The Military Police in Uganda is still busy blocking Dr Besigye 9 months after  the Uganda General elections:

Dr Besigye using a Boda Boda  motorcycle as a get away from the determined Military Police of Uganda.  He has been stopped from using his car.

By Serestino Tusingwire,


21 November, 2016

The former Forum for Democratic Change presidential Candidate, Dr. Kizza Besigye has been seen in another rare moment this afternoon when he too walked for some distance before getting a boda boda which he used to travel to town for a meeting.

It is alleged that Police blocked his car as he was trying to leave his home in Kasangati for a certain meeting in Kampala, and this prompted him to abandon the car and use his feet leaving the empty car in the hands of police.


Government printer lies neglected. The old colonial building  is in ruins at Entebbe as street publishers flourish:

Here is Joseph Kaggwa, the production manager at the Uganda Printing and Publishing Corporation.


The printing press is covered in dust, a clear sign that the machine has not been used in a long time. Kaggwa blames the flourishing street publishers for knocking UPPC out of business.


By Paul Tajuba


Posted  Monday, March 9  2015


Uganda Printing and Publishing Corporation (UPPC) is stationed at Entebbe.

The Entebbe based government publishing house has no business running and the dust baked machines have become a place of abode for cockroaches and ants.

The wooden doors have seen better days as they have now become food for termites.

These are features that stand out when you go to UPPC. When the publishing house gets some business, the staff there works tirelessly to ensure that the out of use machines do not disappoint.

Back in the day

The Government Printer, as it was called before it became UPPC in 1993, had its glorious days though mainly during the colonial days, Obote and Amin regimes.

At the time, the agency was authorised to disseminate information to different government departments and ministries. Through this avenue, duplications and forgeries were minimised.

The printer also dealt in the printing and publishing of newspapers both in English and local languages, the Uganda Gazette, land titles, scholastic materials and envelopes.

Those who worked at the corporation during the golden days have a message of dire straits - asking government to intervene.

How things got out of hand

Joseph Kaggwa-Mubuya, the UPPC production manager has worked at the corporation for nearly 30 years. He says the troubles of the printer started in 1993 when the agency was turned into a corporation but was never given funding.

According to the 1992 UPPC Act, government is mandated to give UPPC money for its operations but the Act is silent on how much government should submit.

Subsequently, UPPC, though under the office for Presidency, has never received money that could have been used to purchase modern printing machines.

Actually, the “newest” machine at the agency was imported in 1991.

In the 1990s when liberalisation of the economy was at its peak, the printing school at the agency collapsed.

“You cannot trace the history of printing in Uganda from UPPC. It used to be the skills centre where even staff would go abroad to enhance their skills but that is gone,” Kaggwa –Mubuya sadly states.

Gud Mbareba, the printing finishing superviser at the agency says the final blow that UPPC got was in 1996 when there was massive staff retrenchment.

He says, “some of the most experienced people were laid off thus the school had to collapse.”


Some of the axed staff found solace at Nasser Road and it was not long before the groupo had established a printing and publishing empire at the strategically located area.

“All those who first owned printers on Nasser Road are former employees of UPPC because they had the expertise and money to buy modern machines. Now UPPC can’t compete with them” Mbareba says.

While Nasser Road is booming with publishing work, at UPPC silence reigns supreme with the machines lying idle.




Government asks for an extra Shs800 billion: 

Mr Matia Kasaija


By Yasiin Mugerwa


Posted  Monday, 9 March, 2015 



In the supplementary request, government would, for instance, spend Shs3 billion on workshops and seminars alone and another Shs4.1 billion on travel expenses.


Uganda Parliament-Wasteful budget requests such as special meals, welfare, workshops, foreign trips and allowances as highlighted in the new government supplementary request have kicked off a fuss in a new budget dispute over the request for an extra Shs800 billion the government urgently needs to cater for “unforeseen emergencies”.

The new request, if approved by Parliament, will increase the 2014/2015 budget from Shs15 trillion to about Shs16 trillion amid complaints that the money is going into consumptive areas.

In the supplementary request, government would, for instance, spend Shs3 billion on workshops and seminars alone and another Shs4.1 billion on travel expenses.

Opposition members have, however, criticised the latest cash request as “a political supplementary request” intended to help the ruling party raise cash to finance its campaigns.

“This supplementary request is suspect. What has been paraded as money for travel abroad, workshops and seminars could be money for campaigns,” said Mr Gerald Karuhanga (Youth Western).

