda again. When UPC realised that Binaisa was very serious with retaining the presidency, they organised a coup since it was already their trade mark in the politics of Uganda. That Military Commision headed by Muwanga came to power through a coup: they ordered the soldiers to surround Radio Uganda, the post office and state house and putting the then president under detention.
The Musevenis were also cheering ‘AMUKUBYE’ since they were less influential at the time and just waiting for the big boys to finish their fights before they start theirs.
So how can anybody argue that UPC would not be still in power today if somebody had not taken a decision to fight them in Luwero bushes? They were not ready to follow the paths of democracy when one analyses all their actions before and after the fall of Iddil Amin Dada. They just wanted power at all costs and that was unacceptable. Good enough, they are no longer ‘tigers’ as they have been reduced to ‘parrots’(those birds that repeat words after you when in the house). Parrots are similar in behaviour as mynah birds. Nobody takes them so seriously when it comes to serious issues.
On a personal note, I’m still happy to stay in the UK at the moment; after all I’m not yet planning and probably will not plan to stand for any elective office in Uganda, unlike some people who are doing it from UK. It is like a person who plans to get a mango fruit from a mango tree using ‘OLUSOLOBYO’( a long, straight and light stick) instead of climbing the tree. In England, they use ladders or cherry pickers to get the fruits but at least they are near the fruit tree.
Byebyo Mukwano
Abbey
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections, UPC current politics, history |
November 21, 2008
I’m not an expert in herbal medicine but it works perfectly well. I agree that it needs to be run along with conventional medicine. Herbs have been an important source of medicine for thousands of years. The World Health Organization estimates that up to 80 percent of people still rely on herbal remedies for their health care. And there are reasons for this, namely, the high cost of drugs in clinics and pharmacies, drug resistance which often lead to treatment failure, prolong and expensive treatment of some chronic diseases which the general population cannot afford. Has anyone seen those lines at Mulago hospital? Not every one can afford to take their wife and kids for treatment at Kampala International hospital. If herbal medicine was not in Uganda, so many Ugandans will be dead by one. Trust me on this.
In S.Africa, traditional herbs have long been used to treat various pain or inflammation-related symptoms. South Africa has the richest plant biodiversity in the world, many of which are medicinally useful .They also use herbs to treat livestock diseases. I don’t know whether the ‘balalo’ in
Uganda also use it too. Some of the plants are employed to treat diabetes, tumours, stomach pain, rheumatism and many other indications.
Personally, I love herbs because of the wide variety of conditions that is said to be treatable with a single plant or group of plants. The reasons why some remedies from plants are used for so many diseases could be that they affect a common (denominator) factor responsible for the diseases and
disorders. That’s one of the reasons why I love herbs so much. You take them for cough but you end up treating 9 diseases hidden in your system as well. That is fantastic, man. Whenever I visit Kampala, I treat my malaria with that sour plant called alovera. I hear it treats so many stuff and it makes me feel good.
People also worry about bacteria infection that comes out of mixing herbs or saliva used by herbalists. Honestly, in the UK here I see people kissing every day on the cheeks or mouth-mouth. So why should anybody worry about a bacteria from a certain ‘jaja’ or ‘grandma’ throwing saliva while preparing herbs. Bacteria are everywhere and our bodies normally find a way of dealing with them. In any case, we all know that the immune system is modified by diet, pharmacological agents, and naturally occurring food chemicals, such as vitamins and flavonoids. Herbal Plants contain a wide
variety of natural compounds mainly plant secondary compounds. Among the secondary compounds are the flavonoids. Flavonoids are among the most common constituents in plants. They are present in high concentrations in flowers, seeds, leaves, herbs, fruits, stems, bulbs, tea, wine, vegetables and other food sources. So taking ‘traditional mixtures’ as some people call them actually treats the disease. That’s why we want the government to put herbalists into some form of training like the Chinese have done to improve in the grey areas which are worrying people.
The Department of Botany at Makerere University has done a lot of research around this area which may one may find very useful to read. They did a study between January 2000 and September 2003 to document medicinal plants used to treat fungal and bacterial infections in health care in and around Queen Elizabeth Biosphere Reserve in Bushenyi and Kasese districts in western Uganda. They also did another one in August 2007.
Abbey.Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Uncategorized |
November 21, 2008
Regarding the justification of the Luwero war, I still believe it was justified and I support the initiative taken by Museveni and others to fight Obote’s government. To broaden this discussion a bit, I’m gonna mention the main principles of the justice of war which are: having just cause, being declared by a proper authority, possessing right intention, having a reasonable chance of success, and the end being proportional to the means used. Museveni and Group had a just cause: getting rid of a dictatorial government which had stolen the 1980 elections. The authority that declared war was a mixture of UPM and other registered parties in Uganda (forming something called NRM/NRA) and their intentions were good at the time and most Ugandans supported them particularly the Baganda. NRA/NRM fought a guerrilla war for only 5 years and that justifies the envisaged success. They knew that the population was behind them and that’s why they chose the Baganda spot who openly hated Obote and his regime.
What exactly happened during the course of fighting in Luwero like killing innocent civilians; using child soldiers; and so on, cannot make a war unjustifiable and we have got international bodies that deal with people who break rules of war fare. For instance international agreements such as the Geneva and Hague conventions are historical rules aimed at limiting certain kinds of warfare. The real Luwero war was justified and there is no question about this. If any morals were not considered by the Museveni soldiers while in Luwero, then some body should investigate this and hand it to over to the international bodies. That is why we have got the ICC now disturbing Kony, Bemba , Taylor and others.
However, I must warn people that there are legal arguments in this area of what is considered moral and immoral when fighting a war. It is not an easy case. For example, to defeat Germany in World War II, it was deemed necessary to bomb civilian centres, or in the US Civil War, for General Sherman to burn Atlanta. Secondly, how does one morally justify the discovery and use of nuclear weapons in a war and end up killing more people than those that were killed in Luwero Triangle and bushes? The Soviets acquired nuclear and thermonuclear weapons in 1948 and 1953 respectively but an attack in 1948 was not seriously considered. An attack on the Soviet Union was quickly rejected by Eisenhower in 1953–although the main obstacle seems to have been the feasibility of removing permanently the threat in one attack. Similarly, would you consider the Israeli destruction in 1981 by F-15’s and F-16’s of a plutonium-producing nuclear reactor in Iraq a just war or not–although the U.S. and U.N. at the time formally condemned the attack and the Israeli policy? There are several examples including the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.
Well the point am trying to make is that wars are justifiable depending on what I have mentioned above. However, what happens during the war does not make a war unjustifiable. Therefore, Museveni’s war against Obote’s forces was justifiable and if he had not done it, probably some body else would have done it.
Posted in luwero war after 1980 'theft' |
November 25, 2008
I have been thinking about the Uganda Christian ‘martyrs’ prosecuted on June 3,1886 at Namugongo and its significance to Uganda as a country after one of the Ugandans raised it at the Ugandan At Heart(UAH) forum. So I asked myself questions like: were the Uganda martyrs really deserve to be called ‘martyrs’ or not? Could Catholics killed for faith be called “martyrs”? Why did kabaka Mwanga took this decision at the time?
Now it is my understanding that within the Bugandan culture the execution of the Christian martyrs was both political and religious. It is the Buganda kingdom that invited the first missionaries who arrived in 1877 and the kingdom benefited tremendously from them particularly in developmental projects like schools. So we thank the insight Kabaka Mutesa 1 had at the time to invite these people.
Nevertheless, I’m still puzzled that we continue to call these people ‘martyrs’ due to the fact that they challenged the power structures of the Bugandan culture at the time because of their faith. If we are to go by the Muslims who keep challenging the power and social structure of the western countries because of their faith, then the word ‘martyr’ is not truly applicable to these people. Muslims or Christians who attempt to do today what these ‘martyrs’ did during Kabaka Mwanga’s reign will feel the wrath of the law and some are even branded terrorists. However, we should not forget that those who die in this way in places like the Middle East are still branded as ‘martyrs’ by some Islamic factions. In Bugandan culture, which the kabaka (leader of Buganda) represents, the kabaka ruled with great authority, and to refuse anything he asked was not only to offend the kabaka but to dishonour the entire Bugandan kingdom. Mwanga perceived that Christians were a challenge to his political power, since Christian pages were not honouring and were taught not to honour their obligation to obey him. If we are to continue to call these Christians killed at Namugongo martyrs, then we have got a lot of martyrs now in Uganda.
Second, it is important at the outset to realize that the persecution of Christians in Uganda was not the norm. There were relatively few Christians actually killed for religious reasons compared to the large number of Christian Baganda. So I don’t think Kabaka Mwanga set out to kill Christians as in Christians or Protestants as in Protestants.
Third, all of the martyrs were Bugandan natives converted through the missionary efforts of British Anglicans and French Catholics. Thus, their lives and deaths were embedded from start to finish in a culture they were familiar with and understood; they were not killed due to a lack of cultural knowledge or a “foreigner’s mistake.” A man like Joseph Mukasa was the personal servant of the kabaka who oversaw all of the kabaka’s pages. He knew what he was getting himself into by confronting kabaka Mwanga over murder of Anglican Bishop Hannington. Mukasa told Mwanga “bluntly” that his ordering of the death of Hannington was wrong; this angered Mwanga, and Mwanga took Mukasa’s outbursts as a form of treason. Mukasa knew the drill about Buganda cultures at the time very well. To disagree with the Kabaka was not uncommon in Buganda but Mukasa’s assertive confronting of Mwanga was unique. The Kabakas used to allow passive forms of resistance and there were effective.Lastly, Mwanga chose Namugongo as a spot to execute these people because to die at Namugongo made one an enemy of the Buganda state. Namugongo was an equivalent of the England’s “Tower Hill.”
Personally, I don’t think we should continue to call the 1886 Namugongo religious people ‘martys’ in the sense of the word in relation to the present events happening in the world. However, I’m happy to say that Buganda kingdom has changed greatly since that time. There is a lot of religious freedom. Catholics, Protestants, Christians and Muslims can all interact within the kingship of Buganda without any problem. It is more reason for Ugandans to support this kingdom that is not afraid of changes that make it stronger. What Kabaka Mwanga did at that time is inexcusable but at least we all learnt from it but most importantly we understand why he did it.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
United Kingdom
GOD BLESS
Posted in Politics, Religion | Tags: Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba |
November 29, 2008
I don’t know how some people arrive at the conclusion that white people have got higher Intelligence Quotient, or IQ than black people but I still maintain that they are wrong. Differences in IQ have got nothing to do with race or colour. I’m gonna be forced to go a little bit scientific and I hope readers do not get bored by this. There are possibly two explanations for this according to scientists and psychologists.
The way the brain is formed and its relationship with intelligence is so puzzling even to a lay man like me. One of the most pressing issues facing the field of psychology is that of individual differences in intelligence. People’s IQs are relatively stable over their lifetime, but this does not mean that their intellectual performance does not change. Some people’s IQ grow with age while others it reduces by age. That’s why you find people who were not that intelligent while in Ntare S.S but grow out of it and ended up even becoming presidents of nations.
The view that white people are more intelligent than black people is wrongly based on the inheriting view of genes which is simply inconclusive and which has got nothing to do with race. For example, identical twins tend to have similar IQs, even when the twins are brought up in different environments. Moreover, adopted children tend to have IQs that are more similar to those of their biological parents than to those of their adoptive parents. These findings suggest that it is not children’s upbringing but rather their genes that determines their IQ. Attempts at improving the IQ of disadvantaged children through environmental intervention programs have also been relatively unsuccessful. However, it should be stressed that these twins with good genes can be either be black or white. There is no gene that has got monopoly over the other in terms of race. In view of such findings, the development of intelligence is governed by some genetic program and is relatively immune to differences in environmental circumstances, at least within the range that most children experience.
Again when we look at the research understanding the how the brain develops and processes information, Scientists believe that neural connections are critical for the meaningful processing of information. This suggests that different neural connections are required for different abilities. Studies of brain development have shown that these neural connections are relatively undifferentiated when a child is born and that they then become progressively more elaborate over childhood until maturity. There is no difference in the neurons found in either a black child or a white one. We are all the same.
Therefore, as a second explanation of difference in intelligence would be the environment. Scientists have explained the difference in IQ relating it to the environment. Many studies have shown that neural connections develop and change in response to environmental stimulation. This capacity of the neural connections to adapt has often been referred to as neural plasticity. For example, research has shown that if kittens are reared in a visual environment in which they are exposed only to vertical lines, in later life the only visual stimuli they will be able to recognize are vertical lines. If they are exposed only to spots of light during infancy, they will be able to see only spots of light in later life. These findings suggest that environmental stimulation plays a crucial role in determining the arrangement of a child’s neural connections and, hence, how the child processes information. Most Africans are probably less intelligent because of the environment around them but if this is improved, then Africa can have people with higher IQ. It has got nothing to do with race at all. Obama or Nelson Mandela may be considered intelligent basically because of either two explanations and the race has got nothing to do with it. Imagine a child whose brain is very good at adapting neural connections to the environment. He or she would be able to develop the appropriate connections to process many kinds of information more effectively than other children of the same age, and would appear to be bright or gifted. In contrast, consider a child whose brain is unable to adapt to the environment and who is unable to develop the neural connections necessary to understand many things experienced in the environment. That child would remain childlike as a result of poorly developed neural circuits. I don’t know whether the environmental factor mentioned here includes nutritional explanation because how does one explain better fed kids in the west who end up uttering nonsense when they open their mouth. They cannot do anything for themselves.
To be honest with you, when one looks at this area of research, you come to the conclusion that Black people are as intelligent as white people but other factors explain why they are in the bottom pit of success. It has got nothing to do with race.
I again disagree with some people when they say that by the time Congo becomes the present Denmark, Denmark would be on another planet. There is no time frame when it comes to economic development. China was below Denmark in terms of economic development 20 years ago but not anymore. If we get our grips together and probably get rid of the less intelligent present African leaders, things will be fine in Africa. Africa will be a force to be reckoned with on the international stage if the politics on the continent can be sorted out as soon as possible.
Posted in health, science | Tags: Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba |
January 15, 2009
1. The central purpose of this debate is to discover and fulfil an African identity. That is why I find it disappointing that in this 21st century a man can sit on a chair and start typing sentences requesting English or Swahilli to be our national languages. What is national in these languages honestly?
2. I find the leakage to this debate of the 1966 crisis or the coming of iddil Amin and Museveni to power, a kind of distraction of this debate about national languages. So please let us not mix up things. Just open up a different thread about this and we shall discuss.
3. Swahilli cannot become our national language because it has nothing to do with national. Swahilli is already constitutionally our second official language. Luganda was the first local language to produce a dictionary, I believe. This was because even the colonialists realised the need to promote it for easy communication throughout the country. I think this dictionary was compiled by John D. Murphy in 1972. However, already the missionaries had produced books serving the same purpose after swahilli was refused by Kabaka Chwa in Buganda . I must mention that the man, Father Kiggundu, who helped in compiling this dictionary, was killed by either Amin or Obote’s people. Kiggundu was the editor of Munno newspaper. Mr. Ochieno or Mr.Otto can help me here and let us know if UPC had anything to do with this murder.
4. Luganda is so romantic among the local languages in Uganda such that I have had women saying that they love it compared to other Uganda languages. It is an equivalent of the French in Europe . In football; it will be an equivalent of the Brazil sambara. In addition, it is extremely and nicely expressive, comparatively easy, and harmonious to pronounce; and easier in its grammar than any of the languages in Uganda .. It also possesses virtually the whole of the nineteen concord-prefixes.
5. Mr. Otto mentioned the gandalisation of words from other languages in one of his messages to make a certain point. I can gladly say that this is a good thing because it shows that Luganda and Baganda change with the dynamics of the society. For instance, we did not have scissors in Buganda before the Arabs came. When they came, baganda adopted the Arabic word makassi for makansi. This was done to suit the Baganda natives dealing with Arabs in trade. There are so many words like this, for instance, kofia, a cap (a word, I believe, of Turkish origin), became enkofira, a hat. The basoga call it emfwakire.
This case is not only limited to Luganda and baganda. It happened in other places in Africa as well. For instance, the Arabs found a certain group of people residing in Zanzibar called Wahadimu. Their real name is actually unknown but they were called this in use being a Swahili adaptation of the Arabic. Most of the Wahadimu now speak Swahili, though with a peculiar accent.
6. Luganda is also so much interlinked to other Bantu languages in Africa . Why should we not swallow a bottle and just promote one of our Bantu languages instead of going for a foreign language as the national language. There are so many luganda words similar to those of the Ndebele in Zimbabwe . The luganda has also got so many words similar with the Bahima. The bahima language is closely allied to Luganda and Lunyoro, a large number of the words being practically the same, but the construction differs, and the Bahima accentuate their words in a very marked manner. The usual salutation, on meeting, is Oreirige; goodbye, Osibege. On seeing a person for the second time in one day, the salutation is Osiberege.Osiberege is not that much different from osibyotya by baganda. Bahima call wooden seats (ckitebe1),Baskets (ekibo),ropes (omugwa),(enanga and entongoU) and a drum (engalabi) have all got the same names as Luganda. So Baganda can be a starting base of uniting bantu speakers before the other groups.
7. Prof Apolo Nsibambi wrote a good piece about the costs of so many languages in Uganda and it gives an insight of why we need to burry out tribal prides and promote the dominant local language in the country.. He wrote that when Uganda achieved independence, Radio Uganda was broadcasting in English, Luganda, Runyoro/Rutoro, Ateso and Lwo. In March 1967, when President Obote delivered his opening speech before a Seminar on Mass Media and Linguistic Communication in East Africa , he announced that another tenlanguages on the radio had been added. By September 1969, other languages had been introduced on the programme by Radio Uganda to make a total of eighteen. These were English, Luganda, Lusoga, Lunyole/Lusamia/Lugwe, Dhopadhola, Lumasaba, Sebei, Runyoro/Rutoro, Runyankore/Rukiga, Lwo, Ateso, Karomojong, Madi, Kakwa, Lugbara, Alur, Kuman and Hindustani.
Yet the President had pointed out in 1967 that all the fourteen languages then being broadcast were not in every case necessary. He had, however, added ‘ I am in government and I have to take the political feelings of the people into account in formulating policies.
Now I was just looking for this last statement. Obote was thinking like Mr. Obargot of 2008. Like most people, Obargot has allowed his bad feelings for Buganda in the politics of Uganda , not to support Luganda as the national language. Do you know how much money Obote costed Uganda by allowing almost 18 languages to create a stampede at Radio Uganda ?
Mr. Msibambi supplements this point of tribal emotions and feelings by giving us an example of the Kakwa. When the Kakwa were requesting that their language be used on Radio Uganda , one of their major submissions was that they felt discriminated against whenever they had to listen to programmes in Lugbara..