The Budget Committee is expected to convene later this week to start scrutinising Mr Matia Kasaija’s maiden cash request as Finance minister designate.

The rising figures

Even before his swearing-in, Mr Kasaija last week requested for Shs847.2b up from the Shs237 billion requested in 2013/14 financial year.

As a rule, supplementary budgets should be a result of unforeseen actions such as natural disasters. However, in some instances, ministries have asked for more funds in the course of a financial year to deal with recurrent costs such as salaries.

Explaining what looks like a policy-reversal on wastage, ministry of Finance spokesperson Jim Mugunga said: “As a policy, there was an across-the-board hold on non-core international travels and workshops. This was meant to manage available resources then. It does not necessarily make workshops and travel unnecessary in functions of government.”

Deputy NRM spokesperson Ofwono Opondo said the NRM party does not get campaign cash from the Treasury and described Opposition accusations as “cheap political games”.






Political Parties in Uganda reject the  EC use of national ID register as NRM government prepares another rigged national election for 2016:

Gen David Sejusa (R) with the vice chairperson of People’s Progressive Party (PPP) Dick Odur (2nd R) address the press at PPP offices in Ntinda yesterday.


By Winnie Tabitha & Albert Tumwine


Posted  Wednesday, April 29   2015


Kampala,Uganda, The Opposition has rejected a move by the Electoral Commission (EC) to use data collected during the compilation of the national identification registration exercise to update the national voters’ register ahead of the 2016 general elections.

Speaking at separate events, various political party leaders said the national ID registration exercise was full of errors and as a result, most Ugandans were not registered.

Addressing a news conference at the DP party headquarters in Kampala yesterday, the party spokesperson, Mr Kenneth Kakande, said: “Many people on the national register did not register for the national IDs and that means if the EC uses the ID project register, many Ugandans are going to be disenfranchised,” Mr Kakande said.

Addressing journalists during the party’s weekly press conference on Monday, Forum for Democratic Change spokesperson John Kikonyogo expressed dismay at the way EC is handling the entire exercise.

“We have failed to get an explanation from the EC on why the old register was discarded and we want them to tell us how those people they are adding to the list applied,” Mr Kikonyogo said.

Democratic Party (DP) secretary general Mathias Nsubuga said the EC should use the previous register. He claimed the Opposition has evidence to the effect that more than 3,000 people appearing on national ID register are not Ugandans.

Uganda Media Centre executive director Ofwono Opondo, however, defended the EC, stressing that whatever is being done is within the law.

EC spokesperson Jotham Taremwa, said the government made the decision that all government departments should use the collected national voters’ data banks for future purposes.

Meanwhile, former coordinator of intelligence services, Gen David Sejusa has said there is no point in going for an election that will be “stolen”.

Mr Sejusa said the criteria of registering voters did not put into consideration verification of citizens.

“You were all registered, but what system was used to establish that you are a citizen of this country? How many of you were asked for a birth certificate, none!” Mr Sejusa said.

Article 61 (e) of the 1995 Constitution mandates the Electoral Commission to compile, maintain, revise and update the national voters register (the same is repeated under the EC Act Section 18).

But Parliament this year passed the Registration of Persons Bill that establishes a national identification register of all persons in Uganda and provides for access and use of the information contained in the national identification register.






Ekibiina kyobufuzi ekya Kabaka Yekka, UPC y’ Obote Ekiwera:

Obote yekyusiza abaamutuusa!



Mu mwaka 1965, Omubaka we kibiina kya KY Daudi Ocheng, yayisa ekiteeso kunsonga yokukusa zaabu we Congo namasanga g’enjovu, okubitunda munsi zebweru.


Dr Obote, nga Prime Minister, ne Minister Nekyon muganda wa Obote ne Onama Minister wa Defence bebatekebwa ko olunnwe nga bwebenyigira mulukwe luno.

Era Ocheng yaleeta ekiteeso ekirala, Colonel Amin okugira ng’awummuzibwako weeks bbiri nga Gavumenti bw’ebuuliriza.


Gwo omukago gwebyobufuzi wakati we kibiina kyo bufuzi ekya KY ne kibiina kyo bufuzi ekya UPC gwafiira ddala mu September 1964. Era 1965 gugenda okutuuka nga bangi ababaka ba UPC mu National Assembly (Parliament) bateesa kulaba nga bawera ekibiina kya Kabaka Yekka. Baakiyita kya bakyewaggula abatagoberera mateeka era abaagala okutabulatabula eddembe mu Uganda.

Abantu bangi baali bakwatiddwa era nga bali mu nkomyo na ddala e Luzira.

Obote yatekawo akakiiko kabulirize ku bya zaabu n’amasanga era abantu bangi ko baawa obujulirwa mu kakiiko ako, ebyama bingi ku kufuna n’okutunda zaabu n’amasanga ne bibikkulwa.

Naye report y’akakiiko bwe yaggwa Obote teyagifulumya! Parliement ye, Cabinet ye nabawagizi bangi aba UPC nebamuggyamu obwesige.


Yali asigazza kwesiga b’amagye bokka. Okuyimiriza Col. Amin yakigaana nakuza Amin mukifo kya Brigadier Opoloto. Mukuteesa kwa Cabinet okwaddako Obote yagenda kukwatta ba Minister be batano nabasibira e Luzira Criminal Prison.





 The British Judge Allen


P J Allen and his judiciary at the time demonstrate the high quality of the judiciary at the time.
Judge Allen and Judge Manyindo presided over  the trials of most of the Amin era criminals. A majority of these criminals hired the best lawyers available in Uganda at the time, which invariably was Ayigihugu. Some like Abdallah Nasur were convicted but a good number were acquitted because of lack of direct evidence. Others like Edward Mulindwa even managed to lie low for a while before escaping to foreign lands.



 I hope your mate WBK does not judge those of us who participated in prosecuting these Amin era criminals as failures, in the same manner that he has judged the ICC prosecutors. Prosecutors are supposed to present the facts before the courts that can convince a court that an accused is quilty. In this, it has to work very closely with the Investigatory authorities, namely the police and law enforcement. In the case of the Amin criminals, the police did not give us enough information from their investigations that would allow a conviction to be  upheld.
It was particulalrly disappointing in the case of Bob Astles in whose case, the judge found he was always around the major killings we charged him with, especially the murders of Archbishop Luwum and Minister's Erinayo Oryema and Oboth-Ofumbi, but we could not connect him directly to the killings. With advance in DNA science these days and coupled with Edward Mulindwa's recent confessions about complicity in the murders, I think a good prosecutor would today nail Edward Mulindwa without doubt. What WBK does not understand, from your debates which I have followed,  is that the ICC prosecutors can only be good as the investigations put before it. The Satatute of the ICC puts a duty on Satte Authorities to cooperate with the ICC in investigating cases referred to it. if a state refuses, objects or even thwarts the invesigations, the direct result is that the Presecutors will not have serficient evidence to obtain a conviction. So Mensouda and her team have so far failed in their prosecution of Jomo Kenyatta, but this is because of the failure of GoK to cooperate in investigations. It is not because Mensouda and her team are bad lawyers as WBK keeps asserting. In fact the evidnce that they had gathered against Jomo Kenyatta was so compelling that any prosecutor would make a decision to prosecute. But faced with alkmost all key or material witnesses withdrawing or disappeared or intimidated, Mensouda had no choice but to withdraw the case.


The first important hurdle, that is the establishment of the International Criminal Court, has now been successfully overcome. States party to the Rome Treaty now have to decide ways and means by which they can strengthen the ICC's Investigatory capacity and authority, especially in cases where a suspect or accused  holds or is close to power. The UN Security Council has to give the Prosecutor extra-ordinary powers to investigatewith or without the cooperation of the State concerned. Th UN must also strengthen its Witness protection programme. Lastly, the Security Council must reserve to itself power to punish leaders, like Jomo Kenyatta and Omar Bashir who refuse to cooperate with the ICC investigations. This may mean imposing travel bans, arrest warrants and other other economic sanctions against them so that they the continue to swagger around like Jomo Kenyatta whn in fact they should be locked up in prison as dangerous criminals. 
Written by 
George Okello


UPC founder Milton Obote

The term movement legacy was first coined by professor emeritus, Goran Hyden in 2011, and by it I mean a pattern of political behavior that characterized anti-colonial nationalist movements in their struggles for independence.

Half a century since most countries gained independence, this form of behavior continues to shape ruling- and opposition party politics in Africa and Uganda, while frustrating the prospects for deepening democracy.