Posted in Politics, culture |
January 21, 2009
Multipartism helps the oppressed
Thursday, 17th January, 2008
EDITOR—I wish to comment on Michael Nakahebe’s letter entitled “Movement politics was peaceful and successful” published on Tuesday. In the letter, Nakahebe blames Africa’s present problems on tribalisation of politics.
Tribalisation of politics has been going on everywhere in Africa and has nothing to do with the introduction or resurrection of multipartism on the continent. The African governments have got a tendency to intimidate, displace and disenfranchise ethnic populations suspected of being sympathetic to the opposition.
Multipartism just gives a chance to those displaced by ethnic clashes to have a recognised voice against the government. In Kenya, there was a movement founded in the 1980s called Mungiki which drew its support from thousands of people displaced by ethnic clashes.
The reality is Africa will never go back to one-party system as so many people have sacrificed a lot to put us where we are at the moment. In Kenya, for instance, a left wing movement called Mwakenya was founded in 1979 to challenge the one-party orthodoxy. So many of its members were jailed, detained, killed or forced into exile. Mwakenya was multi-ethnic though the Kenyan government used to portray it as a Kikuyu tribal movement.
So it is the politicians in power to blame for the tribalisation of politics with their ‘divide and repress’ strategy rather than multipartism. With or without multipartism, people always find a way of opposing the government as a way of expressing freedom of association.
Several movements were formed in Kenya to challenge injustices by the state. These included: Dini Ya Msambwa, Legio Maria, Akorino and Hema ya Ngai wi Mwoyo (The Tent Of the Living God).
The common thread that joined all these movements was that they rallied their followers behind traditional values to challenge mainstream churches as well as injustices by the Kenyan government. It was not until 1992 when Kenya returned to multiparty system that some of these movements were transformed into political parties.
Ethnic violence in Kenya broke out even before the country had returned to multipartism. This was in November 1991 when Kalenjin warriors attacked Miteitei Farm on the border between Western Nyanza and the Rift Valley provinces. However, It is true that violence escalated after 1992 but this was mainly due to state tribalisation of politics rather than the existence of multipartism.
In October 1993, Maasai gangsters attacked and killed 30 people and displaced 30,000 in Enoosupukia, Narok, as punishment to the Kikuyu who had voted against the government party (KANU). The Kenya Human Rights Commission estimated that state-sponsored or state-condoned violence in Kenya between 1991 and 2001 killed 4000 people and displaced 600,000 others.
This was a ploy by the ruling elite in Kenya to use ethnic violence as a tool for winning elections and used it to blame mulitipartism. Multipartism is good as it gives people freedom of association and expression. It does not lead to ethnic violence at all. Let us give it as chance in Africa.
Abbey K. semuwemba
United Kingdom
source:www.newvision.co.ug
Posted in Politics |
February 5, 2009
I don’t know why some people think Obote is the greatest man Uganda WILL ever produce. Well, I’m sorry to say that I don’t agree with them at all. Let us scrutinise their hero:
1. Obote was the man who started coups in Uganda by illegally ousting president Mutesa in 1966. This same year he abolished kingdoms and is partly responsible for the death of Ugandans in the Lubili attack of 1966.
2. He is responsible for militarisation of politics in Uganda and this is exemplified by in so many examples in his government (Obote 1 and 2). He also started the tribalisation of the army in Uganda when he recruited a lot of his tribes mate in the Uganda Army after taking over from DP’s Ben Kiwanuka.
3. He is responsible for producing a constitution that makes the offices of the Vice president and prime minister not independent of the presidency. The president can fire the VP and prime minister any time and this was started by the changes brought about in the 1967 constitution.
4. He is allegedly responsible for several deaths of Ugandans that occurred between 1980 and 1985. Actually, he failed to protect the Ugandan population in Luwero when he was legally made a president after the 1980 elections.
5. It is also believed that president Obote did not want the Islamic University in Mbale to be built while he was in power. These allegations were made by president Museveni at one of the Mbale University’s graduation ceremony. Museveni also reportedly said that Obote did not want Uganda to be a member of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC). Obote’s reason, according to Museveni, being that the two were linked to Idi Amin.
6. Obote was one of the politicians who started the ‘TEMANGALO’ environment in Uganda. For instance, Prime Minister Kintu Musoke attacked Obote for having bought a government house on Prince Charles Drive in Kololo at a give away price. The prime minister wanted to prove that Obote was the first politician to purchase a government house and to convince the public that it was therefore in order for President Museveni or his brother Maj. Gen. Salim Saleh to purchase the same house.Let us also remember that Uganda House was built using tax payers money though this could not be proved properly in the courts of law.
7. Apollo Milton Obote is the only party leader the Uganda Peoples Congress (UPC) had before he died. Remember UPC was established before even Uganda got independence. But you gonna find a lot of UPC supporters asking a man who has been a leader of FDC party since 2005 to step aside because he has served one term.
8. E.T.C
Yoyo Obote wamwe
Abbey.K.Semuwemba
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections, Politics, history |
February 5, 2009
1. The current land bill in Uganda comes across as a document fighting for the small landlords or landless in Uganda but it loses its moral platform when the biggest land grabbers become the big people in the government or the elites in Uganda . So what is the use of this bill when even those who put it on the paper aren’t following it? Another question would be: do we have any disadvantaged groups in Uganda who do not have land? And if so, who is fighting for them? Are Balalo falling in the category of disadvantaged groups or they are being used by the national elites to grab other people’s land. Germany is the leading country to support the disadvantaged groups seeking lands the entire world. It has actively supported a lot of international declarations and conflicts which demand secured access to land particularly for the disadvantaged. These include: the Habitat II Conference in Istanbul 1996, World Bank Land Research Conferences from 2001 to2007, EU Second Forum on Sustainable Rural Development in Africa 2007 etc.
2. When the balalo walk into any village in Kiboga on the instructions of the state, is that the best way to solve land conflicts in Uganda ? When a government shifts a certain group of people to go and settle in another area already occupied by others, it raises a lot of eyebrows because the whole thing seem not be done in good spirit. I know you don’t mention this in your paper but I would be glad if you comment on it. The fact of the matter is that the way NRMO government is handling the land issue is a reflection of people who have not done enough research on the subject. Walking into an area and start evicting the indigenous people is automatically gonna breed conflicts and I don’t think we need this at the moment in Uganda . Let me give you an example; in Brazil , in the state of Amazonas it is suspected that fully one third of its land area has been illegally appropriated (Brazilian Ministry of Agrarian Development 2001). According to official maps, the remote area of Raposa Serra do Sol in the Amazon region is an Indian reservation. However, white newcomers to the land are using the judicial system to try to evict the Indians who have been living there for generations from part of the reservation. Seizing advantage of bureaucratic indifference, these people, led by powerful rice growers and ranchers, have persuaded judges to order Indians to leave the land. These are the same things almost happening in Uganda . One group of people is determined to own the biggest land in Uganda and this is unfair.
3. a)Now I would like to touch on what some people proposed to Mengo administration(about buying land in other parts of uganda rather than fight for the mile akenda (9000 sq miles) .Mengo is is against the current land bill. There is no way Mengo can start buying land in different parts of Uganda without eyebrows being raised by ethnic communities. In countries where part of the population – often indigenous people – have historically been deprived of their land rights, more serious conflicts can arise even decades or generations later. Guatamala provides such a case. In 1879, communal lands were de facto expropriated by a law giving proprietors three months to register land titles, after which the land would be declared abandoned. Most of the “abandoned” land was then allocated to large coffee growers. Although there were attempts at redistribution in the early 1950s, these were stopped and reversed following a military coup in 1954. Since then, struggle over land has continued, leading to violent conflict time and again
b) Mengo just needs to find a way of securing most of the land in Buganda or making sure that land in Buganda is not sold at the rate it is being sold right now to land grabbers. You seem to support Mengo in their approach to make sure that the kabaka land is ‘hands off’ provided they can eventually develop it (replacing subsistence farming with modern or large scale farming). Hope I have got you right on this one because I read your document ages ago. However, this position is also gonna be difficult to sustain if those in power are determined to grab land in Buganda at whatever cost.
4. I would also like to inform Ugandans that what is happening in Uganda (people in government using all means to grab people’s land) is not news in East Africa . In Kenya , the Ndung’u report from 2004 revealed that former Presidents Kenyatta and Moi, as well as cabinet ministers, former high ranking civil servants and other influential people have been among the major beneficiaries of illegal allocations of public land. So let us prepare ourselves for more land grabbing by those in power in Uganda . I heard that Mr. Museveni is now the biggest land lord in Uganda . Is this true?
What is unfortunate is the way the land grabbers have not spared the forests in the region. I don’t think that the land grabbers have given up on Mabila forest yet despite the demonstrations. They will ‘eat’ it slowly as the public concentrates on other issues. In Kenya, for instance,Ngong Road Forest next to Africa’s largest informal settlement Kibera with an estimated population of over 700,000 people provides a source of income for the poor from the harvesting of various products including firewood, poles and medical plants.The forest’s flora and fauna include over 120 bird species and over 35 mammals. The forest serves as well as water catchment as for recreational use and finally provides oxygenation for Nairobi ’s air pollution threatened inhabitants. In 1932, an area of 2,926.6 ha had been gazetted as forest reserve. Today, hardly a quarter of it is left. The allocations of Ngong Road Forest provide a sad example of how public resources have been used to unjustly enrich a few and how state corporations were used to perpetuate grand corruption. State corporations did not just lose land entrusted to them but they were also pressurized to purchase illegally acquired public land at exorbitant prices. Many became captive buyers of land from politically connected allottees. In 2001, for example, part of the forest land was illegally excised, subdivided into 32 plots and allocated to 13 companies who sold them to Kenya Pipeline Company for Ksh 262,388,478 (US $ 3.639.471).
Abbey.K.Semuwemba
Posted in Politics |
February 5, 2009
1. Habyarimana just like Museveni came into power through violence. While Museveni’s violence was justified because he had to get rid of Obote Dictatorship and had a convincing democratic plan on paper, Habyariman’s was not because his coup did not have any democratic plan ahead. Habyarimana came into power when the order of the day in East Africa was getting rid of presidents through coups. Amin ousted Obote in 1971 and Habyarimana did the same on Kayibanda two years later.
2. Both Habyarimana and Museveni introduced something called ‘the Movement’ when they came into power. Everyone in their respective countries was required to be a member of this so called ‘Movement’.
3.Habyarimana hated the ‘tutsis’ just as it is claimed by some people though I’m not sure, that president Museveni hates some tribes in the north. Habyarimana had only one Tutsi in his cabinet, one ambassador in the Foreign Service, and two deputies in the national assembly. He kept a picture of Tutsi huts in flames in his presidential house.
4. Habyarimana, just like Museveni, was also friends with the Bakiga communities
5. I highly doubt whether Habyarimana’s wife was involved in his assassination because she and her family benefited a lot from his regime and Habyarimana’s death would affect them most. Agatha Kanzinga was almost the 2nd most powerful person after her husband. It’s like Janat Museveni plotting the assassination of Museveni right now. So I rule that one out completely. She had a lot to lose.
6. I think some sections of the Hutus in Rwanda and the Tutsis in both Uganda and Rwanda masterminded the assassination of Habyarimana:
Ø When RPF was launched in 1987 in Kampala, one of their main aims was to force the return of Tutsi back to Rwanda whether Habyarimana wanted it or not. There were to do this using all the necessary means. General Rwigyema joined RPF in 1988 and later about 4000 Tutsis also deserted UPDF for RPF with the sole purpose of fighting the Habyariman government. Death of Habyarimana or incumbent would be the last thing for any rebel leader to worry about if an opportunity to effect it presents itself. Do you think Kony will not take an opportunity to ‘silence’ Museveni if it presents itself?
Ø On the other hand, some sections of the Hutu radicals in Rwanda were not happy with the Arusha agreement of August 1993 that provided for the establishment of a broad based transitional government that would include the Tustsi. But the truth was that even Habyarimana never believed in this agreement b’se he was a tutsi hater. He just signed it to buy himself time to organise his ‘house’ and probably the hutu readicals knew it as well. So why would they kill him? But then again most of the evidence points to the fact that the Hutu radicala may have killed him. For instance, on 03/04/1994, radio Mille Collines warned that ‘a little something’ was about to happen before Habyariman was killed tow days later. This is all confusing because how can a radio make such an announcement and nobody in the intelligence took it seriously. May be the radio was warning Habyarimana. Who knows?
7. Back on the modesty of leaders in Uganda, I think Brother Amed Katerega needs to agree that the current regime in Uganda is not modest at all. At least Habyariman was assassinated in a plane given to him as a present by the French president. So there was no serious loses there for the tax payers in Rwanda. On the other hand, Uganda is so poor to afford a president of that magnitude which is in the dreams of president Museveni.
8. As MPs like Beti Kamya were asking for the shs.60 m vehicles, Museveni competes with them by asking for a very expensive jet. What about us? What can we ask for? Why can’t Museveni have the spirit of Kikwete and Tanzanians? According to the Guardian (TZ newspaper) (2009), the Tanzania government is halting the purchase of vehicles this year to save money to buy tractors and other important agricultural inputs. It also said that the TZ government will not hold seminars, workshops or symposiums unless they are really crucial to the nation.Some people may not like it but Adolf Hitler is also one of the greatest and at the same time one of the most modest men Germany has ever had. Hitler was born into a modest provincial family. As a young man he worked as an impoverished manual labourer.
Posted in Politics, history |
February 5, 2009
We should support any form of federalism on the continent. We should support the federalism within Uganda ( Buganda, bunyoro, busoga and northern federalism). We should also support the East African federalism and the General Africa federalism that will eventually bring about the United States of Africa.
Let us all agree that African borders that separate different countries are very artificial and we have suffered from the process of partition for a long time. Buganda federalism will unite a lot of people within Buganda. Federalism will be the catalyst that will ultimately unite us as Africans. Federalism will be the catalyst that will ultimately reduce the powers of different African leaders within their respective states and Africa in General. Most importantly, federalism will help to reduce on the tensions brought about by the artificial borders created by colonialists. The artificial boundaries in Africa have magnified the like hood of international and domestic conflicts which has weakened the stability of various governments on the continent.
With African federalism, the Chewa and Nagoni will be able to connect freely with their brothers and sisters in Zambia, Mozambique and Malawi without any ‘real’ border restrictions. The Kakwa in Northern Uganda and south Sudan will also have a similar feeling.
African federalism can also be a good thing economically for the 15 African land locked countries including our Uganda. Trade will take place across the continent without a lot of restictions involved. People can move about with one passport across borders and that can only be a good thing.
It will also reduce on shouts for secession among respective states if those demanding for federalism are given their federo. Buganda wants federalism and I see not good reason yet why it cannot have it. The more the government hold out a stubborn position, the more the secessionist will keep making the noise. Secession in Africa is not news and it is one of the ways people take when seeking self determination. For instance, the Somali of Ethiopia’s Oragen region want to secede. The Eritrians have already seceded from Ethipia. The Ewe of Ghana also want to secede just like the non-Arabs in South Sudan.
I don’t trust brother Gadaffi because he is a dubious politician and I don’t know his personal intentions of pushing for a United States of Africa, but I do support the idea in principle. Actually, I do support any kind of federalism on the cointinent because that is the future of Africa.
Byebyo ebyange
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Politics, federalism in Uganda |
February 5, 2009
What is happening on the UK economy has really scared me a lot. The British economy is running down very fast. Yes, what is happening in the world economy right now has happened before but I don’t think I was even born by then. That is why I have to take the forecasting done today very seriously. I had some money saved and I was hoping to use it for something in Uganda in future but with the fall of the pound, I think I need to send it and save it from Uganda before the pound crashes to very low levels.
1. a).I would like to partly agree with you that spending is the answer to Britain’s current financial problems because there is no any other alternative for any politician at the moment. Gordon Brown explains this on his website or blog when it comes to people that criticise more spending by comparing it to ‘’a doctor not wanting to use the defibrillators on a patient whose heart has stopped for fear of future electricity bills’’. But I’m one of those who never trust politicians and whatever comes out of their mouths. I however trust Dr.Besigye a little bit because of what he has gone through but the role of a modern politician is to persuade people that everything will just go on getting better, without disruption to their lives and with no effort on their part. As a general rule politicians do not lie. They just say what the majority of the population want to hear. Iddil Amin(1979) and Saddam’s former information minister(2003) were prime examples of people who told people what they wanted to hear when it was clear that their governments had reached the expiry date during the wars.
b) Do you honestly believe that the State should spend more than it taxes in order to stimulate investment and consumption because that is what is happening in Britain and USA at the moment to beat this recession? By spending more money, we are increasing the money supply and maintaining inflation. By maintaining inflation, Britain and USA will keep printing more money. USA already used this method (printing more money) in 2001 to stop recession when the dotcom bubble collapsed in 2000 and wiped off over $5 trillion from the value of technology companies. Printing more money and borrowing will keep diminishing the wealth of the UK economy and that is a real worry for us the ‘Nkuba Kyeyo’ or ‘ambassadors of Uganda’ residing in the UK who need to send money back home. Nevertheless, more spending or borrowing can be good for Gordon, politically, in the short run, because this means that Gordon Brown can transfer the current problems to whoever will take over after him. The problems aren’t gonna go away at all. The way that things are progressing at the moment the British Government will soon manage over 50% of the UK economy particularly as it now controls the banking sector.I guess USA will do the same and I somehow feel sorry for politicians because that is what they are supposed to do.
c) I have also heard on news that the government plans to lower the interest rates to encourage banks to lend money but this is all a gamble. Obviously they are doing this with the hope that the growth will miraculously restart. Even if this was to work then all that it would do is to keep an unsustainable situation running for a little longer.
Therefore, I don’t think spending or more borrowing is the ‘actual’ answer here in the long term. If UK is to survive this economic problems, it needs to cut down massively on state expenditure, as a percentage of GDP . All budgets in areas of the Health Service, the Civil Service, Social Services, education, the military and all branches of government would have to be cut back drastically. However, I don’t think any politician would be bold enough to do this because whoever does it will cost them politically. I don’t think Gordon or even Cameron when he comes to power will have the courage to do it.
2.a) I think Obama has inherited more trouble than most people know and he is likely to go down because of the dirt George Bush has left behind. I will go into this another time because it is a big topic on its own but I wanna talk about the inflation and employment in your message below.
b) The inflation that Britain and other countries are experiencing was partly exported to us by you, Americans. You printed more dollars and then sent it to different countries in form of aid and other means as a way of sucking it out of your system. When every one saw you printing off more money, they did the same. If I were Museveni, I would start refusing the USA aid right now because this is all inflation being exported to us from their countries. This sort of inflation leads to the rise in the cost of things people want to buy. Actually, every country should strive to stand on its own economic legs without borrowing or Aid. Then there is monetary inflation (by Gordon Brown) that is a voluntary act on the part of government to allow the existing amount of money in circulation to increase. The British Government is borrowing so much money now that it has no option but to inflate at an enormous rate. So inflation is already a problem, WBK. Don’t brush it off, sir.
3. a).you sounded like most politicians by putting employment ahead of inflation .All politicians consider full employment to be vital in a modern economy. That is why they keep giving us false figures of unemployment whenever they are asked. They move those that have been unemployed for more than a few months out of the unemployment figures. They are still unemployed and consuming resources but they are dropped out of the important unemployment statistics. For instance, the total number of unemployed people in the UK now exceeds 6 million, instead of the official figure of 2 million according to independent sources. Like I said above, never trust the official figures of the politicians anywhere in the world. I’m now just waiting for the day Mr. Otto Patrick and Mr. Katerega Ahmed will send us the real composition of the UPDF army since they wrote that it represents all kind of tribes and it is not dominated by Ugandan westerners. Mr.Otto was kind enough and sent us the different organisations that make up UPDF and we did publish this on the UAH Blog for the consumption of those who are non-members.I hope he does the same with tribes and influential positions occupied.
b) UK and USA have more inflation than they did before as a result of the Government trying to achieve full employment because they have been spending more than they tax. We have also got a problem of higher wages in this country. High wages cause stagnation accompanied by unemployment and inflation. High wages mean that workers price themselves out of a job. With higher wages it means some jobs cannot be done effectively. When labour realised this problem, they opted to allow a lot of foreigners like us to come and work or study from the UK to do jobs that could be filled by British people who are paid by the State not to work.
Therefore, any one who tells you that inflation will only become a problem in 2-3 years, there are playing politics and not telling the truth. It is already a problem and this is evidenced by a lot of things happening in the country right now. For example, the less skilled workers are often better rewarded than the skilled workers. There is a stream of people to undertake useless jobs as they are not particularly demanding. Many of the jobs created by the British Government in the last few years would fall into this category.The polish and Bulgarians are doing anything they put their hands very cheaply. Unions do not help matters as they suppress competition between one worker and another by equalising wages. They prevent better workers from working better than others and restrain the amount of work done. They often frighten off more vigorous workers. They also prevent the introduction of new more efficient working practices. In the long term they cause stagnation and finally unemployment. The decline and the collapse of the traditional motor industry in the UK was a classic example of trade unions destroying an industry. The collapse of the docks and the coal mines are two more good examples. Even during this recession the unions are, and will, make restructuring businesses more difficult than it needs to be.
Abbey
Posted in Economics |
February 5, 2009
I’m gonna sound a bit confusing and like I’m defending Museveni’s poor policies but I’m not. I just want to defend his policy of loyalty to those closely working with him out of personal conviction when it comes to loyalty. Personal loyalty is fine and I don’t want to be among those that put Museveni’s failures on putting loyalty at the forefront of his administration. Personally, I value loyalty in most of the things I do more than anything else and I value those that remain loyal to their friends or political partners whatever the circumstances. I also believe that presidents should surround themselves with people that are both loyal and willing to work as a team more than anything else. Former USA president, Bush George, was also blamed for the same thing as Museveni, but I did not believe the accusers even an inch. Bush administration failed because he was himself naturally competent and a bit dull. Museveni is failing probably because he is incompetent particularly on the economic arm of the country. He is a shrewd politician by all standards but I think his knowledge of economics has let him down. For the most part, he has chosen economic advisors based on mostly loyalty and similar ideology rather than competence, experience or expertise.
Realistically, majority of the leaders in the world put loyalty ahead of competence when it comes to certain positions in the government because of the number of secrets involved when running a government. Secrets in state administration create a difference between managing a country and a corporate company like McDonalds. After 9/11, White House secrecy wasn’t just a matter of personal, partisan loyalty, it became a matter of national patriotism, and the Patriot Act is all about secrets: how to keep the government’s and how to find out yours.
Similarly Museveni of 1986 did not have a lot of enemies as the Museveni of 2009. Our president has got a lot of enemies every where he looks, and as a leader he can only contain them by surrounding himself with mostly those loyal to him. Loyalty is needed in certain parts of administration particularly when it comes to the people you mostly see everyday as a leader. For instance, ever since I came to Britain, I have seen all prime ministers surrounding themselves with people loyal to them. Blair and Campbell were like identical twins on TV. Campbell and Peter Manderson probably had more powers than any body else in Blair administration because their loyalty to the prime minister was unquestionable. Jack Straw was a bit of both(loyal and competent) and I think that’s why prime minister Brown also recruited him into his administration.
Another area,apart from economics, where Museveni should not have put loyalty so much ahead of competence, is the military. Uganda has not had a chance of building a totally professional and competent army ever since Obote took over power from DP’s Kiwanuka in the 1960s. Museveni had this chance availed to him in 1986 and that’s when he should have done it but he has failed up to now. The UPDF, like most of the state organisation, reward and promote members based on loyalty and longevity instead of competence. They hate testing and teaching credentials given to others to dilute their power. The army should not be about presidential loyalty. It should be about national loyalty or loyalty to the people and professionalism. Mr.Kakoza Mutale is a classic example of what you get when you value loyalty and fealty above experience and competence, in the matters of the military.
I don’t want to do an ‘Ochieno’ here but I remember hearing somewhere when FDC is promising Ugandans a competent government headed by people with expertise and experience. They said that they will never appoint or confirm cronies whose main qualification for office is personal connection or party loyalty. May be we should give them a chance and see if they fulfil their promises.
Byebyo Ebyange
Abbey
Posted in Politics |
February 5, 2009
Muslim brotherhood is mandatory in Islam. All Muslims are obligated to feel the pain of another Muslim being tortured anywhere in the world. That is why I can understand why Muslims are demonstrating against Israel in so many African countries. By the way, a certain Muslim brother called me to say that he is disappointed in our Arab brothers in the Dubai who have ruthlessly decided to spend more than £100 million to buy footballer Kaka from AC Milan to Manchester City. He told me that what Arabs don’t know is that the oil money is supposed to be for all Muslims all over the world and not their personal wealth. He told me that the sheiks behind this deal can use this money to build another Muslim based university or hospital in Uganda other than splashing it on one Brazilian player.
Back to the Israel issue, I’m definitely saddened by what is going on in that part of the Middle East. Israel is committing state terrorism and nobody can stop it apart from the Americans. Terrorism committed against civilians for political or other ideological goals by deliberately targeting non- combatants, is a boldface, cold blood murder and therefore whoever is involved should be punished by the law.
The USA is the boss of Israel. When the USA tells Israel to withdraw, they will do so immediately. I guess they have already done so today not to antagonise the inauguration of Barack Obama as the president of the USA which is taking place on Tuesday this week. Israel in particular and Jews in general do not abide by UN resolutions. One can conclude that Jews operate subversively within the United States of America.
The UN has become a useless organisation because it cannot touch the Americans. The UN has got to promote peace and to address humanitarian crisis as it is mandated and that’s why the UN enjoys the benefits of international legitimacy, diplomatic immunity, and a twenty billion dollar per year, 25% of which is funded by the US. The US pulls the strings at the UN. By the way, who pulls the strings at the African Union? Do we have an African ‘super power’ yet or not? Uganda is already the ‘superpower’ in the Great Lakes region considering what we have done in Rwanda, Zaire and Sudan.
All in all, Muslim brotherhood is good and it was encouraged by our prophet. That’s why what sheikh Mubajje is doing right now in Uganda is not good for the Muslim community. If he had Islam at heart, he would have vacated the mufti chair as soon as he lost the trust of the majority of Muslims.
Abbey
Posted in Religion, international |
February 5, 2009
I would like to make one thing clear: I have got nothing personal against Beti Kamya. If I’m to look into my heart and not brain, I think I admire Beti’s passion and a bit of honesty when she is writing or saying things. I used to spend hours every day with my grandfather listening to political programmes on FM stations from 8pm onwards, and I can confirm that Honourable Beti is one of those people I enjoyed listening to.
Having said the above, my brain tells me that what Kamya is doing now is good and bad. Good in the sense that it generates debate in the whole country about tribalism. This can be good if it can makes leaders look into their hearts and dispose off tribalism in the state administration but the fact is that it serves no purpose other than to stir up tribalism in the country. It is bad because tribalism tends to promote instability. It makes democracy very unstable. In all honesty, the bad outweighs the good side of it.
I don’t look at Kamya as some one genuinely fighting for Buganda’s interests. I look at Beti as a politician who can switch sides depending on her personal political benefits. History has shown that Fighting for the clan (family) has always been a path to power. Some politicians use it when they are on the ropes to make a point in political circles. It makes some one to stop doing the right thing and only do what is necessary for their political survival.
I agree that Uganda is not like Japan where there is a monoculture society. So tribalism is a reality in the country. There is a lot of tension between Banyankole and other tribes basically because president Museveni has treated his tribes mate with soft gloves most of the time. There is a lot of unfair tension between Baganda and other tribes because of the history of Uganda.
If one looks closely, I think one will find that history offers nationalism as the only consistently effective alternative to tribalism. We can all overcome tribalism as a country in the long run but the problem is that all our leaders are not ready for the experiment of nationalism. Obote was not ready for it as evidenced by the way he stuffed the Uganda Army in the 1960s with his tribes mate, but you will find people calling Obote a Ugandan nationalist. Museveni is not yet ready to be a leader of a national country and that’s why people are rightly pointing out at tribal flaws in his administration. While I was in Kampala you could hear statements like: ‘ebisajja bitubye sente nezibitwala eli ewabwe’ meaning ‘these men have stolen all the money and taken it to their regions’ or ‘bwoba toyina nyindo mpanvu tofuna mulimu Uganda’ meaning ‘if you don’t have a long nose, you don’t get a job in Uganda’. So what is the truth in all these statements?
The truth is that tribalistic instincts inform all too much of human behaviour throughout the ages, and an effective nationalism can seek to transcend those instincts, bringing people together, as it has traditionally done in the United States. With the current unfashionable nationalism of the Obotes and Musevenis, there is no way one is going to stop tribalism in Uganda. Some wise politicians like Beti Kamya have realised or foresighted this situation and therefore have hijacked it to further their own interests. How can one say that there are publicly fighting for Buganda but want to be national chairperson of FDC? Does it make sense to any body? The FDC national chairman in supposed to represent all tribes in Uganda. If you want to fight for Buganda’s interests at political party level or national level, you need to go about it in a wiser way than opening your mouth carelessly. Can any body see Beti achieving anything for Buganda at national level if she keeps opening her mouth like that? We have got to be honest about situations if we are to achieve even an inch of what we claim to fight for.
We were all lumped together by Europeans inside artificial national borders and we have got to find a way to make it work like some people have done. Indonesia has got 13,700 scattered islands comprising more than 360 distinct tribes and ethnic groups and a mix of languages and religions but they are more developed than Uganda with just 52 tribes. The following could be good starting points:
- Due to continuing regional differences, let us make Uganda a federal nation. Mengo and the north are yawning for federalism and I see no reason why they can’t have it. Bunyoro and Mirima are happy to refuse federalism and settle with regional tier because of their morbid jealousy for Buganda.
- Luganda can become our national language because of the various reasons given by several people.
- English can be strengthened as our official language to help with communication between federal states of Uganda and East Africa. You can get anything in East Africa and the world when you know how to speak English. We should not allow the shadow of Swahilli to hang over us.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
United Kingdom
Posted in Politics, federalism in Uganda |
February 5, 2009
Dear Ugandans,
As i watched sky sports news some time after work, my mind straightway went to the current saga going on between Beti Kamya and his party,FDC when I saw the news that Gallas William, has lost his Arsenal captaincy and. As a Chelsea supporter, I was so disturbed when Gallas crossed to Arsenal from Chelsea but I had heard of certain aspects of his bad behaviour with the boys in the dressing room that made me accept this loss. What William Gallas did two day ago: revealing secrets of the dressing room- can be compared to what Beti Kamya is doing to FDC at the moment. What I don’t understand is why FDC cannot strip Kamya of his position in FDC just like Arsernal Manager, Wenger, has stripped Gallas of the captaincy of the team. FDC need to send a message out loud and clear that those who reveal party secrets will not be awarded as “patriotic” whistleblowers as it seems to be the case with Beti Kamya at the moment. In fact, a person who has threatened to put the party secrets in the open may be more dangerous than the one who has revealed them and as such Beti should be divorced from FDC as soon as possible. What Wenger has done is to show Gallas and others that no player is bigger than the club.
As they say the person most likely to sell party secrets to the enemy is living in the ‘inner’ House of the party. I think FDC or any party should nail anyone who sell them out, regardless of what they have done for the party in the past.This sets a good displinary foundation for the party in the long term.People must train themselves to keep secrets at any level whether personal, militarily, national, political party or anything else. For instance, when the USA was planning the invasion of France in 1944, their only hope of making it work was hiding the details of the operation. It was going to be a bloody operation at best. The Americans kept details of the technology used in the Apollo program secret because they wanted to make sure they had better rockets than the Soviet Union. Secrecy played a major role during this operation and that’s how it should be at any level.
What FDC is doing by handling Beti Kamya with Kids gloves is very dangerous. There are only doing it with a hope of maintaining future good relations with Beti Kamya but it always backfires. An example is when an investigation of nuclear secrets stolen by China from a U.S. laboratory was repeatedly slowed and played down by the federal government in favour of keeping good relations between the countries. Some of the newspapers in USA were quoted as saying that China’s espionage at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico in the mid-1980s helped it develop the technology to miniaturize nuclear bombs, a key step toward fielding a modern nuclear arsenal. Let us also remember that the Chinese got nuclear secrets in the 1980s when Clinton was governor and Reagan was President, an issue that brought questions to be raised during Reagan and Clinton’s presidency. I would expect FDC leaders to move swiftly to bring this issue to an end because it is damaging the party and Dr.Besigye more than necessary. The FDC needs to tell all the members of the ‘inner circle’ that party secrets will never be invoked to the public in case of any fallout with any party.
We must teach Ugandans the value of keeping secrets at any level. Diplomats or civil servants have to walk into their offices with this in their minds. We don’t want to end up like that case in 2004 when it was confirmed that a senior Israeli diplomat in Washington met several times with a Pentagon analyst being investigated by the FBI on suspicion he passed classified information on Iran to Israel. Yes, countries share secrets among themselves but it should be sanctioned by a bigger authority not every tom and dick. That’s why this Pentagon analyst was being investigated in the first place despite the cooperation between Israel and USA.
Much as I would love more Buganda representation in FDC because I’m a Muganda, I would request Honourable Beti Kamya to stop slandering or libelling the party like she is doing now. As the Baganda say:’akiivamu yakiiyita ekyato’’ meaning when ‘people call boats ugly after using them’ which is not right. Beti should at least use words like:’ I think FDC did this and that’, if she just wants to play politics, because of course, when you say “I think” something is true, it’s not slander OR libel. We can all fight for Buganda interests using better methods than slandering or libelling a political organisation that is as young as FDC. It’s not fair.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
UK
Posted in Politics, federalism in Uganda, kingdoms |
February 7, 2009
‘Sowing the Mustard seed’ is both Museveni and Obote’s book. It is a book which don’t tell us a lot about some of the main things we need to know. I actually pray that another of the historicals like Besigye and Muntu write a different book and keep it somewhere to act as a second reference to what happened between 1980 and 2006. We have been fed with enough lies about NRA and Obote and some of us have had enough. Some one somewhere needs to start telling the truth or we shall force the truth out of them.
The 1997 ‘Museveni- Obote’ or ’sowing the mustard seed’ is a book that is much dominated by the name Obote and UPC.Apart from Museveni, the item, group, event, or personality that gets the second highest number of mentions is Milton Obote.
According to the Monitor newspaper(2005),In Sowing The Mustard Seed, Obote appears on 51 pages, followed by Amin on 47 pages, the Uganda People’s Congress party on 34, Tanzanian president Julius Nyerere on 26, Museveni’s first fighting force Fronasa on 25, the Democratic Party on 21, Museveni’s comrades Eriya Kategaya 19 and Martin Mwesiga 18 respectively, the National Resistance Army on 16, Museveni’s brother Lt. General Salim Saleh also on 16 pages, and the National Resistance Movement party on 10 pages. Museveni’s wife, Janet Kataha Museveni, appears only on 8 pages.
Absurdly, the UPC party of Obote gets more space in Museveni’s book than any political group Museveni has ever founded and led, from Fronasa, to the UPM, and the NRA/NRM.
I also just wish that the UPC guys like Ochieno stop hiding the truth about Obote and write everything for the sake of us, the young generation, who endeavour to find the truth wherever it is. It pains me when I open my inbox and read a message about UPC that is indefensible from Ochieno. This kind of stand does not do any fovours for UPC at all. UPC killed Ugandans and we want a UPC cabinet member like Tiberondwa or Rwakasisi to come out and say everything as it happened. We don’t need to be refered to Obote memoirs like Ochieno has been doing.
So basically we need atleast three books from another NRM historical and an Obote or UPC historical to corraborate what is in Museveni’s book.
Nze Bwendaba
Abbey
Posted in Politics |
February 7, 2009
1. We all agree that land is such a special resource anywhere in the world but if you read the proposals suggested by some people on how to maximise output on land(getting rid of peasant landlords) in Uganda , they are good but not realistic. By realistic, I mean, no politician including can genuinely start what they propose without losing the political battle. It is like a politician cutting down on public expenditure now because of recession. It will be suicide. Most of the African leaders depend on peasants for their votes. So they cannot risk upsetting them by offering their lands to big investors. That is why even Museveni has taken the softer option of only giving away public land instead of going for the peasants land. The moment he starts interfering in peasants land as a state policy, then even the likes of Ahmed Katerega will turn against him, because they have also got land inherited somewhere and they are doing nothing big on it.
2.Secondly there is no way one can start pushing the country from peasantry to large scale production when the political system in place is still corrupt and the economy is not in position to give the peasants a strong alternative. The peasants will try to fight such a policy as much as possible. With corruption, even the investors given the land will either be fake or they will fail to operate in the end. All these will summarily breed land conflicts which the state may even fail to contain. For instance, according to Oxfam (2006), between 100 and 150 people were killed in Southern Ethiopia when land formerly belonging to Borenas(peasants) was warded Gulus(rich investors) by the government. Also in many parts of Latin America , small farmers fear to lose their farms to big farmers. This fear can only be removed if there is a viable alternative other than the wages which will be provided to peasants by the big farmers. Compensation of small farmers is normally done in very small amounts in most developing countries. Small Farmers or peasants are not compensated on the basis of the market value of their properties. The government only does it to ‘kutukiliza mukolo’.
3. some people also say that they oppose anything that makes land difficult to buy and sell but they are forgetting that most valuables tend to fall into this situation. People who make such statements are in most cases accused of arrogance because they think that everything in this world has got a price. Probably the Arabs who wanted to buy Kaka from AC Milan were thinking like you, but the truth is some things are not for sale. Land is supposed to be such a very valuable thing in Buganda and people take it very seriously. That is why president Museveni has got to be very careful with the land issue in Buganda and Northern Uganda because it is capable of burying any politician in Africa if not handled very carefully.