Nationalist movements in Uganda were spearheaded by three main sections: World War II veterans, a small not so well-educated elite class of clerical workers, and leaders of a nascent civil society.  These groups were united by a single but multi-faceted cause, namely to vanquish the colonial masters and take charge of the state apparatus.

Other than this mission, these groups remained committed to their particular identities. The issues were varied and subordinate to the cause. The anti-colonial movements adopted a simple but important strategy of popular mobilization for the cause. It was rare and in most cases illegal to campaign.

Most notably the movement against the British took place at the level of society because there were no representative bodies such as parliaments or legislative councils until much later in the struggle.  Membership to these movements was rather diffuse and fluid, but because there was a single movement, this was not detrimental to its dynamic and operation.


Ensi ya Uganda nebizibu byayo ebilabika nga tebyagala kuggwa:


13th December, 2020


By World Media

The unnecessary suffering of the King of Buganda until the savage politicians killed him.







The Catholic Ganda of the country of Buganda are again coming together in the new political party of National Unity Party to try and govern the Republic of Uganda:

 26 August, 2020


By Kalundi Sserumaga

Masaka Municipality MP Mathias Mpuuga (left) shares a light moment with Mukono Municipality MP Betty Nambooze (in white) and other DP block members as they officially joined Bobi Wine’s NUP in Kamwokya, Kampala, ealier this month. PHOTO | MICHAEL KAKUMIRIZI 