4. they also say that tradition and culture are tying us down to peasantry and let me hope that you have assessed this very well. In Uganda, the main tradition that valued land so much were the Baganda until recently because most of us have sold our parents lands. The question is: how come there is not much development in those regions that did not historically treat land as a traditional obligation. We should also remember that before the Roman law on land came into place in 1926, the local testimony or traditions managed to keep lands together and safer from intruders. That is why Uganda has not got a lot of white settlers unlike Kenya because Buganda kings could not allow it. Even the sharia law which all Muslims are supposed to follow, places emphasis upon local testimony. The locals have got to be satisfied with whatever you are planning to do as a leader before you make any plans on their land.
Abbey.K.Semuwemba
Posted in Uncategorized |
February 7, 2009
1. The current land bill in Uganda comes across as a document fighting for the small landlords or landless in Uganda but it loses its moral platform when the biggest land grabbers become the big people in the government or the elites in Uganda . So what is the use of this bill when even those who put it on the paper aren’t following it? Another question would be: do we have any disadvantaged groups in Uganda who do not have land? And if so, who is fighting for them? Are Balalo falling in the category of disadvantaged groups or they are being used by the national elites to grab other people’s land. Germany is the leading country to support the disadvantaged groups seeking lands the entire world. It has actively supported a lot of international declarations and conflicts which demand secured access to land particularly for the disadvantaged. These include: the Habitat II Conference in Istanbul 1996, World Bank Land Research Conferences from 2001 to2007, EU Second Forum on Sustainable Rural Development in Africa 2007 etc.
2. When the balalo walk into any village in Kiboga on the instructions of the state, is that the best way to solve land conflicts in Uganda ? When a government shifts a certain group of people to go and settle in another area already occupied by others, it raises a lot of eyebrows because the whole thing seem not be done in good spirit. I know you don’t mention this in your paper but I would be glad if you comment on it. The fact of the matter is that the way NRMO government is handling the land issue is a reflection of people who have not done enough research on the subject. Walking into an area and start evicting the indigenous people is automatically gonna breed conflicts and I don’t think we need this at the moment in Uganda . Let me give you an example; in Brazil , in the state of Amazonas it is suspected that fully one third of its land area has been illegally appropriated (Brazilian Ministry of Agrarian Development 2001). According to official maps, the remote area of Raposa Serra do Sol in the Amazon region is an Indian reservation. However, white newcomers to the land are using the judicial system to try to evict the Indians who have been living there for generations from part of the reservation. Seizing advantage of bureaucratic indifference, these people, led by powerful rice growers and ranchers, have persuaded judges to order Indians to leave the land. These are the same things almost happening in Uganda . One group of people is determined to own the biggest land in Uganda and this is unfair.
3. a)Now I would like to touch on what some people have proposed to Mengo administration(buying land outside buganda instead of fighting for mailo 9000) that is against the current land bill. There is no way Mengo can start buying land in different parts of Uganda without eyebrows being raised by ethnic communities. In countries where part of the population – often indigenous people – have historically been deprived of their land rights, more serious conflicts can arise even decades or generations later. Guatamala provides such a case. In 1879, communal lands were de facto expropriated by a law giving proprietors three months to register land titles, after which the land would be declared abandoned. Most of the “abandoned” land was then allocated to large coffee growers. Although there were attempts at redistribution in the early 1950s, these were stopped and reversed following a military coup in 1954. Since then, struggle over land has continued, leading to violent conflict time and again
b) Mengo just needs to find a way of securing most of the land in Buganda or making sure that land in Buganda is not sold at the rate it is being sold right now to land grabbers. Some people seem to support Mengo in their approach to make sure that the kabaka land is ‘hands off’ provided they can eventually develop it (replacing subsistence farming with modern or large scale farming). However, this position is also gonna be difficult to sustain if those in power are determined to grab land in Buganda at whatever cost.
4. I would also like to inform Ugandans that what is happening in Uganda (people in government using all means to grab people’s land) is not news in East Africa . In Kenya , the Ndung’u report from 2004 revealed that former Presidents Kenyatta and Moi, as well as cabinet ministers, former high ranking civil servants and other influential people have been among the major beneficiaries of illegal allocations of public land. So let us prepare ourselves for more land grabbing by those in power in Uganda . I heard that Mr. Museveni is now the biggest land lord in Uganda . Is this true?
What is unfortunate is the way the land grabbers have not spared the forests in the region. I don’t think that the land grabbers have given up on Mabila forest yet despite the demonstrations. They will ‘eat’ it slowly as the public concentrates on other issues. In Kenya, for instance,Ngong Road Forest next to Africa’s largest informal settlement Kibera with an estimated population of over 700,000 people provides a source of income for the poor from the harvesting of various products including firewood, poles and medical plants.The forest’s flora and fauna include over 120 bird species and over 35 mammals. The forest serves as well as water catchment as for recreational use and finally provides oxygenation for Nairobi ’s air pollution threatened inhabitants. In 1932, an area of 2,926.6 ha had been gazetted as forest reserve. Today, hardly a quarter of it is left. The allocations of Ngong Road Forest provide a sad example of how public resources have been used to unjustly enrich a few and how state corporations were used to perpetuate grand corruption. State corporations did not just lose land entrusted to them but they were also pressurized to purchase illegally acquired public land at exorbitant prices. Many became captive buyers of land from politically connected allottees. In 2001, for example, part of the forest land was illegally excised, subdivided into 32 plots and allocated to 13 companies who sold them to Kenya Pipeline Company for Ksh 262,388,478 (US $ 3.639.471).
Posted in Politics |
February 10, 2009
Let us go slow on the comparison between Common Man’s Charter and Museveni’s 10 point programme. I’m not a Museveni sympathiser but sometimes I’m forced to defend his paper policies when some one starts ‘sugarcoating’ Obote’s failures. Ok, let us see what we know so far about these two paper policies:
1.Obote’s first administration started off as market-oriented and pluralistic. Then in 1966 Obote changed for the worse as we all know by now. The Common Man Charter(CMC) was a step influenced by what was happening in Tanzania at the time. So basically Obote moved to the left in 1969 and the CMC was adopted by UPC at their delegates conference in the same year.Nyerere had a hand in most of Obote’s changes in Uganda from the 1960s till when his death.
On the other hand, Yoweri Museveni started on the left ideologically. In the 1970s he was virtually a Marxist-Leninist. People like Robert Mugabe were radicalised by armed struggle. Yoweri Museveni was de-radicalised by armed struggle. Robert Mugabe became more and more of a socialist in the heat of the liberation war. Yoweri Museveni became less and less of a socialist in the tensions of armed struggle against the Obote regime.
2.Like i said, the CMC buried Obote 1 because it was a threat to both the British andUSA interests in the region. The British had about 80 companies in Uganda wh faced the threat of nationalisation.On May 1, 1970 President Obote announced that the state would take over foreign enterprises in the famous Nakivubo Pronouncements.So the British through the Isrealis hatched a plan from South Sudan to get rid of socialist Obote. The USA also looked at the relationship Obote had with Nyerere as a threat to their capitalist interests in the region.
On the other hand, the 10 point programme had the blessing of most of the international community. Austria is where the 10 point programme was galvanised from and the movement held a lot of meetings there in 1985. That’s why the International Institute for Peace (IIP) president, Erwin Lanc, Austria’s former internal and foreign affairs minister and his wife, Christianne, were invited to attend the 15th Heroes Day celebrations at Ssembwe-Nyimbwa, Luweero.
3. The CMC was bound to fail from the beginning because, according to prof Ali Mazrui,the state had entered the market place of enterprise and pushed away the real entrepreneurs. It felt the role of government was to actively control and own business. They felt an equitable and just environment can only be created by government owning and interfering with business. The Government then simply rewarded supporters and chased away political opponents. A bedrock of nepotism and corruption and mismanagement was born. The companies were run down.
In addition, the CMC was introduced to make everyone relatively with money into their pockets to curb down on ‘kondoism’ or thuggery which was going at the time. Instead it just increased ‘kondoism’ as the rich kept being scared of the people. So it was a total failure. Let us also remember that Obote’s CMC was not pure socialism as that of Nyerere. So it was a bit of a confusing document with intentions which Mr. Nviri will give us if he wants to inishallah.
On the other hand, the 10 point programme had the support of the masses in Uganda mainly in the south of the country. Museveni’s point No.5 for an independent, integrated and self-sustaining economy, for which he is still fighting for, was and is a better attractive option for Ugandans than the so called CMC.
In addition,despite the fact that Museveni has not done much to get Ugandans out of poverty, his 10 point programme is evn still popular among the opposition. For instance,DP president is on record saying that DP will take up NRM’s 10-point programme and polish it in preparation for the 2011 general elections, the party president, John Ssebaana Kizito, said.
Abbey
Posted in Politics, history, luwero war after 1980 'theft' |
February 19, 2009
I suggest that Ugandans should try to develop where they originally come from instead of solely depending on the government. The northerners should start putting money in the north instead of pouring most of their money in Buganda . The same goes for Banamasaka, bateso, batoro, Basoga, banansana, banabutambala, banabushenyi, e.t.c. I’m basically advancing for both ethno-localism and geo-localism. Yes I support globalisation and its fruits or people moving around from one region to the other but we should all develop where we come from. It is this very reason why even Ugandans abroad/Kyeyo- decide to build themselves a small house in Uganda despite having citizenship in other countries.
The countries in Europe have also got people who think like me. In the UK, there is a super market called the Morrison’s. It is basically based in northern England because the owners of it are Yorkshire guys. There are also a lot of investors who are home boys and decided to develop their own regions instead of moving to London . This is the same spirit we would like Ugandans to develop if we are to create regional balanced development.
Now let me go back to Masaka where I have got some ‘bbako’ or ‘in-laws’ from Kyotela. Masaka town has got almost the same population as Leeds City in the UK. According to www.masaka.co.ug, masaka town has got about 70,000 people. In Leeds, most of the private businesses were started off by men and women born in Yorkshire. Even the recently finished biggest cancer hospital in Europe has received most of its modern equipment from the Yorkshire business men and women. This hospital is located near St. James Hospital for those who are familiar with Leeds city.
Similarly, I don’t see any reason why the rich Masaka men in Kampala don’t pull themselves together and start developing their region. They can use organisations such as Aga Khan Masaka Secondary Old Students Association (AMSOSA) to act as a spark towards this direction. Already they have used this organisation to fundraise for the construction of a modern computer laboratory, library or sick bay. Yes, other people can move into the town but ‘abana enzalwa’ need to form the foundation of development of this town. I know of some of these guys in Kampala like our Semujju Nganda of Uganda Observer, Hajji Darawusi Mwanje, Hajji Hassan Mugenyi, Musa Mbajja(based in Katwe), my muko whom I have also copied this message and others.
Already there are people thinking like me in Masaka and have developed a lot of private schools in places Bigasa, Buwunga, Kyanamukaaka, Kabonera and Lukaya town council. I also hear that the Londoners have also started a radio station which the people in Lungujja are enjoying. There is also an Indian investor who was born in Kyotela and I read somewhere in the newspapers when he was planning to start up a fruit processing factory in Masaka.I think he bought the creps factory from the then Masaka Cooperative Union. This factory is based in Kyabakuza .
By the way, I understand that the presidential spokes person, Mr. Tamale Mirundi is from Rakai which is part of Masaka district, is he doing something for people in Rakai or he is also waiting for the government and non-Rakanians to pour money into the region?
Posted in Politics |
February 19, 2009
It is true that governments where recession has hit hard are borrowing money and increasing spending WHERE IT IS NECESSARY. ‘Where is necessary’ involves pumping more money into the banking system or nationalising some banks but not buying expensive jets for the executives or presidents or increasing the salaries/bonuses of company executives or public workers. This is where Uganda has got it wrong. All countries or local governments around the world are reducing on their budgets because of global recession. In USA , according to the centre on Budget and Policy Priorities, 44 states are gonna reduce their budgets by more than $350 billion dollars over the next 2 years. In the UK , bodies such as the Association of British Insurers, the Investment Management Association and Pirc, a consultancy advising shareholders, believe the bonus culture should be reformed during this recession period. Both in Nigeria and Tanzania , there are finding ways of reducing on public spending.
It is also true that different countries deal with recession using different theories of economics which I prefer not to go through today. However, the theory people are familiar with is the Keynesian theory which has been welcomed by UK Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, with open hands. This is where governments advocate for deficit spending. It is the same theory which has destroyed our Black Musician, Michael Jackson, who kept spending more than he gets or has on his account. When you are heavily in debt, the only way to keep spending is to keep borrowing. I support Gordon Brown but his Keynesian theory is more of a political survival decision rather than anything else. The whole thing is a gamble from the start. Yes, consumer spending is the main driver of the UK’s economic growth but an increase in people saving to pay off their debts will result in companies’ profits falling. Companies in turn will lay off staff, leading to a vicious cycle of people losing their jobs and being unable to pay their debts and mortgages.
The only reason why our prime minster here in the UK cannot easily reduce on public spending is basically because he has been on TV telling people that falling public spending means worse public services, so he can’t turn around and start slashing now. So the only real option for the government is to spend some of the money that it saved during the good times and LESS borrowing to beat this recession thing. After all, the UK economy has been booming for years. We’ve not had a recession since 1992.
But the reality is: what any government should be doing is trying to cut debt by trimming public spending. But that is suicide to any political leader. So it’s clear that the UK government will borrow as much as it takes to buy the 2010 election if possible. The downside to this is that government borrowing is exactly the same as consumer borrowing. At some point, you have to pay it back. And the way government pays off borrowing is through higher taxes.
One Ugandan wrote on the UAH forum: ‘To say that Uganda has recession is like talking of a chicken with a toothache’. Basically, the statement would have been:’ to say that Uganda has got no recession, it is like a man sleeping with a woman with HIV for a long time without a condom, and then turn around and say that he has got no HIV before he even goes for a check up’
Uganda has been sleeping with the donor countries who have got HIV (recession) for a long time. Uganda is basically married to the donors ( USA , UK , Canada , France, Japan , Dubai ,…) and there have got a lot of children (Ugandans abroad) together. Ugandans abroad gave Uganda about $1.4 billion in 07/08 alone and there are the major source of foreign exchange in the country. Each of these guys looks after more than a lot of families in the 75% non-monetary sector. So when Nkuba Kyeyo( unpaid Ugandan ambassadors abroad) or donors( Uganda ’s husbands) are affected in any way, the following services will reduce whether you like it or not:
Ø Construction boom in Uganda will decline
Ø Quality of life of families depending on them will decline
Ø Businesses in Uganda cities like the hospitality industry will feel it because of reduced spending
Ø Uganda’s general export industry will be affected because of less spending in USA or UK . We don’t have enough market within Uganda to consume the goods we produce. What will happen if the donor countries shut down their markets from us as was the case in 1930s? Trust me, even your ‘senga’ in Adjumani will start feeling it when the monthly sugar is no more.
Ø Uganda’s current budget is 30% dependant on donors. So if they squeeze their money, we are in trouble. Even our ‘BONA BASOME’ is paid off by donors.
Ø NGOs are already integrating their services in Kampala because donors have squeezed funds.
Ø Tourism industry is already in decline in Uganda and this is directly affecting the so called CHOGM hotels and travel agencies.
Ø Foreign investment is in a decline. Haven’t you read about the Arab Shimoni Investor who has changed his mind?
Ø Food prices have become high in Uganda
Posted in Economics |
February 25, 2009
1. a)We have got to support the existence of the ICC because Africa is the top beneficially compared to other countries. This treaty which created the ICC is not even as old as Museveni’s regime or Kony’s war in the north because it was adopted in 1998 at an international conference in Rome after intense negotiations. So why should we start discarding it before It has been tested enough.
b) The ICC is an important deterrent to those that are committing crimes on the continent. At least, every sitting African president knows that there is an arm of law that can touch him when he leaves presidency, if he commits crimes against humanity. We used to have ad-hoc war crimes tribunals (modelled on the Nuremberg trials of Nazi officials following World War II) ,like the one that tried the former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic at The Hague and the Kagame courts in Rwanda that tried genocide criminals, but they were not as legally and internationally pronouncing as the ICC. The ICC is the first new international judicial body since the International Court of Justice, or World Court, which was created in 1945 to adjudicate disputes between states.
2. The only reason why some people like fear this court is because they assume that the West can use the court against developing countries and the presidents they support. This is the same fear Asian countries had before putting their signatures on the treaty. That is why most of the Asian and African countries delayed signing it.
3. Let us also note that Prosecutions in the ICC are only valid if national courts are unable or unwilling to prosecute serious crimes. And only a nation ratifying the treaty can make a complaint against its own citizens or those of other nations for crimes committed on its soil. For instance, the International Criminal Court had no authority over events in Ethiopia or Eritrea, because neither country had ratified the treaty creating the tribunal. Israel signed it but not ratified. So we cannot touch it despite committing crimes against humanity in Palestine. Egypt, Iran and Syria signed. India, Pakistan and China neither signed nor ratified. Russia signed but not ratified. I know that Uganda signed but I’m not sure whether it ratified it. Most democratic nations and all European Union countries signed and ratified the treaty. In the USA, Former President Bill Clinton signed the pact in December 2000. President George W. Bush renounced it in May 2001. Let us hope that Obama will do the needful and resign it in 2010 after sorting out Guantanamo Bay Prison and pulling troops out of Iraq.
4. I am not an expert in constitutional law, but I do know that the Constitution recognizes that state crimes are the jurisdiction of state courts. Of course, the rights of the Constitution continue to hold, and if we had federalism in Uganda, certain “due process” would be recognized to be the jurisdiction of Buganda or Bunyoro or Busoga courts.
It seems reasonable that the Constitution be interpreted consistently. Things of a state are the jurisdiction of the state. Things of the world could be the jurisdiction of the world. Perhaps more knowledgeable men than you and I might work out the details of a treaty recognizing world courts and establishing the review process by treaty. By the way, I don’t know what court you appeal to after being found guilty in the ICC. May be the lawyers here on the UAH forum can help us.
However, what we must know is that the war crimes tribunal was created as a court of last resort, and its mandate is to only step in when countries are either unwilling or unable to dispense justice themselves. This means that Ugandans or president Museveni can not be prosecuted over Kony war or any crimes committed in Uganda if the mechanism to prosecute war crimes already exists within the Uganda judicial system. So I ask anti-ICC to stop misrepresenting the court’s concept or to continue arguing that it will be used for frivolous and/or politically motivated prosecutions. Once and for all, the whole concept of an International Criminal Court does not in any way contradict our African/Ugandan ideals. Every Ugandan wants to see justice done fairly but unfortunately we cannot see true justice in our own courts of law.
Byebyo ebyange
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Politics, international |
March 5, 2009
I have been reading some messages on the UAH forum calling those who fought Obote dictatorship in 1980 to be ‘killers ‘or ‘murderers ‘ but is this justified at all. We all know that Obote was destroying democracy in Uganda in the 1980s and the quest for or preservation of “democracy” is often used as a justification for war.
Again, I keep asking myself these questions: is there any human being who is not capable of ‘killing’ a fellow human being if squeezed by a certain situation. Personally, I don’t support any body to kill any fellow human being but at the same time I know that I live in the world where most of human beings are potential killers (even those preaching against it). Human beings have done so much killing throughout the history of civilization. Since the beginning of civilization millions and millions of people have been killed in combat or died in the aftermath of combat. The socialists (Communists and Fascists) in the 20th century murdered more than 100 million civilians (source: “The Black Book of Communism”).
When we go back to the circumstances that led to the Luwero war, war was inevitable. Ugandans had to use all the ‘’necessary means’’ to get rid of Obote. It appeared to be an essential element of Darwinian evolution which is “red in tooth and class”, the survival of the fittest and where might is right. The pacifist Greek idealist and philosopher Plato also wrote long ago, “Only the dead have seen an end to war”. So probably, as long as human beings are squeezing fellow human beings in certain areas, these things are gonna be part of us whether we like it or not. The solution is to respect the rights of fellow human beings whether you are a president or prison officer or spy man.
Then there are people who fight the government of Uganda unjustifiably like Joseph Kony. He started his war with childish 10 God’s commandments and unsurprisingly he managed to get followers. Before Kony, there was Alice Lakwena who deceived people that she had magical powers and they still followed her. Anyway, like the Nazi leader Herman Goering once remarked that it was easy to lead people: into war, regardless of whether they resided within “a democracy, a fascist: dictatorship, a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.” All that was: required, Goering argued, is for their government to “tell them they are being attacked,…”
If we continue with ‘killers’ then even drunk drivers are killers because they cause a lot of road accidents every day. Personally, I also take women who abort their children to be ‘killers’ but at the same time they may have a good reason to do so. I still think that abortionists are ‘killers’ and they are wrong because I think the unborn are ” people” deserving the exact same rights as an actual born person.
Then there are people who are called ’serial killers’ and I don’t know whether we have got them in Uganda . There are websites on the internet where the artwork, letters, locks of hair, even fingernail clippings and crawlspace dirt of notorious serial killers can be had for a price. Christopher Berry-Dee, a British criminologist who did a videotaped interview with serial killer, Michael Ross, in September 1994, copied his finished product and rough footage onto a DVD and began selling it on his own website, and another serial killer website, for $29, plus shipping and handling. Despite the fact that some Ugandans are saying everyday that Late Obote was responsible for the death of their relatives,UPC is using the name of the same man to promote their party. So may be, human beings have accepted killing to be part of their society as long there is an end benefit to one of the parties involved.
In addition to the DVD, several of Ross’s handwritten envelopes were for sale on eBay in 1999; two years before the Internet’s largest auction house said it would no longer permit the sale of killers’ memorabilia out of concern for victims’ families.
People are always ready to protect killers especially if they are from their own clans or ethnicity and nobody is surprised by the actions of strong Obote apologists. For instance, an Israeli student finishes high school without ever hearing the name “Genrikh Yagoda,” the greatest Jewish murderer of the 20th Century.
Then we have got film stars like Michael Moore who practically accused Bush Junior to be a killer in his ‘fahrenheit 911 ‘ film- for those who have watched it. This was because of the death of American soldiers, of Iraqi women and children for the purpose, but was this the right word to use on Bush or not? I don’t know in Bush’s case but I know one thing for sure: Dr.Besigye does not deserve to be called a killer because he was involved in a struggle for democracy in Uganda between 1980 and 1986.
As so often in life, there is no real “solution” with a happy ending. People went to fight Obote dictatorship in the 1980s not knowing that we will have almost a similar problem afterwards. Buganda supported this revolution and the federo promised to them during the bush is not even in a walking distance to achieve it.
Byebyo banange
Abbey.K.Semuwemba
Posted in Politics, luwero war after 1980 'theft' |
March 6, 2009
Hello people
Yes, I do think that all Israel prime ministers MUST be punished for the crimes committed against the Palestines and Lebanese. What recently happened in Gaza was against the international law but I think Israel has not yet ratified the ICC treaty and, therefore, it is difficult for anybody to drag them to ICC. Israel and Russia are already regretting putting their signatures on the ICC treaty because the treaty is always in their faces whenever they commit crimes.
Having said this, there are some people who have tried and still trying to bring some Israel prime ministers to face justice for the crimes committed against humanity. For instance, a special war crime court was set up in the 1990s to charge Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for authorizing the massacre of hundreds of Palestinian men, women, and children in the Beirut refugee camps of Sabra and Shatilla in 1982. The Israelis themselves set up a commission called the Kahan Commission which found Sharon “indirectly” responsible for the slaughter and fingered Hobeika as the chief instigator. At the time of the massacres, Hobeika was intelligence chief of Lebanese Christian forces in Lebanon who were battling Palestinians and other Muslim groups in a bloody civil war. He was also the chief liaison to Israeli Defence Force (IDF) personnel in Lebanon.
I would also like Ugandans to know that Israel cannot be charged in any international court without exposing the evil side of the American administration. So the USA does everything in its powers to make sure that Israel never faces the law. An example is when Hobeika called a press conference in July 2001 and announced that he was prepared to testify against Sharon in Belgium and revealed that he had evidence of what actually occurred in Sabra and Shatilla. 7 months later, Hobeika’s car was blown up by a remote controlled bomb placed in a parked Mercedes along a street in the Hazmieh section of Beirut. It is alleged that this assassination was done by both the USA and Israel agents.
This action alone shows that the Israelis and USA are afraid of international law and if there was no international law, probably Israel would have used a weapon to wipe out the Palestine population by now. USA and Israel do everything they could to destroy evidence because they know that justice never decays. So the ICC or the international laws act as a deterrent to those planning to commit certain crimes. This is enough reason for us to support the activities of the baby ICC till when it will develop into something that can catch even the ‘big boys’ like Israel, China and USA. At the moment, let the ‘small boys’ like Bashir of Sudan feel the heat that will shape the way they do things.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Politics, international |
March 6, 2009
Ugandans,
The ICC treaty is international by all the definitions of an international treaty. USA and China do not solely define internationalism in a written document. The ICC became international and ratified when the UN got 60 ratifications necessary to bring the ICC into being. By 2005, 99 states had ratified the treaty.
There is something else I want Ugandans to note here. Belgium was one of those countries who started a law in 1993 within their borders similar in work to the ICC Treaty. The law permitted human rights prosecutions where by non-Belgians could be tried for violations against other non-Belgians in a Belgian court. I don’t know whether this law is still operational with the existence of the ICC now. Let me hope that our lawyer, Charles Eliba, can help us out on this. If this law is still operational, then Mr. Matek and others who don’t trust the ICC can file their charges against Museveni from here.
Germany is another country that has a similar law to Belgium. German law provides “universal jurisdiction” allowing for the prosecution of war crimes and related offenses that take place anywhere in the world. In 2006, former prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay filled criminal charges in Germany against Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, and other officials. So if it is also operational, Ugandans who want to bring cases against certain individuals in the government can go for it.
My only problem with the ICC is in the Articles: 15, 42, 53, 54, 86 and 87 of the treaty which grant the ICC prosecutor global authority to bring charges anywhere, against anyone. The prosecutor can collect secret evidence that’s never revealed to the defendant — only to the jurists hearing his or her case. I don’t know the intention of this but I think it is unfair for the defendant not to know the evidence against him or her in advance. These are the things our legal representatives to the ICC need to iron out in their next global conference.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Politics, international |
April 18, 2009
The idea of ‘spying’ or trailing terrorist suspects is effective and it is the very reason why I support phone tapping of suspects as proposed by Minister Mbabazi. If you have got enough credible evidence against a suspect, all you need is to present it in front of the courts of law instead of torturing them. Torturing should not be an option if we are to bleed a peaceful world in the long run and here is why:
1. Torture, as noted in another email, is unambiguously illegal. It is illegal under a covenant the United States ratified, illegal under federal and military law, and illegal under protocols of civilization dating back to the Magna Carta.
2. Torture is notoriously unreliable. Many people will say anything to make the pain stop, while some will refuse to yield no matter what is done to them. Yes, sometimes torture produces vital information. But it can also produce false leads and desperate fictions.
3. Torture is never limited to just the guilty. The case for razors and electric shock rests on the premise that the prisoner is a knowledgeable terrorist like Osama Bin Laden, or Abu Musab al-Zarqawi or Kony. But most of the detainees in US military prisons or Uganda ‘safe houses’ are nothing of the kind. Commanders in Guantanamo acknowledged that hundreds of their prisoners pose no danger and have no useful information. How much of the hideous abuse reported to date involved men who were guilty only of being in the wrong place at the wrong time?
4. Torture is a dangerously slippery slope. Electric shocks and beatings are justified, you may say, if they can prevent another 9/11 or the burning of Owino Market. But what if the shocks and beating don’t produce the needed information? Is it OK to break a finger? To cut off a hand? Again a case like Uganda, a politician may send the intelligence boys to arrest you JUST because are in FDC or sympathise with FDC and some one chops off your fingers for no good reason. Is that justifiable, Peter?
No. Torture is never worth it. Some things we don’t do, not because they never work, not because they aren’t ”deserved,” but because our very right to call ourselves decent human beings depends in part on our not doing them. Torture is in that category. Let us wage and win this war against the barbarians like Joseph Kony or other rebel groups without becoming barbaric in the process. Let Ugandans walk free in their country without any fear of someone ‘hijacking’ them to unknown destinations.
What Bush did was illegal and punishable under American and internal law. The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which the United States ratified in 1994, prohibits the torture of any person for any reason by any government at any time. It states explicitly that torture is never justified — “no exceptional circumstances whatsoever . . . may be invoked as a justification for torture.”
Unlike the Geneva Convention, which protects legitimate prisoners of war, the Convention Against Torture applies to everyone — even terrorists and enemy combatants. And it may not be evaded — this is spelled out in Article 3 — by “outsourcing” a prisoner to a country where he is apt to be tortured during interrogation.
In principle, interrogators should not cross the line into outright torture.
Posted in Politics |
April 27, 2009
Dear Ugandans,
Before independence, the UPC, by virtue of its non-Baganda domination, was assured of support outside Buganda—and not because it had a party organization which could deliver the votes but because the rest of Uganda hated Buganda at the time. It used the tribal divisions to accumulate support for itself outside Buganda. It’s not that I blame Obote for using tribalism to his advantage because afterall, several politicians including Beti Kamya and Museveni are using it to get keep themselves in power. The moral principal here is that it is wrong and Obote should have done better.
After independence, when the elections to the national assembly were held, UPC faced no rivalry outside Buganda. For instance, In Lango, Obote’s home district,UPC held all but one of the council seats, UPC was 100% in the district council of Bunyoro who hated Buganda so much,……….
In 1962 -1966 period, although each of the legislators was known in his local area, his popularity rested on the tribal identification tag attaching to him rather than on any sustained contact of a political nature developed between him, and the people of his area. In other words, they had no local base of power. Local power rested in the hands of politicians who were active in district government.
By 1962 the UPC was able to establish itself as a party capable of reaching a compromise with Baganda by using the KY rope or alliance to reach them. UPC itself did not have a lot of confidence in its party officials and that is why they fronted a few for elections. For instance, the 139 candidates put up by the UPC for the 1962 elections to the National Assembly included 47 teachers, 30 business traders, 16 fanners, 8 advocates, 3 doctors,5 clerks, 4 journalists, 6 co-operative officials, 2 engineers and only 6 party officials
The UPC was able to consolidate its position only after bringing the conflict within the traditional order of Buganda to a violent and decisive end in 1966 with the aid of Amin and the military. Amin was a UPC through and through.
In one sense, the central government was a bit inclusive because almost other tribes including the baganda were represented, but the people wielding real power were northerners. In some cases, as in that of Kigezi, UPC leaders who occupied ministerial positions at the centre were far less powerful than the Ceremonial Head or Secretary-General who was in a position to develop personal bases of power within the district
After 1967, Obote increased his power tremendously. The 1967 Constitution was designed to get rid of feudal rule at the sub-national levels of government by increasing the powers of the District Commissioner, who now became the effective instrument of the central government policies in the district, and the removal of outmoded offices at the local level. Chiefs and ministerial figureheads at the district headquarters were removed. Obote also increased his powers so much as a president. I will explain more about the 1967 constitution when I get a chance inishallah.
Yes, Uganda is a ‘developing democracy’ after going through various episodes of the 1962 constitution, 1966 and 1967 constitutions, Amin dictatorship, ‘chameleon’ UNLF government and the Tito Okello part timers:
1. The 1962 constitution entrenched representation based on tribalism and regional allegiances
2. The 1966 constitution did not change this as Obote was interested in using tribalism to keep himself in power for a long time. The army he formed as the prime minister from the biggest political party in parliament, was full of his tribes mate
3. The 1967 constitution did not also change this situation as well because the leader was the same. Actually, we should have had a General election in 1967 but because of Obote’s fear of elections, the Republican constitution was passed in that year and under it, it was specifically provided that all members of the then existing parliament were deemed to have been elected for a further term of 5 years. This meant that Obote was to be our president till 1971 when General elections had to be held. So Obote was another leader using the law or parliament to impose himself on us though Amin later showed him the exit door.
4. Under Amin, there was no parliament since Uganda was under a military government. This guy did not waste tax payers’ money by pretending to be what he is not. He was a dictator. Full stop. No messing about like others have done.
5. Without wasting time with the useless UNLF government (full of pretenders, ‘snakes’ and ‘chameleons’) or NCC which acted as a parliament under Binaisa and Lule, let me jump to the present life under Museveni. When Museveni came to power in 1986, the NRC which was formed while NRM was still in the Bush continued to act as our assumed ‘national parliament’. I’m using the term ‘assumed’ because nobody elected them. The president and all NRC members elected themselves for tenure of 10 years. In essence, one could justifiably say that we didn’t have a proper representative parliament.
Nevertheless, I want you to note something here: the representation based on tribalism and regional allegiances did not stop with 1962 and 1967 constitution alone. It is still here and now being given ‘new life’ by none other than our beloved MP Beti Kamya. Actually, it may never end if Kamya succeeds with her new pressure group she formed recently.
Therefore, I don’t think that it is entirely poverty that makes MPs stop being patriots. It is a combination of so many things, among which include:
Ø Tribalism: the need to impress the president because he is from the same tribe or region as the MP. Failure to do as he says, the president may campaign against you and lose the constituency
Ø Threats to some MPs for taking different positions from the president. Some of these threats may be very serious.
Ø Lack of patriotism among the current crop of legislators
Ø E.t.c
Abbey.K.Semuwemba
Posted in history |
April 27, 2009
Dear ugandans,
If anyone knows Mr. Moses Kalanzi’s email, we would like him to join us at the UAH forum as soon as possible. I have read a few bits he has written in the media and his work seems to be interesting.
Regarding Lule’s leadership, I can only say that Lule was a victim of ‘snakes’, ‘chameleons’ and hypocrites in the UNLF government. Museveni himself never wanted Lule to become the president of Uganda at the time when one tries to analyse some of the sentiments he pours in his book sowing the Mustard Seed. Museveni believed that the FRONASA group should have had an upper hand in the post Amin era and I believe he wanted himself to be the president. That’s why he steeped on a lot of people’s toes while in the Moshi Conference (March 1979). Lule kept himself the Defence minister for a while with Museveni as his deputy (state minister of defence) because he knew how powerful the minister of defence can do to a regime that was unstable as his. He should never have trusted Museveni at all because Museveni himself had shown signs of fighting for the presidency whatever it takes.
Lule at the same time did not trust Paulo Muwanga because he knew that this was Obote’s snake in the UNLF government and that’s why he removed him from the important ministry of internal affairs and replaced him with a man he can trust, Dr.Andrew Kayiira.
The Obote Group, on the other hand, did not trust Museveni because they knew what he was after. They recruited a few FRONASA into the UNLA and Museveni did not like this as he says in his book. But this was what anybody who wanted to consolidate his power base should have done. The UPC people wanted to keep the northerners as the majority in the army because they knew that power lies in the army in African politics and also wished to keep their strength in the north going. The UPC guys did not even like Museveni being the Vice chairman of the Military commission but Nyerere intervened in Moshi and there he was.
Museveni in return did not like them at all but kept them within his distance and that is why he accepted to serve in the UNLF government. Museveni was not worried about Prof Lule’s presidency that much because he knew he was gonna fail. If Lule had come into presidency with an army of his own, he probably would have survived the ‘snakes’ and ‘chameleons’ in the UNLF government. When Lule realised that he was surrounded with snakes that were gonna bite him any time, he started seeking the shoulders of the Mengo clique to cry on and that is when these snakes made a move. He never moved out of the central region in the 68 days because he knew that there were more snakes waiting for him outside the central region and he was scared to death.
Lule wanted to create a balance in the army (UNLA) and that is why he introduced the quotoa system for recruitment, which would have been based on the population of each of the country’s ethinic groups. The UPC group did not like this as this would have meant more Baganda and other western tribes dominating the army. I think Museveni supported him on this issue because he was watching the UPC Group very closely.
The truth therefore is that Lule did try to make some steps within the 68 days to consolidate his presidency but he would never have made it without an army of his own. His insistence of going by the 1967 constitution can also be seen as a president who wanted to give himself more executive powers. Who would not want this if you wanted to consolidate your power? The UPC people moved very fast and got rid of him. They tactically replaced him with the 1960s former Obote’s right hand man, Binaisa, who was the architect of the 1967 constitution. This Binaisa knew that he was just being used and that’s why he resorted to turning state house in a business entity to make himself a few dosh here and there.
Abbey.K.Semuwemba
Posted in history |
April 27, 2009
Dear readers,
With due respect to our Asian friends and Ugandan nationals, I think they have not changed their ways wherever they live. I really thought that the Amin example would have given them a few bits on how to live in the society but wapi. Here in the UK, I thought being a Muslim can easily make one intergrate with Asian Muslims like Pakistanis but they still look at us differently which is a shame. It is alleged that Amin wanted to marry an Asian woman and he was denied this chance and this is one of the reasons why he expelled them from Uganda. But this kind of marriage segregation has not changed up to now:
1. An Asian Muslim woman is not allowed to marry a black Muslim man which is against the Islamic principles and rules
2. An Asian Muslim man or woman is not allowed to marry outside the family. So they end up marrying first cousins to each other
3. an Asian Muslim woman or man is not allowed to marry a siqh or non-Muslim despite Islam allowing men to marry non- Muslim women
It still baffles me why human beings are so segregating of each other so much. For me, if a man is a Muslim, educated enough and working, I will allow him to marry any of my sisters. I’m insisting with being a Muslim because I believe in my religion so much. But I think cultures should not remain indefinitely conservative since they were created by human beings themselves. Society should be allowed to change in a good way by accepting certain good modern things.