The prospect of another election, against an incumbent who appears to be physically running out of time, has created a very jumpy political class, even by its own usually jumpy standards, both inside and outside of the ruling party.
The primary pre-occupation seems to be a two-headed question: who can we support now, so that we will be able to be close to whoever will come after?
The emergence of Kyadondo East MP Robert Kyagulanyi, alias Bobi Wine, over just the last three years as a new political force, has simply complicated this process quite radically, but has not altered its fundamental direction.
In his article “On rule Musevenia, Buganda and the politics of transitions,” that appeared in this newspaper on August 8, Asuman Bisiika correctly sees this situation, but then chooses to understand it in an unhelpful way.
What Mr Kyagulanyi has done is raise a lot of fear in several quarters, by simply existing in various ways. His lack of historical political baggage and record as a self-made man created independently of State patronage, has made it difficult for the ruling party to discredit him politically.
What is worse, he has stepped up the pace of his bid to become the dominant force of the Opposition, by welcoming virtually the entire body of Democratic Party (DP) parliamentarians into his newly formed National Unity Party (NUP). The reaction has been instructive.
The other side of the coin
That, however, appears to be the smaller problem. Mr Kyagulanyi is also making people nervous because he is a Muganda. And not the regime, which has always been on tenterhooks, but circles within the wider Opposition, and elements of the intelligentsia. This is very telling.
“The circumstances are clear; it is a transition period. And the projection of NUP is clear; subtly rallying the sense of Buganda nationalism. But NUP has an alibi: ……...Given the circumstances, even if NUP wanted to run a Ugandan nationalist party, it would not. What this portends is that NUP could just retreat into the most raw-sentiment political rallying point: Buganda nationalism…,” Bisiika writes.
Political activist and lawyer Hussein Kashillingi tweeted: “This NUP looks like the new Kabaka Yekka! My friends in DP, while fearing that NUP might front candidates against them, have decided to flock to Kamwokya [at the party’s headquarters].”
Also tweeting was journalist Ivan Okuda: “A few days ago, I argued that Bobi Wine’s NUP has the fundamental flaw of having its core membership seeing this as a chance at reviving Ganda nationalism. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but it has inherent limitations on terms of nation building. Today’s events vindicate me!”
Regime apologists also sought to make profit of the general sense of turmoil in Opposition ranks through the tactic of amplifying any fears about Ganda nationalism.
But in my view, this was not necessary, as suspicion of Buganda, and, therefore, of Baganda politicians, already exists in the Opposition and wider society.
This is a profound confusion born of poor politics and frankly, tribalism.
Ethnicism, tribalism and nepotism
There is ethnic nationalism, there is tribalism, and there is nepotism. These are three separate things. But republicanised Ugandans mix up those three, and call it all ‘tribalism’.
Ethnic nationalism is simply the politics of a given ethnic group aspiring for partial or total autonomy over their own affairs in accordance with their own cultural values. It is probably the most widespread form of governance, especially in the Western world. Many of the countries making up the European Union are internally subdivided on primarily ethnic lines.
Tribalism, on the other hand, is the unprincipled use of ethnic identity to advance the political and material interests of individuals. The key indicator of this is how they use and invoke ethnic nationalist arguments, but critically, do not want to recognise or give due authority to the native governance institutions created by that ethnicity. Or if they do, to then hijack them.
In all cases, it is for use as a tool to negotiate for their own personal advantages at the centre. They claim they are doing this “for their people”, but are in fact simply advancing their own personal careers, by selling the political value of their ethnicity, moreover on a retail basis. They seek to harvest individually from a collective struggle, and then betray that very struggle, once they get on the inside of the European-created government. It is an old game.
Nepotism is something else. It is basically the distribution and consolidation of public appointments and opportunities based on family and social affiliation. Basically, the goods are shared out among “relatives, in-laws and friends”.
This group naturally grows in size as the numbers of eligible members increases over the years, and soon takes over or becomes very visible in the whole realm of public appointments, government contracts and favours.
Because these are naturally primarily blood ties, nepotism often has the outward appearance of one tribe taking over. In this NRM era, it is the accusation made against people from Ankole, and Hima people in particular, as well as “westerners”, in general.
The best current example is the Uganda Peoples Congress (UPC) party. It has nine MPs in the current Parliament, all from one ethnic region, which happens to be the region of their leaders, Milton Obote and their current leader, Obote’s son, (who eventually took over the post at one point held by his mother). What is more, a good number of these people are related to one another by blood or marriage. If one were really in fear of “tribalism”, then surely, they would sound an alarm about what amounts to a large extended family project vying for State power.
The word ‘nepotism’ comes from the Italian/Latin word “nepo” (nephew). In the heyday of the Holy Roman Empire (962-1806) as a global power, with the Catholic Church as its ideological foundation and the Pope as its heads of state, many members of the clergy were not there for spiritual reasons. They were political actors. As such, they had wives and concubines, producing secret children. They would, therefore, use their offices to get “deals” for their male offspring, by presenting them as their nephews. This lives on in the Italians proverb: “A priest is a man everybody calls Father, except for his own children, who are obliged to call him ‘uncle’”.
So, the good news we have is that the NRM is actually correct: they are not a “tribalistic” regime. The bad news is that they are a nepotistic one.
But this is where nepotists are clever: they hide their “work” behind the ethnic group they come from. The standard response to complaints about this state of affairs, is to instead accuse the one complaining of being ‘sectarian’, thus using the rest of their ethnicity as a sort of human shield.
And in response, many of those in the same ‘tribe’ as the nepotists will actively defend this state of affairs. They do so partly out of the fear the nepotists have planted in them about how they will “also suffer” in the event of a regime change, and partly because they may have the hope that one day, by luck, marriage or some other development, they may also qualify for a seat at the table.
In return, they may get a few ‘bones’ thrown their way in the form of becoming the foot soldiers for the ruling clique.
But this cannot last forever. As the network naturally expands in size, it also becomes narrow in inclusion. As more and more people of a smaller eligibility are taken on board, it can move from ethnicity, to religion within the ethnicity, to strictly blood ties, and even schools attended, over time. This is where we see the ‘falling out’ incidents, where former ‘regime insiders’ suddenly find themselves on the outside with the rest of us.