Abbey.K.Semuwemba
Posted in Religion, cultures |
April 27, 2009
The opposition is right to tell Museveni’s supporters to restrain themselves from supporting anything whether bad or good in Uganda. We all once loved president Museveni because we thought he was gonna give Uganda a better foundation than Obote did. Actually, he tried in the first 10-12 years of his leadership to put things right. Both his political and economic policies were sound. I know people particularly UPC supporters have always criticised president Museveni and late Dr. Kiggundu Sulaiman(who was governor Bank of Uganda then)for devaluing the Uganda shilling in the 1980s but this was the right thing to do at the time. Actually, this was one of the measures IMF/World Bank came up with to enhance the scope of the private sector, contending that private enterprise was more effective. So nobody was going to get IMF/World Bank money before fulfilling these conditions. Therefore privatisation and devaluing currencies were IMF/World Bank policies and we would have benefitted from them if the whole process had not been messed up by greedy people in the NRM government. Donors overall aim was to shift the governments of Africa from consumption to investment.
Those now close to president Museveni should advise him to go back to the Museveni of 1980s, at least for the remainder of his current term. There is no need to praise him even when he is clearly making mistakes. Museveni himself criticises people who praise leaders all the time without pointing out their mistakes in his book sowing the Mustard seed on page 48. While in exile in Tanzania, he met Akena Odoko and Sam Odaka whom he described as among the many ministers and colleagues of Obote who were busily flattering Obote at the Uganda Club in Kampala while he was making mistakes. Ministers used to sing TUKUTENDEREZA( to quote Museveni) to Obote.
Abbey.K.S
Posted in Presidency |
April 27, 2009
Dear readers,
I have never said that Hitler, Obote, Amin, Jean-Bedel Bokassa and others in their category (who were nuttier than squirrel turds) did not do good things for their countries. The bad things they did outweigh the good things. All I know is that I pray and hope that these people stand right up front with Satan in hell, burning their bodies off because of their horrendous deeds(of course God knows better). I lost a father because Obote and Muwanga’s government failed to protect him. Just mentioning Obote’s name make an average person cringes and offer criticism just by hearing it.
Personally I would like to see the Newspapers in Uganda annually publish an issue devoted to the most villainous people of the century. As I see it, this is my list:
- Obote- More Ugandans were murdered in Obote 2 than during Amin’s reign.
- Japanese military leaders of pre WWII (rape of Nanking ), and WWII.
- The racist elements of American society that made it their mission to terrorise, lynch and deny black people their rights.
- The Turkish leaders of the genocide of Armenians, the first full scale genocide of the 20th century.
- The Pakistani military and government officials that murdered 3 million Bangladeshis until India invaded Bangladesh ended the terror, defeated Pakistan , after which Bangladesh became a full fledged nation of its own.
- The Nigerian politicians that started the Biafran war.
- Those who started the genocide of the Tutsi in Rwanda .
- The Indonesian government officials and military leaders who murdered millions over the years, including massive purges of ‘communists’, anti-Chinese pogroms and the murder of fully 1/4 of East Timor’s population over two decades.
- Those murderous politicians and military leaders in Central and South America who have created mass death, genocides of native peoples, death squads, torture, murder and war over a century.
- Brazil and it’s generals, the “dirty war” in Argentina, the death squads of El Salvador and the nun raping troops of the government there, the genocide of Mayan Indians in Guatamala, especially under Rios Mont and helped by the CIA.
- Pinochet of Chile and his willing executioners, including Nixon, Kissinger and others.
- The murderous Islamic leaders of Sudan with their genocidal war against the black Christians and polytheists of Southern Sudan . That’s I pray that the ICC gets Bashir to serve this purpose.
- The Belgian guys who were responsible for the horrors of the Belgian Congo early in this century that saw millions dead from abuse, slavery, and brutal military repression.
- Adolf Hitler
- Joseph Stalin
- Saddam Hussein
- Slobodan Milosovic
- Nikolai Lenin
- Benito Mussolini
- Idi Amin Dada
- Mao Tse Tung. Mao killed more than Stalin
- Bokasa
- Koroma of sierra Leone
- M……..(I have forgotten his name)
This is getting depressing because I can see more African leaders filling up the list than anywhere in the world. So anybody can feel free to add another name.
Abbey.K.Semuwemba
Posted in Politics, history |
April 27, 2009
I remember one ugandan wrote on the UAH forum that it is solely the role of the government to create jobs and not the private sector and I would like to partly disagree. I would like to say that the experiment of governments creating jobs has miserably failed and now it is upon us to do this. The government mainly needs to create an environment that allows investment to take place. This environment may include things like better infrastructure, better investment institutions, better communication systems, political stability as it is in central Uganda, e.t.c. Yes, they can create some public jobs but it is never enough for a population of 30 million plus. How do you expect the government to accommodate all those 20,000 plus graduates that come out of colleges like Makerere university, Kyambogo, Nakawa, Mbale university,… every year? If you are abroad and you have got some money to help your graduate brother or sister to start up business in Uganda, just do so- because there are no enough jobs from the government.
In the United Kingdom where I live, Margret Thatcher’s years saw an increase in foreign investment, particularly following the pursuit of monetarist policies in the 1979-90 era. Since then, the United Kingdom has been a leader in the move away from government regional policy and toward inward investment and now attracts a larger proportion of global inward investment than any other national economy around Europe. The point is that the conditions for investment are there in the country and even without government input; the private sector is now employing a lot of people compared to the government. This is what the Museveni govt needs to do urgently: creating better conditions for investment all over the country.
I think to be fair to president Museveni, his economic policies look good on paper but because of lack of independent institutions, that is why there is a lot of presidential ‘KAVUYO’. Museveni is trying to boost the private sector just like Thatcher did in the UK in the 70s. Under Thatcher, most of the coal mines in north east England were closed which saw a loss of two hundred thousand jobs (about two-thirds of total employment including the iron-and-steel, shipbuilding, and engineering industries), and the car industry in the West Midlands, which saw a 37 percent decline in employment between 1981 and 1992.However, she went around this employment gap by encouraging inward private investment and attracting foreign investment in big cities in England.
Similarly, for most economic experts in Kampala including the World Bank, the attraction of foreign investment is seen as “crucial to the future economic vitality of regions” in Uganda, and they believe that privatisation of industries must keep going for a very long time. If Museveni can allow institutions and ministries to function independently without his interference, probably all these fake investments like Shimon demonstration site would not be happening. The president should let those institutions responsible to assess companies that qualify for “corporate welfare,”( which ensures that corporations receive tax breaks and public money that would once have been invested in regional development or individual welfare payments) to so independently. The president MUST not interfere with these institutions.
The Labour government here in the UK has improved on Thatcher’s policies by introducing policies such as Gordon Brown’s New Deal for the young unemployed but Brown or Blair never interferes with the institutions handling these things unless if it is very necessary. President Museveni should do the same.
Posted in Politics, international |
April 27, 2009
As Ugandan living abroad, if we are to do anything back home to help our brothers and sisters in Uganda, the most critical question is how to create quickly hundreds of millions of jobs for the poor with limited purchasing power and limited capital for investment. The idea that most of these jobs could be created in the corporate sector or by government-sponsored activities has already been put to rest- because it has been tested and it has not worked out in several developing countries.
For any strategy to be successful, it must give central importance to self-employment and entrepreneurship, with emphasis on agriculture, agro-industry and small firms in the informal sector. Actually Edward Mulindwa’s egg business proposal has already been implemented by some Ugandans I know who have made their money from simple ‘kyeyo’ in the UK and went back home and it has made their lives ok. The most important thing is to encourage people to become self employed instead of moving from one job to the other. Secondly, we must start by creating jobs which are agro based rather than putting more emphasis on the so called corporate world. By the way, there is money in anything somebody wants to do as long as one plans very well and put their mind to it. People like Mukwano, Mulwana and most Kampala genuine tycoons did not make money by starting with corporate business plans. They started with something small and representing local interests. They are actually richer and more useful to Uganda than those Ugandans you listed in your message below.
The professionals abroad can help us to lobby their organisations to give outsourcing contracts to fellow Ugandans at home because that’s how Indians and Chinese have benefited from globalisation. Most corporate companies in USA and other big economies can now outsource jobs that can be performed remotely such as website creation, link building, article submissions, Blogs, data entry, programming, virtual assistants and many other online tasks. Let those guys you mentioned help Ugandans at home win such kinds of contracts instead of wishing to look like ‘kings’ among fellow Ugandans.
Those Ugandan professionals abroad can also help us in developing new ideas within the existing industries or attract more foreign investment in agro-based industries. For example, we have got a lot of ‘KASASILO’ or ‘rubbish’ that can be turned into bio-fuel. Bio-fuels in Brazil have created about a million jobs and there are plans to expand bio-diesel production to benefit hundreds of thousands of smallholder farmers. China has a large-scale programme to reduce methane emissions from animal husbandry which is creating a whole new industry of biogas equipment manufacturers and producers. In South Africa, energy upgrading of housing in slum areas avoids emissions and creates more than 100 new skilled jobs for every 100 units of buildings renovated. Such projects could expand to large-scale operations because they can attract significant funding from industrialized countries through the Clean Development Mechanism created by the Kyoto-Protocol.
Nze bwendaba
Posted in Economics |
April 29, 2009
Dear Ugandans,
Uganda is a long way to uniting as one country which is sad. Late Obote divided the country so much and the current politicians are also still taking advantage of these divisions. Obote practically divided the north and south of Uganda from the 1960s. Museveni rightly used this division to get rid of Obote dictatorship and getting himself into power.
Obote used to call the freedom fighters in Luwero Triangle ‘bandits’ after he illegally imposed himself on Ugandans on the evening if Saturday,11 December 1980 ,and unsurprisingly Mr.Ochieno Joseph is also using the same words(bandits) of his mentor in some of his messages. It’s no secret that Obote hated Baganda and the vice versa was true. For instance, In a speech broadcast on radio Uganda, obote told a rally held in soroti in 1981 that if the baganda did not behave themselves, they (the Acholi-Langi alliance) would do to them what they did to the west Nilers in 1980.
Phares Mutibwa in his book Uganda since independence also wrote that at Kololo , one Acholi soldier wrote on the wall:’killing a muganda or a munyankole is as easy as riding a bicycle’.
So basically, whoever was to fight a guerrilla war against Obote’s despotic regime had to exploit this divisionism which had been started by Obote from the 1960s when he made sure that the army was dominated by northerners. It is the very reason why museveni chose Luwero triangle as his spot to fight Obote because he knew that Baganda and southerners in general would support the rebels in everything. It was also claimed in a public lecture at Makerere University in 1988 by A.G.G Gingyera-Pinycwa, professor of political science, that the NRM/NRA went to the bush to remove the northerners from power, and I don’t think that he was far from the truth.
The questions we should also ask ourselves are:
- Who started this process of dividing Uganda into the north and south?
- What can be done by the present and future generation of Uganda to make sure that it does not happen again?
- Do northerners need some form of a sensitisation program to realise that anybody can become a president whether he or she is shorter than you? What matters is what that person has got to offer.
- Can the current tribal divisions in UPDF also cause us future problems if they are left unchecked for a long time?
Byebyo ebyange
Abbey.K.Semuwemba
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections, Politics, history |
May 23, 2009
Dear Ugandans,
My feeling is that both homosexuality and prostitution should both be illegal. Legalising prostitution will make our children vulnerable to this immoral behaviour thus leading to higher child prostitution in the country. Right now, sex with a child is legally rape and assault but the old men abusing kids will start quoting legal child prostitution as their defence once caught in the act. Laws like legal prostitution make children not to be treated differently than adult citizens yet they lack the ability to fully comprehend their actions.
Some people argue that prohibition of prostitution will never work, wastes untold billions of our money, and actually makes it more dangerous by driving it underground but I think such voices simply lack the moral backbone. I don’t care if the war on prostitution is not winnable. Sometimes man has to take a moral stance. There is certain honour in fighting for what is right, even if the fight is in vain. Such voices seem to approach all human issues from the purely economical position. They don’t care if doing prostitution is moral or not, they are only concerned with the economical ramifications.
I’m also of the view that prostitution is a form of slavery. I don’t like the idea of the prostitution’s tendency to promote the idea of people as property. Remember that we had slavery in this country up several years ago? It was considered legal among the big nations like USA and Great Britain, and many considered it moral, but we advanced as a society and the whole world came to accept that slavery was immoral and unacceptable. We looked at what is right as to the rights of people.
In addition, prostitution exploits women, hurts families and destroys marriages, and the government should not add further credibility to legalized sex selling. I don’t think it is OK for a pimp to charge a prostitute for use of a street corner if prostitution is legal.
With legal prostitution, I would warrant a bet that the victim is the prostitute herself as she loses self-esteem. A prostitute puts herself at risk to please people. The fact is that legal abortion, legal prostitution, and the defence of both make women toys, playthings. Well, as far as I know, women don’t like it much either.
Prostitution is already legal in Canada but actually soliciting sex is illegal. In Germany, Netherlands, Brazil and Nevada (USA) prostitution is legal but they have not benefitted much from legalising it apart from creating more problems. Even those states in USA that have legalised it have found it hard to protect people who commit these crimes in other states where it is not legalised. For instance, if a convicted prostitute fled Utah and sought refuge in Nevada to escape imprisonment, Nevada is bound to return the prostitute to Utah even though prostitution is legal under the laws of Nevada.
I don’t know whether Uganda is a signatory to the so-called UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) because this treaty is causing a lot of immoral problems in several countries. For instance, in 2002 the CEDAW Committee directed China to legalize prostitution even though prostitution is condemned in the convention. The committee says prostitution would be OK because it is often a result of poverty and economic deprivation. This is yet another U.N. treaty that meddles in personal matters that are none of its business. CEDAW criticizes Ireland for the influence of the Catholic Church in society and the state, in large part because of the church’s opposition to abortion. The committee also directed Ireland to legalize abortion. Kyrgyzstan is criticized for restrictions on lesbianism. I have now got a feeling that organisations or individuals promoting homosexuality in Uganda are partly being funded by CEDAW. Please if we are not yet members of CEDAW, stay away from it completely because it will tell us to legalise abortion, prostitution and homosexuality.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Politics, health |
May 25, 2009
Hello Ugandans
Prostitution is slavery unlike the institution of marriage. In Greece, it used to be termed as ‘porneia’ which means to sell and refers to slaves bought and sold for cultic prostitution. In Rome, It used to be called “fornicatio” which means prostitution or trafficking in slaves for that purpose.
Yes, sex is very important in marriages such that in Islam a wife is supposed to give the husband the ‘goods’ any time he wants without any hesitation. Islam places so much emphasis on sex in marriage because having our naked bodies caressed all over and warmly held with love and affection is as vital to our emotions as eating and drinking is to our health. Also, sex for most people is the most intimate event; even prostitutes make a difference between a customer and a partner and use another cognitive schema. However, marriage is composed of so many things which go beyond sex like omulongo Kato Joshua of Newvision explained.
I believe that men who advocate for legal prostitution just want to turn sex into another product or service that can easily be bought in a shop. They want to make it lose its sacred value which has always been attached to it. There are even some religious leaders who concoct ‘hadiths’ or sayings of the prophet to easily help themselves with sex any time they wish. For instance, In Iran,Mullahs who are travelling on pilgrimages routinely take temporary wives, sometimes for a week, sometimes for a day, sometimes for a few hours. In the West this is called prostitution. In Iran it is hallowed by the name of ‘sigheh’ and it has the full sanction of the law. One can only imagine the plight of poor women in Iran who are driven by necessity to become de facto prostitutes. But anyone who believes in female dignity and family values has to consider ‘sigheh’ a complete scandal. I suspect that People advocating for legal prostitution have got less respect for women in general.
Prostitutes have been part of us from the days of Jesus and there is no way we can start comparing them to wives. A wife is a wife and a prostitute is a prostitute. The ancient Israelites believed in pre-marital and extra-marital sex (as long as it wasn’t with someone else’s wife), prostitution for foreigners (but not Jewish women), polygamy, the right of sexual satisfaction within marriage, and numerous other pro-sex beliefs. Prostitution should remain immoral and illegal. Even in USA where morals have degenerated more than anywhere on earth, some states like New Orleans and Washington, DC have kept prostitution a crime. We must protect certain morals in Uganda.
If you want to buy prostitutes, just do it like the way men do adultery or fornication or steal Global Aids funds without being caught. Most men (except me) can easily find themselves buying a prostitute for a night. Personally, I don’t pay for the ‘goods’ which we are both enjoying. That is out. If you can’t give me your ‘goods’ for free, then eat your ‘goods’ yourself. As it turns out being ugly is no reason for having to go to for prostitutes because people like Hugh Grant, Eddie Murphy and Martin Luther King (MLK) were caught with one. These guys could have or could have had any woman they want but the urge to buy women like as if buying toothpaste forced them to go for prostitutes.
Kiibi nyo banange
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in culture |
June 3, 2009
UPC supporters,
Uganda is a tribalistic society and it’s not Abbey Semuwemba thriving on it as you wrote below. It was your Obote and UPC that thrived on it more than any body else from the 1960s till when he was toppled by Acholi officers in 1985 on the day baganda call Mulindwa:
- Yes, there is sort of a group that wants all the ‘greater north’ to speak with one voice. Personally, I hope it happens because I like unity for a cause. But, I’m gonna be honest with you on this one: for instance, if the presidential elections are to be held today in Uganda and there is a candidate from the north (Probably Robert Mao or Otunu Olara) against a Semuwemba or Besigye from the South, majority of the northerners would vote for their son whether he is less qualified compared to other candidates or not. It happened during the DP’s August 1980 delegates’ conference at the international conference centre in Kampala when the Acholis fronted Tiberio Okenyi to stand against Dr. Semogerere for the post of president General of the party. Semogerere got 186 votes while okenyi got 23 votes. All the delegates from the north voted for their Acholi son except Ambrose Okullu and Zachary Olum who voted for Semo.
- Nevertheless, the acholis have never forgiven Obote for dividing the Acholi district into Simba and Moto Moto factions because he wanted to prolong his stay in power. Obote wanted to keep them fighting each other since a unified Acholi would worry his leadership and he was right when one looks at what happened at the later stages of his leadership. Obote depended on rival factions within the party to lead UPC for a long time. In Toro, he clandestinely supported a rival UPC group called ‘KAGOROGORO’ under Rwambarali against another one under Samson Rusoke. That is how he run his shows in UPC for a long time till the day called Mulindwa happened in 1985.