There probably has never really been a truly ‘tribalistic’ government in the history of this country, because greed, by its very nature, is exclusionary; it cannot take in everybody, as then there would not be enough to over-eat. In any event, there are very few ‘tribes’ in Uganda that are small enough to be favoured wholesale by those giving out favours in any era.
It is only in this context that this anxiety over Buganda can then be understood. Nepotists use ethnic identity as a shield, but ethnic nationalists use it as an argument for greater orderly guaranteed inclusion.
Buganda is an ethnic nationalist entity, driving an ethnic nationalist movement. No more, no less, and no apology. Its principal opponent in this struggle is a nepotistic regime, falsely accusing it of tribalism.
But here are the practical problems: the default political culture in this country is the one defined by the mission school-created middle classes, a legacy of them having been centred in political leadership by the outgoing colonial governments.
The prospect of an actual native takeover of this space currently under neo-European occupation terrifies them, as it would make them subject not just to their own native laws and customs, but also to the native laws and customs of whichever other part of the country they live in.
Commentators such as Bisiika focus on Buganda because of the implications I have described. If Buganda were to undress itself of this failed European state, many Ugandans would have trouble seeing where to place themselves, since they have neglected the task of proper restoring of their own native institutions in the places they come from.
Buganda creates the biggest fear for a number of reasons, as it could up-end the very core items that make most elite and middle-class Ugandans feel like they have a country. The government of Buganda takes a very accommodative view of this, and works to make everybody feel at home.
But if one were to take this ethnic nationalism to its actual logical conclusion, then the picture would be very different.
The religious institutions would be obliged to hand back to our native religion all those sacred sites that they grabbed and desecrated by building their churches on top of them.
Yet, Africa must decolonise, reclaim and restore herself. And it is the duty of every African to help work towards this. What we call “politics” in this country, especially in the context of the 1995 Constitution, is simply the activities [colonial governor of Uganda Andrew] Cohen intended to have played in the playground he designed for the middle class. Such politics cannot resolve the two key things still keeping the African here in poverty: liberation from the Western-designed and controlled economy, and the return of all native land and other assets seized over the last 120 years.
This is an urgent matter because the collapse of Western global domination is imminent. A key development will be the evaporation of the historically-imposed value of the US Dollar.
This will mean a final collapse of these already ailing states the West planted in Africa, and therefore, a collapse also of the kind of politics generated by those states. Africans must be ready to re-organise according to their own principles and values.
Other ethnicities
Many other native communities of Uganda also want greater unified control over the territories and resources, and the right to design their own development, in accordance to the heritage of the languages and history. After all, when Uganda was a federation between 1962 and 1967, none of the federated units were complaining. But they will not stick their necks out. As a result, Buganda is portrayed as seeking “special” favours, simply because it is the only first nation prepared to speak up.
But once Buganda was able to force the NRM to fulfil at least part of its wartime commitments to restore ebyaffe, many other regions made the same demand for “their things”, despite there being no record of them having made such demands at any point since the 1967 abolition and the end of the 1981-1986 war.
Another example is the very interestingly diverse attendance of non-Baganda children brought by their parents to the annual Kisakaate education camps organised by the Nabagereka.
I am informed that in particular, one MP, who comes from far outside Buganda, made it a point of enrolling his children each year, and went on to buy a significant area of land in Buganda, but he has never been known to take to the floor of Parliament and call for the restoration of federo.
It is this kind of elite hypocrisy that enables the flourishing of the kind of perverse politics we are now seeing. What is, in fact, a wider political position, and one with a deep historical grounding and appeal, is artificially isolated to Buganda.
This is the root of all these comments that basically outline the impossible situation mainstream Baganda politicians find themselves in: they are not allowed to become Ugandans, in the sense that, if they join any Ugandan party in significant numbers, or worse still, assume leadership positions, then they are seen as trying to “take over” the organisation, and turn it into a Buganda nationalist project.
If, on the other hand, they then seek to create their own forum dedicated to the things that concern them, they are accused of being “sectarian” separatists who do not want to join the rest of Ugandans in the “nationalist” political enterprise.
But actual politics is about finding a balance between what different people want. And so responsible power structures are supposed to take on board all their views, not ask people to abandon them. And the peoples’ leaders, if responsible, are supposed to join with others and say what they actually want, and not what they think will please those in power.
Buganda’s insistence on saying what the Baganda want should be welcomed, because it simplifies things. The truth is that most people want the best for their community, and every community what is the best for its people. Ugandan “politics-of-the-centre” have meant that the general assumption is that one fights to get as much space as possible there to share out with one’s “own” people. That, actually is where “tribalism” and nepotism come from.
This brings us back to Asuman Bisiika, who goes on to say that “if there is anyone with the right credentials to be called Father of the Nation, it is Cohen. He built the national institutions on which an independent Uganda would run as a nation…(creating) Uganda Commmercial Bank or Radio Uganda, consolidated the co-operative movement in a bid to deepen African native participation in the economy.”
To conceive a colonial governor as possible “father of a nation”, shows the extent to which that “nation” is actually a European project built for the benefit of Europeans, and not an African one at all.
These “national institutions” attributed to Cohen were simply a further part of his plan to placate the Africans by making and controlling concessions. The demand for African credit, African control over the production, supply and pricing of agricultural commodities, were some of the oldest demands to be made after colonialism was put in place. And Buganda was the first place where these demands were made.
Only those wedded to the neo-colony can be appreciative of Cohen, precisely because he was sent to the colonial Uganda to solve the problem of an unmanageable African nationalism that had destabilised colonial order with rioting and boycotts in the 1940s.
Buganda has one voice: the institution of the throne (Namulondo). It is deliberate misrepresentation to ignore that voice, and instead look for its “motives” in the actions of individual politicians from Buganda. This applies not just to Buganda, but of any other native region.