- During the 1980 General elections in Kampala, most of the Acholis soldiers in Mbuya, Nagulu, Makindye and Lubiri voted for DP because traditionally most of the Acholis were DP supporters. They were just ‘chakamuchakasised’ or brainwashed by their Acholi leaders in the army (the Bazilios) to start supporting the Langi president and UPC because most of their sons had been recruited in the army and in the public service during Obote times. The Obote army was dominated by Acholis and Langis during Obote. We shall see in 2011 if the Acholis will change this image and instead vote for a southerner even if Robert Mao or Olara Otunu stands.
- On 2nd March 1983, Obote announced the promotions of Major General Tito Okello to the rank of Lieutenant General and also promoted Brigadier Oyite Ojok to the rank of Major General. This was done as a ‘thank you’ to both the Acholis and Langis for helping Obote rig the 1980 elections and retain political power. This Lango-Acholi alliance eventually collapsed when the Acholis learnt that Obote and Oyite Ojok(both Langi by tribe) were promoting more of the Langi officers than the Acholis( who were the majority in the army). Obote also ensured that the battalions around Kampala were commanded by the Langis because he did not trust the Acholis. Eventually, this mistrust led to Obote being kicked out later one and Tito Okello( a langi) taking over. So the day the baganda call ‘Mulindwa’ was initiated not by the southerners but by the sectarian army Obote built. Probably, this may also explain how Museveni is fertilising his downfall by promoting mostly people from his region at the expense of other tribes.
We should take French based Ugandan jouranlist,Billie Kadameri’s comments about the still exisiting bad blood between the Acholis and Langis seriously. There is a rumour going on that the Acholis in the army and abroad have been grooming Olara Otunu as the future president of Uganda since the days when the Langis(Obotes) were in power.
Nevertheless, I have listened to several of Olara Otunu’speeches and interviews and he seems to be very good and articulate in what he is talking about. He singlehandedly exposed the problems in northern and sold the ‘genocide’ idea to the international community. Last time, I listened him, it was in 2006 when he was hosted on Andrew Mwenda’s KFM when he was tussling issues out with General Tinyenfunza.
Otunu is also remembered during the reign of Iddil Amin when he was the Guild president of Makerere University in the 70s. At a meeting in 1973, between the minister of Education, Brigadier Barnabas Kili, and the students at the campus, Otunu attacked the Amin regime, accusing it of neglecting the welfare of the masses and accused government officials of fattening like pigs because of corruption. He later fled the country immediately after these attacks on Amin’s dictatorship.
I still think that UPC should give the young blood in Ochieno Joseph a chance to take the party forward although I’m pretty sure that whoever becomes the party chief will never become a president of Uganda during our life time.
Byebyo Ebyange
Abbey.K.Semuwemba
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections, UPC current politics |
June 3, 2009
UAH members,
Some of these problems have been created by the politicians themselves
and I don’t know if we will ever go back to ‘normal’. Politicians in
Uganda don’t want to bridge the gap between themselves and the people
they lead. They isolate themselves so much. For instance, recently
while i was in Uganda there were so many instances that we had to be
stopped on Entebbe road because a certain leader or ‘MUKULU’ was going
somewhere. I have been seeing this situation since I was a kid and I’m
surprised that it is still going on. They stop all cars from moving
because president Museveni or Janat Museveni is also moving. How will
Museveni get to know the problems of traffic or the pot holes on the
road if he is not allowed to feel the same situation.Please Katerega
or Aisha Kabanda, tell the president and other leaders to stop
inconveniencing Ugandans on this. Recently, I bumped into David
Blanket (former UK labour minister) on a street in Bradford when I was
going to Morrison super market and he was as free as a bird. I started
wondering why we can’t really be the same in Africa.
Secondly, it was another politician called Dr.Obote who started this
system of eliminating political opponents stupidly because he wanted
to cement his leadership in the 1960s. Thus, guys like Brigadier
Okoya, Lieutenant Colonel Omoya, Zacharia Babukiika, Denis Mundere,
Martin Aroma, Daudi Ochienge and others were eliminated physically in
this way. Okoya was shot and killed at his house in Gulu by soldiers
in uniform though some people contend that the first FRONASA
operatives might have been involved in this murder. During the 1960s,
so many baganda were killed at Nakulabye on orders of politicians.
So this bad behaviour has been passed on from one leader to the other
and from one generation to the other. You go for some body’s wife in
Uganda, the first thing the husband thinks of is to kill the ‘lover
boy’ and not go to the police. Obote started it, Amin followed him and
now we hear that Museveni is also doing it. There are several people
that have died under Museveni whose deaths are questionable. People
like Dr.Andrew Kayiira, Noble Mayombo, and others died under
mysterious circumstances and people are still waiting for answers. So
unless, we get a president who will introduce a real fundamental
change in Uganda, the fact is that whoever joins politics in Uganda
will always live under fear of his or her life. This trend was started
in 1960s and it does not look like it is going away very soon.
Abbey
Posted in Politics, Presidency |
June 13, 2009
Hello Ocaya and other UAH members,
As we continue to show that FDC and NRMO are two different parties, let us now use Akena Pojok as a historic case study- to show that people can fall out with party leaders and form their own parties:
1. Akena Pojok,just like Museveni Yoweri, had top leadership ambitions in both UPC and UPM.He was more like Museveni in his presidential planning as they both recognised the use of the gun to reach their final destinations. As Museveni formed FRONASA, Akena formed jis own military group, independent of Obote’s Kikosi Mahalum, which he called Save Uganda Movement(SUM). His group included fighters like: Colonel Zedi Maruru, Liutenant Colonel Omaria, Major Kimumwe and others.
2. However, it should be stressed that Akena Pojok was an Oboteist before joining the ‘third force’ and he played a great role during the Moshi conference. Before the Moshi Conference was convened,Obote and UPC had planned to send several ‘bayaye’ groups to help them create a majority in the conference. As such,UPC was officially represented by a group led by Dr.Luwuliza Kirunda but they had their ‘bayaye’ or bogus groups among which included groups led by: Otema Alimadi, Akena Pojok and Paulo Muwanga. This is how Obote controlled the moshi conference using a remote control in his sitting room somewhere in Tanzania and it worked for him perfectly very well.
3. Akena Pojok started falling out with UPC in 1980 when Obote failed to organise a delegates conference for fear of being removed from party leadership. Akena Pojok and Adonia Tiberondwa then decided to form a group rumoured to be called ‘UPC-without Obote’. Later on,Tiberondwa ‘KATEGAYED’ or chickened out for fear of losing his ministerial post, but Akena Pojok soldiered on for a while. Nevertheless, Obote realised that he had to do something and that’s why he called for a delegates conference in November 1980. Obote’s conference had no agenda other than rubberstamping several resolutions and confirming Obote as the leader. Let us hope that Mukyala Miria Obote will not borrow this because he wants to endorse his son as the new leader.
4. When Akena Pojok realised that there was no life left for him in the UPC, he put his efforts more on ‘UPC-without Obote’ which later came to be called the ‘third force after getting a lot of support outside the party. The third force eventauly became UPM with Museveni(former UPC) elected as its leader and Bidandi Ssali(another former UPC) becoming the secretary General. So can we really say that UPM which later came to be called NRM is the same as UPC because of its founders? Definitely not
5. Lastly, I think Akena Pojok later on also ‘KATEGAYED’ and moved back to UPC after failing to become the leader of UPM-because he stood on UPC ticket in Gulu west and won confortably in the 1980 parliamentary elections. I think this is the reason why Mr. Ocaya thinks that he was never a member of the ‘third force’.
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections, history |
June 13, 2009
People who say that FDC and NRM are the same don’t know what they are talking about. They are just playing dirty politics. FDC is a registered political party and totally independent of NRMO. Yes, some of its founders were former members of NRM but all parties in Uganda apart from DP have had a chunk of members of other parties prior to their formations
When UPC was formed in the 1960s, it took a big chunk of DP and Kabaka Yekka members. There is even a rumuour that Mayanja Nkanji was recruited in UPC while he was studying at Oxford University in the UK, and that’s why Obote did everything in his powers to lobby for him to become the Katikiro of Buganda after Michael Kintu was sacked. In return, Mayanja Nkanji helped Obote to get the KY/UPC alliance against DP. Well did the crossing of DP and KY members to UPC turn UPC into a DP or KY? The answer is No.
In 1980 UPC also lost a big chunk of its members to DP. Some of these included: Dr. Martin Aliker, professor yoweri Kyesimira,Dr.Kazungu,Dr.Muzira,Wilson Lutaya,Matia Ngobi,James Kahigiriza, Nekyon, Alex Waibale, and many others who had abandoned the sinking ship with driven by late Captain Dr.Obote. Did this make DP a UPC? No
Let us also look in details how UPM which later evolved itself into NRM/NRA came to be formed. Let it be known that most of the founders of UPM were former UPCs. When UNLF stopped being in existence and Binaisa was out of the office, some members of UPC who did not want to join DP thought of forming a new party. At first, they called themselves the ‘third force’.This group was led by Akena Pojok(then minister of Transport and a UPC),Opira(former deputy chief of intelliugence in Obote 1),Erisa Kironde(chairman of UEB in Obote1),Ruhakana Rugunda(then deputy minister of health), Bidandi Ssali(then minister of local Administrations),Yoweri Kaguta Museveni and other UPCs.
The Third force also recruited from DP territory and they managed to get guys like: Matia Kasajja of Hoima,Bernard Buzaabo,Dr.Bwambale and so many other DP supporters. They also went for neutrals and the biggest fish they got was professor Tarsis Kabwegyere
This ‘third force’ came up with a better name:’Uganda Labour Congress’ in May 1980 which they later changed into UPM.Museveni(FORMER UPC) was chosen the leader of UPM.Guys like Yona Kanyomoozi, Epharaim Kamuntu,Dr.Ezra Nkwasiibwe,Kabwegyere and Pojok did not want museveni to become the leader of UPM but they failed to block it. Actually, Kabwegyere later decided to join DP as Mr.Ssenyonjo Michael has done today after his disappointments with FDC(Whatever they are).
So basically when one analyses all these political parties, they have been almost formed by the same people from older parties. By the way, even most of their policies tend to be the ame on paper.I know for sure that NRMO stole some FDC policies after the 2001 elections, for instance, the removal of graduated tax. But it is totally unfair for anybody to say that FDC is NRM or NRM is UPC or PPP is NRM and UPC. These are politics UPC used to play in the 1980S by telling northerners not to vote for DP because they gonna be enslaved by southerners.It’s dirty politics which should not be given ny room in Uganda if we are to move forward.
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections, Politics, history |
June 15, 2009
UPC supporters,
If you can reach out to the members of UPC NEC, please kindly ask them to stop attacking FDC or DP or any other party for the sake of future democracy of Uganda. Oh, they may be allowed to attack NRM or Museveni(1990-2009) but not the pre-1986 Museveni or NRM. I told you that UPC should stop pointing fingers at anybody because whatever is happening now under Museveni(1990-2009) did happen under UPC. What I have failed to understand up to now is why some people from the north that experienced first hand experience on the murders, intimidation and thuggery that went on during Obote 2 are the same people supporting UPC now indirectly or directly. I remember you, Mr.Mulindwa, telling us how you suffered under UPC but I don’t know what is driving you to sympathise or support this party. One of UAH former members, Mr.Oryema Johnson, suffered at the hands of UPC when he was studying at Makerere university in the 1980s such that he and the then Guild president, Opiyo Oloya, ended up finishing their studies from Canada. But I used to be astonished every time I heard Mr. Oryema sounding a bit sympathetic to this party. Both Oryema and Opiyo are in the same age bracket as Major General. Mugisha Muntu and they all harbour leadership ambitions. When they were terrorised by Obote’s army in the 1980s, Oryema and Opiyo went into exile while Muntu went to the bush to fight.
The Obote army intimidated and killed a lot of students at Makerere university in the 1980s purely because they wanted to devise ways of either UPC dominating the Guild or closing it altogether if UPC couldn’t have it. At one time, one George Bwanika was shot and damped in Namanve forests. UPC used the offices of the then Dean of students, George Kihuguru and the Deputy Vice chancellor,Gingera-Pinycwa, to plung the whole university into chaos with the help of obviously the army.
On 20th February 1981, Obote invited some UPC student supporters and Mr.Kihuguru for a meeting at state house and this is where they devised the plan to get rid of the then Guild president, Opiyo Oloya. I think this guy is now writing for the New Vision as I have read several articles authored by him in that paper. After this meeting, UPC students broke into the offices of the Guild, looted files, beat up the Guild officials and announced that they had overtaken Opiyo’s government. The whole thing was done in Amin style and then you wonder where Idd Amin learnt these coup tactics from.
You wrote:’ the moment you state that the Ugandans of Mukura that were murdered in train tanks were murdered by UPDF commanded by some leaders of FDC, the Nsubugas play no speak English’. Now let me also use this opportunity to see if the Mulindwas will pretend like they don’t speak English after the following revelations about some Ugandans killed just only in this very month we are in, June/July 1981:
· Lt.Col.William Ndahendekire: shot dead by UNLA soldiers who emptied 2 magazines (60 bullets) in him infront of his family in his house in Mbarara.This fella was a sandhurst graduate but that’s how we lost him
· Byaruhanga: he was a police inspector, Special Branch, Kasese. He was arrested in his office by the soldiers and taken to their barracks where they murdered him from
· Edward Sempebwa: former District Commissioner, Kasese Distict. He was picked from a pal’s house and killed in Jinja
· Watabe:DC,Mukono. He was shot dead by soldiers after an alleged attack by the Museveni rebels on Mukono police station
· Jacob of the Marian Brothers,Kisubi: he was gunned down in broad day light near Kisubi, Entebbe
· Fred Luswata: General Manager, Uganda Tea Authority. He was shot dead by soldiers at his Bunamwaya home which they also looted without any ENSONYI
· Amina Nalukenge: she was business woman at Kawempe.She was shot dead without any mercy of killing a woman
· Hajji ISMAIL: Resident of Mukono: shot dead by the same soldiers who killed watabe
· Hajji Abbasi Kibazo: Chairman Uganda Taxi OPERATORS Cooperative Union. He was arrested from his office in Kampala and taken to Makindye Barracks where they did what Bayaye call ‘OKUMUMIZA OMUSSU’
· E.T.C
Yes All sane Ugandans do regret incidents like Mukula and Kayiira Murders and we hope that those who worked with Museveni while he was on top of things and they are now part of other parties (FDC or DP or PPP), will help us to get to the bottom of it with time inishallah. At the moment, it is realistically difficult for these guys to just open their mouths but I believe they will when Uganda is free for every body.
But it is important for UPC to just continue working with other parties without pointing any fingers because they will create political capital for Museveni and NRMO. Let them play their part in the current political environment very quietly while they also sort out their internal problems by: rebranding themselves; getting rid of the Obotes; encouraging the opposition to unite……….. and then we shall see.
Nze Bwendaba
Abbey
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections, history |
June 15, 2009
1.One UPC supporter called Edward Mulindwa wrote:’ ……The fascistic hatred you have for the Obote family makes one wonder whether you are a bonafide fascist…..’.I think this was uncalled for but for the sake of the debate, let us let readers here judge for themselves. Fascism first crystallized in Europe in response to the Bolshevik Revolution and the devastation of World War I, and then spread to other parts of the world. If it is a post-WWII occurrence it should be called neofascist or neofascism unless it solely involves participants in older movements. The first political party to entrench fascism or neo-fascism in Uganda is UPC. What makes UPC neofascists is because they reinterpreted FASCIST ideology and strategy in various ways to fit new circumstances happening in Uganda since the 1960s.
Ugandans have been fighting UPC fascist policies as far as 1960s. When Obote illegally aborogated the constitution in 1966 and declared himself president,resistance was short lived and mainly limited to Buganda, but when he tried again to force himself and his UPC ideologies on us in the 1980s, the resistance was bigger than before and that’s why it succeeded. So how can anybody call Abbey a fascist or neo fascist when you have got a fascist party occupying the tax payers’ ‘Uganda House’.
If up to now, UPC supporters don’t believe that the 1980 elections were rigged, then they will never believe anything and i will just drop this one.However, the August 1983 cabinet itself Obote formed after stealing the elections reflects the fascist ideology and policies of UPC. The 1967 constitution itself Obote used to form a cabinet and open up parliament was not respected after stealing the elections. Because Obote did not stand as an MP somewhere nor specifically elected by the UPC parliamentary group,he broke the law to allow himself to be sworn in as a member of parliament. UPC had no respect for laws or constitutions as some people in the present government. Paulo Muwanga who was appointed as VP also fell in the same category. Both Obote and Muwanga and their party were law breakers and neo-facsists first class. As if it’s not enough,Obote then made himself an imposter MP(without a constituency), president and minister of finance at the same time.On the otherhand, Obote made Paulo Muwanga- the minister of Foreign affairs, the VP and minister of Defence(as if the Mulindwas weren’t interested).
Out of the 50 ministers in Obote’s 1983 government, there were only 5 Baganda yet Baganda were about 26% of the whole population. The Muslims who were approximately 6.6% of the whole population did not have any sneeze in that fascist cabinet. On the otherhand, the protestants were 28.2% of the whole population and were given 40 ministerial appointments.The catholics who were the majority(still the majority in the country) got only 9 ministers. Mbu UPC is not a fascist party and does not do tribalism,which kind of defence is that?
2. Just to let you know that when you kill a person in Uganda evenif there are no street cameras, we have still got something called GHOSTS. Actually, there is a film called the ‘GHOST’ if you wanna watch it. So don’t think that because nobody took a picture of Obote’s meetings or could come up with a video of the 1980 murders, we don’t know that Ugandans were killed under UPC watch.So those who commited murder in 1980s and went away with it will soon die and get their punishment in heaven.
3.I would like UPC supporters to crosscheck with Opiyo in Canada because i’m telling the truth.Before Opiyo, there was a UPC Guild president in the names of Welikhe Watuwa who was the first to abrogate the constitution of the Guild(just like Obote did in 1966)-because he(Welikhe) was simply a fascist or rather neo-fascist.So a resolution of vote of no confidence was introduced and tabled in the Guild General Assembly to boot him out. Opiyo Oloya was the one that was elected to replace Welikhe and in the press release of 6th Dec 1980, Opiyo warned that the majority of students he represented wouldn’t recognise any govt that would come in power illegally or fraud.So when UPC stole the election, they booted him out and that’s how he ended up in Canada. So go and ask him nicely with a cup of coffee, he will tell you everything you need to know.
Abbey
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections, UPC current politics, history |
July 9, 2009
Hello Edward,
There is a lot of research I have read around this topic and I think I understand where you are coming from with all the points you have pointed out. However, I’m gonna take the side I would like to sell to the Uganda public which is: men should go for circumcision or take their baby boys for circumcision as soon as possible.
You are right that circumcision is a painful experience as it was done to me when I was above the baby stage. They deceived me that they were taking me to Kampala city for a ride and I woke up in Kawolo hospital. I think I remember this pain because I was a bit older when it was done but I don’t think babies do remember this pain when they grow up. Yes, when there are still babies or infants, they feel and express this pain in stereotypic ways involving vocalization, facial expression, body movements and autonomic activity but they later become OK and smile normally. The wound would heal normally without undue bleeding or infection, and that the outcome will be just a ‘normal circumcised penis’.
You asked:‘………… Abbey Ssemuwemba must be thrown out the window for he claims that circumcising men does have an effect on their sexual enjoyment. How does Abey make this conclusion when he has never experienced the side of being uncircumcised?’’
One does not need to be circumcised or uncircumcised first to know the advantages or disadvantages of circumcision. Let me elaborate: when a man has got that foreskin still intact on their penis, he feels greater sexual sensation during sex due to the greater sensitivity of the protected glans, and that the foreskin is an erogenous zone in itself. A foreskin and its full complement of ‘neuroreceptors’ (as scientists call them) can easily make the uncircumcised man to come or ejaculate very fast thus leaving a woman in limbo. This is the time women start thinking: ‘Oh, AMALIDE BISELA BYANGE’ meaning the man has literally wasted her time. The uncircumcised feel a little bit too much more than the uncircumicsed men and this is where the problem comes from.
Since circumcised men have no feeling in their foreskin (in fact, no foreskin at all), the only form of stimulation comes in the form of pressure on the head and the shaft of the penis, and in the orgasm itself. This helps the uncircumcised to prolong during love making and thus helping the women to enjoy the whole game for longer. Forget about Mirima’s explanation about styles and stuff like that because those are just what we call ‘icing on the cake’ or ‘having a soda while eating at the same time’.
Lastly, uncircumcised men often experience pain during their primary sexual act while circumcised males do not. This is because the ‘frenulum’ is removed, along with the foreskin, during the circumcision operation. If you may allow me to become a biology teacher for a second,…… the uncircumcised penis contains a certain piece of skin called the frenulum – that is attached to both the prepuce and the glans of the penis. The frenulum serves the same purpose as the hymen in virgin girls/women, i.e. as a barrier to unwanted or premature sexual activity. During the first act of intercourse (or masturbation), the frenulum is torn from the mucous membrane that keeps it in place, a change that subsequently allows the foreskin to be fully retracted over the entire ‘head’ of the penis. Similarly, for women the hymen is broken during the first sexual act (though, of course, it could also be broken for reasons completely unrelated to sexual activity).
So tell me Edward: what is wrong with a baby boy feeling that pain when they get circumcised that will allow them to satisfy their future partners or wives and also save them from that pain when they have their first sexual experience, obviously apart from other advantages listed by Mukyala Rehema and others.
Just think about it
Abbey
Posted in cultures, health, science |
July 15, 2009
Dear UAH,
The resignation of Mbale Municipality MP Wilfred Kajeke is one thing that will not go down unnoticed in the history of Uganda. It’s not a light matter considering the country where we come from where every man is more like for himself. I’m still surprised that Kajeke made this kind of decision not because it isn’t easy, considering what was happening in the country, but it takes a real man to do what he did. Most people cannot leave that parliament willingly as we all remember the case of Brigadier Tumukunde after he run into trouble with the regime in power.Most Ugandans can do everything possible to be or remain members of the parliament.
In South Korea in the year 2006, a member of the opposition party, Mr. Choi Yeon-hee, refused to give up his parliament seat after he was found grabbing the breasts of a female reporter while drunk. He only accepted to resign from the party’s secretary-general post and quit the party but not from the parliament. In South Africa, Mandella’s ex-wife, Madikizela-Mandela was found guilty on 43 charges of fraud and 25 of theft in the Pretoria court but she never immediately resigned her seat in parliament.
Therefore, Kajeke’s resignation can be seen either as a protest to a bad government and parliament or it can become the first step in the accountability process in parliament. Mr.Kajeke reminds me of the resignation of England’s Robin Cook(RIP) before the Iraq war, the difference being that Kajeke is not a member of Museveni’s cabinet as Cook was a member of Tony Blair’s government. Three days later in his landmark resignation speech, Robin Cook made the first public declaration that US companies had sold anthrax to Iraq. It took a real man for Robin to say what he said then.
Without thinking about the reduction in the number of FDC MPs in parliament, Kajeke’s powerful reasons for resignation have won him great respect within the opposition and those within the NRM with a subconscious mind. He cited a lot of reasons for his resignation but I’m going to stick with the issue of corruption that has embedded the Museveni government for a long time.
President Museveni’s reign will probably be remembered as the most corrupt in Uganda’s history. Almost the whole system is now designed to bury corruption, not expose it. Complaining about the corrupt is now more like wastage of time because if the complaints are all swept under the rug and everyone knows that complaining is futile, they don’t exist, right? NRMO and corruption go together like bacon and eggs in restaurants in the UK where I live.
Kajeke is summarily telling us that we must never again give our votes to the corrupt. More than anything else he is telling us that we have a moral duty to protect our country against corruption and other evils happening now. It is down to us to stop our governments. It is our duty to stand up and to demand the resignation of all MPs who are responsible for the removal of presidential term limits because of the Ug shs.5m bribe and arguably now the arrogance of those in power who thinks that their words are now laws themselves in the country. We must remember that voting in a non-ethical politician makes us all into active shareholders in a criminal company.
Abbey
Posted in parliament |
July 16, 2009
Dear all,
How could any one have separated a supporter, sympathiser and a member efficienly at that time in the 1960s when Museveni was arguably a DP member or supporter.All i know is that there is a thin line between a supporter, sympathiser and a member because at the end of the day each group end up voting for the same party on election day.So it is so likely that Museveni voted for DP at that time when he was ‘whatever category’ some DP members wanna put him.
The fact of the matter is that the Bahima were traditionally DP supporters before NRM and Museveni changed this. The Bahima supported DP for historical reasons in Ankole. Just before independence the protestants who were sharing power with the Bahima protestants wanted to snatch power from the Bahima aristocratic system(Obugabe of Ankole). Therefore, the Bahima allied with the Catholics to foil the Bahiru protestant move. When DP was therefore formed in the 1950s, nearly all of them joined DP. That’s how the Muhiru prime minister, Nganwa, was toppled in 1962 and replaced with a catholic called Kabeirebo John.What i cannot definitely tell you is whether all the Bahima that joined DP at that time were DP card holders or not. There is a possibility that one was mainly identified with a certain party because they were openly supporting or sympathising with it, and if that was the case, then Museveni was a once member of DP.
This reminds us of the time in early 1980 when Professor Lule was planning to come back to bid for the DP leadership and then the then executive started panicking by saying that he wasn’t a DP ‘member’ or card holders as you called them.This did not however STOP DP card holders such as: Sam Njuba,Sam Sabagereka, George Kalanzi, Christopher Ntabazi, Sam mukasa, Paulo Kavuma ,……from campaigning for the ‘supporter’(LULE) without a card.Lule himself had to hold a press conference while in Nairobi to declare that he had joined the party in 1959 when Ben kiwanuka was the president general. So if i may ask, is Lule now remembered as a DP ’supporter’, ‘member’ or just a ’sympathiser’? OR does DP only categorise people when it suits them?
One DP member called Lawrence Mukasa wrote:’……………. Re-read Bwengye’s “The Agony of Uganda” (Regency Press), it is a long time since I read it, but the facts are that Museveni came to DP leaders and asked them to give him the party leadership.….’’
According to Bwengye(1985),Museveni never approached the DP leaders as it was the other way round. In the first week of May,Bwengye was informed of the imminent launching of the party called ‘Uganda Labour Congress’ and that Museveni was behind it. In order to stop this launch,Bwengye in his capacity as the Sec General of DP made a personal approach to Museveni to persuade him to join DP instead. Museveni was later again met by other DP ‘generals’ in his office NOT their offices, in the Nile Mansion, a delegation that included 3 people:Dr.Semogerere,Boniface Byanyima and Bwengye himself.
Museveni agreed to rejoin DP as ‘ his people at home,including his own father, were all DP supporters’.He later changed his mind and the rest is now history. Just open page 95 of the book and you will find everything there.
As regards DP and FEDERO as an historical tie, EBYO NZE SINDIBIMANYI as Kayanda used to say in a certain song that goes like:’Kayanda onkwatira otya kumukyala wange.Lelo luno Nkusse’
Byebyo Munange
Abbey
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections, Politics, history |
July 21, 2009
Dear UAH,
I don’t know why some UPC supporters are so obscessed with the name UPC because its associated with a lot of things in Uganda that makes some of us feel like we have had dinner as chilli sauce and chilli burgers coupled with chilli juice. Names of parties are just political definitions which can change with times. Some of the UPC ‘Generals’ have acknowledged that some Ugandans have grown uncomfortable with the term. So it needs changing, as simple as that.
NRMO did not start as NRMO.It has been changing with the times and that is what i called rebranding the party.UPM was changed to Uganda Liberation Movement when some UNLA soldiers joined them. Uganda Liberation Movement later changed to MOSPOR(Movement for the Struggle for Political Rights) which later also changed to Peoples resistance Army(PRA)-more like a replica of the alleged rebel organisation MBU started by Besigye in 2004. PRA later united with Uganda Freedom Fighters(UFF) of professor Lule to form NRM.
Museveni saw it necessary to unite with professor Yusuf Lule because he needed the Baganda and some DP on board to fight the Obote dictatorship. He therefore met Lule in Nairobi while Lule was residing at one of his brother’s house.Lule’s brother is called Kabanda whom i personally know as a relative though we aren’t friends. The bottom line here is that one sometimes need to form alliances with others if one wants to achive something.UPC need to cooperate with other opposition parties to fight Museveni in the 2011 elections.The current IPC can compared to the alliance NRM formed with the UFM(of Kayiira) and the UNRF when they met in London to form what is called Uganda Popular Front(UPF).
UPC therefore should not be afraid of changing its name and also joining the IPC wholeheardetly because it is very necessary. By the way,It was also rumored that MJ was considering changing the name of neverland to ‘Hardly EverLand’ before he died. UPC can also out of ‘patriotism’ change ‘Uganda House’ to ‘Uganda’s Taxpayers’ House’ because it was allegedly built using tax payers’s money.
Political leaders have also changed their names dependimg on circumstances. For instance, Russia’s Lenin was once called Ulianov while Stalin was once called Dzygasgvuku. Probably, Hon Akena was wise not take Obote’s name on board because it would have reminded some of us the ‘chilli’ dinners coupled with gun shots in the evening.But who knows, Akena may change his name in future to ‘Jimmy AKena Kalule’ because his mother is a Muganda.
Cities have also changed names because names are not religions as Mulindwa wants us to believe. For instance, India’s Bombay was changed to Mumbai as China’s Peking to Beijing , both reverting to the correct name from a pre-colonial era.
Terrorist also do some rebranding when they want to join the ‘political cake’. For instance,the terrorist group in northern Iraq, known until 2002 as the Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK) and then as the Kurdistan Freedom and Democracy Congress (KADEK) changed its name to KONGRA-GEL because they realised that the former names were reminding people of ‘chilli’ dinners yet people want to continue eating their MATOOKE and KAWUNGA in peace.
Byebyo munange
Abbey
Posted in UPC current politics |
July 21, 2009
We all know that Museveni was once a member of DP and UPC before he became NRM or NRMO or whatever it is at the moment. CP and UPM are off springs of UPC.
Both the DP EXECUTIVE and the millitary government or commision never wanted Lule to come back. It is believed that Lule wrote to the Chairman of the Military Commission(MC),Muwanga, asking for permission to come back.Muwanga then wote to the then DP executive seeking their advice about this but to Lule’s disappointment, the DP executive wrote back to say that they had nothing officially to to do with Lule’s return to Uganda. In otherwords, the Bwengyes,Ssemogereres and the like did throw Prof Lule into the hands of the Lion without any fight. However,DP promised to welcome him as any other party member(not supporter) but they were not so much bothered about pressing the MC for his urgent security.
DP exective also sent a delegation led by Zachary Olum to go and tell Lule in person that the party had nothing to do with his return. The delegation also scared him off by revealing that his return was unsafe. The fact of the matter was the DP executive did not want Lule to come back as guys like Semogerere and Bwengye risked losing their posts within the party in the looming delegates conference.They also feared and they were right that Lule’s return would divide the party which wasnt in their best interests at the time.
When Lule realised that these guys were doing everything possible to block his return, his supporters formed an interim executive committe chaired by another DP CARD HOLDER,professor Senteza Kajubi. They then started negotiating with Yoweri Museveni(as Vice chairman of the MC) directly to help them guarantee the safe return of Professor Lule. Museveni initially gave them assurances that Lule would be protected but only lateron to connive with the Muwangas and Oyite Ojokos to stop Lule from coming back.
Ugandans are also right to say that ‘DP decided to organise a parallel function in Bushenyi the day Prof. Lule was coming spearheaded by the then Publicity Secretary of the Party Dr. Kawanga Ssemwogere’.However, they later got AKAKUBA NSONYI or ‘BANATULABA BATYA’ and decided to send Bwengye,James Kahigiriza and Bernard Buzaabo to go and join the people that were welcoming Lule at the Entebbe International Airport.
Abbey.K.S
Posted in 1980 Uganda elections, history |
August 3, 2009
Dear readers,
Judge Kanyeihamba made some comments in his interview with the Uganda Observer on 02/08/09 that made him sound not as bright as we all thought.
- Uganda was under a military dictatorship under Iddil Amin during the Moshi conference and the government before Amin( Obote 1) was a semi-military government, of which both could have been only removed by either a military man or through military means. So what made Mr. Kanyeihamba and the group to underlook the military Commission during the Moshi Conference and let UPC/Museveni beat them in this game. Museveni knew that to remove a military man, you have to be a military man and that is why he formed FRONASA to prepare himself for both Obote and Amin scenarios in future. Both UPC and Museveni were very culturative in their approach to issues prior to Moshi Conference. Both UPC and Museveni knew and still know each other inside-out.Actually, Museveni feared no other party in his first 15 years of leadership more than UPC because they knew each other every well. They go back a long way.
- Kanyeihamba and his friends drafted the UNLF ‘ baby’ laws as he states in his interview below but how they missed to put a clause that makes it clear that the UNLF government was gonna be governed under the 1967 Republican constitution, i dont know. Prof Lule as Chairman of NEC just used his own initiative to start leading the country using the 1967 constitution but he later met problems as we all know. All the legal experts at Moshi just left this issue just like that for reasons best known to themselves.
- Lule was tricked into dominating his cabinet with UPC after the moshi conference such that prof matia semakula kiwanuka predicted Lule’s downfall in an interveiw on BBC at the end of April,1979 by saying that Lule will not last b’se his administration was one sided. How can any leader of an African country get himself surrounded by ‘tigers’ (UPC) instead of friendly pussy cats, i will never know. Well they say, keep your enemies closer but UPC were more than enemies and anybody with an eye for leadership, needs to watch UPC very carefully. They are very manipulative when it comes to politics. UPC wanted Obote as the president of Uganda after Amin, and both the Moshi conference and UNLF governments were just stepping stones towards that objective. The 1980 elections was a destruction that was ruthlessly dealt with though they later paid a very big price. This is what i have been telling Brother Ochieno and Mr.Matek last week before the former took me into lessons of how to spell his name yet it was an obvious typing error. The fact is that UPC never wanted to promote any democracy in Uganda after the fall of Amin.All they wanted was to be in power at all costs and Ugandans needed to do something.
- I’m happy that judge Kanyeihamba confirmed in his interview the bogus groups i keep telling UPC supporters- that were formed by UPC prior to the Moshi conference. These groups were led by Dr.Luwuliza Kirunda, Otema Alimadi, Akena Pojok, Paulo muwanga( the military uniform man who Museveni is copying these days by putting on military dressing to remind us the importance of the military in politics of Uganda).
Otherwise Kanyeihamba’s 1st interview with the Uganda Observer was very good because it helped us to confirm certain historical facts for those of us who were not in Moshi.
Abbey
Interview:
http://www.observer.ug/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4529&Itemid=59
Posted in Moshi conference 1979, history |
August 5, 2009
Readers,
I beg to differ from President Museveni on the issue of Banyoro-Bafuluki. What Museveni has proposed in Bunyoro will open a can of worms he will not be able to put back in the tins. Ethnic federalism don’t accomplish the goal of unity in diversity anywhere in the world. It only empowers tribalists to disseminate messages of hate to others and this is unacceptable in a semi-democracy like Uganda. I would much rather prefer to have equal rights for all Ugandans regardless of ethnicity.
What president Museveni has proposed in his letter is unconstitutional, unequal and unjust to discriminate an individual in politics based on the ethnicity. Let everybody be given a chance and the majority will sort out the end product.
President Museveni assumes, by going with his proposals, that all folks who share the same ethnicity should agree on everything. That comes from a mindset in which all of the Banyoro people he knows think alike, which is a scary prospect, to say the least. Such fallacy is that all races and ethnicities are at the same level.People who relate every question to ethnicity just assume that their unreconstructed obsessions are Uganda’s and that the country would find them riveting. Instead the country is yawning.They are playing dangerous politics and they should be stopped.
The point I’m trying to make here is that ethnicity -based law will be used to destroy what the titular citizenry of the Uganda is trying to build here. Such a law,if approved, will hold back individuals of talent for too long. If the Banyoro in Bunyoro have got talent, they’ve nothing to fear of other tribes in their regions. Let them copy the accommodative ways of the Buganda region where all tribes are living side by side with Baganda peacefully.
What Museveni proposed in his letter is comparable to the Jim Crow laws in the old USA which were segregating the blacks, where instead of the racist claiming that some races were lesser races and could thus have their rights reduced, they now claim that because other races worked hard to get ahead, they now should be discriminated against because their ancestors worked to get ahead. Banyoro should know that discrimination is discrimination no matter how one justifies it !
The one thing we can always count on is that young people like myself will rebel against any establishment that brings such draconian laws. And in a 30 years time in Uganda liberalism and multiculturalism will be firmly established as the establishment.
Most of Museveni’s proposals can easily sail through parliament and become law because we have got a weak opposition at the moment.This country needs some form of a two-party system in a multi party environment if possible. We don’t want one party dominating politics to any great degree as is the case today in the country. We need a formidable opposition. Right now, the NRM Party is itself letting the tribalists and Museveni’s ethnic ideas drag it into oblivion as some members of the opposition are cheering and agreeing with the president as I have read somewhere.
It is indeed my hope that in the next 50 years we will not have to give preferential treatment to anyone based on ethnicity or religion.Federalism can be achieved regardless of ethicity, if all Ugandans can see the beauty of it.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Posted in Politics, federalism in Uganda |