Buganda dilemma
Once, while hosting a radio show with [UNAIDS executive director] Winnie Byanyima, among the guests, the topic turned to the circumstances under which she gradually parted company with the NRM, a party she had helped to found.
She recounted one particularly heated meeting of (I think) the NRM parliamentary caucus. It was at a time when the party was being roiled by accusations of failure to take serious action against corrupt but important officials. There were other issues too.
The meeting became a showdown in which Ms Byanyima was left locked in a bruising one-on-one exchange with the President, which was making him increasingly angry. The matter was commented on quite a bit in the media at the time.
What Ms Byanyima revealed was a new detail: that what she found frustrating was that nobody else was speaking up. Instead, throughout the exchange, she kept being slipped notes written by her fellow caucus members urging her to raise various other points that clearly, they were not prepared to be seen raising themselves.
She said this was having the effect of making it appear that she was the only unhappy person in the caucus, thus allowing the President to be dismissive of this “minority” view, and portray her as a self-promoter.
This is the Buganda dilemma.






How Bobi Wine, a presidential candidate for the national election of 2021, has already forgotten his core fans:

July 17, 2019

Written by Yusuf Serunkuma

The smiling Bobi Wine at one of his rallies, An Independent Member of Parliament in Uganda. 


If the success of his hit single, Kyarenga were to teach us anything, is that Bobi Wine gains more political mileage as an entertainer than a mainstream politician: the song was played at weddings and funerals alike; it was played at political rallies and birthday parties.

Composed as a simple love song, the tune somehow managed to mobilise its own public and reached audiences that certainly the singer would never have imagined. 

But more importantly, Bobi Wine’s uneducated and power-forsaken fans – by far the majority, and the ones he needs most – felt closely connected to their man as before. They danced to the tune and chanted his name. In the thrill of the song, they also, knowingly or unknowingly, committed their loyalty to his cause, and their readiness to die for him.


In the aftermath of Kyarenga, came Tuliyambala Engule, which equally managed to mobilise a sizeable public. But not as much as Kyarenga. It was a good one coming after Kyarenga. But its overt political contestations, and religiously-inspired sombreness – not really danceable beat – ate into its ruffian appeal. 

I do not want to blame the government  ban on Bobi Wine’s music, but the singer himself has become less creative. He has also become too serious for his core fans. Thus, when government banned his concerts and music, he never gave his fans reason enough to defy – by releasing more irresistible dancehall bangers [through the media available to him].

It needs to be emphasised that Bobi Wine’s edge over  Maj Gen Mugisha Muntu or Col Besigye is that he is an artiste. He is surely not more articulate than Nobert Mao, neither could he be more eloquent than his bosom friend, Asuman Basalirwa.

By the way, his edge over all these more experienced hagglers is not simply that he sings his politics, but that he is an entertainer. And lately, Bobi Wine has ceased to entertain.

Sometime last year, I argued that to stand a chance at the presidency, Bobi Wine will have to deftly craft for himself a personable double identity: identify both as a well-cultivated gentleman – capable of sustaining debate at supposedly elite platforms such as the Capital Gang or the Frontline – but also keep his hue as hard-boiled “Rastafarian.”

What has happened, however, is that Bobi Wine has successfully transformed himself into a well-cultivated dandy: You will see him step out in designer suits and ties, and a “Louis Vuitton” suitcase in hand!

His English rolls well on the tongue, too. This is a commendable feat, but it alienates his core constituency. This is dangerous for he needs the “wretched wananchi” more that the dark-suited pretenders he is appealing to.

It needs to be emphasised further that what endeared Bobi Wine to Ugandans was his music – less his political music – but more the disco and dancehall bangers. [And this is not downplay his political music].

See, a brawl with Bebe Cool over who is the best artiste in the land is more politically powerful than a speech at the floor of parliament. Musically wrestling with Jose Chameleone is more beneficial than harmoniously appearing at a DP rally: controversy is the name of the game.

Let me reiterate an old argument of mine: under the current nature of our politics, there is only one way Bobi Wine will fundamentally shake up things. That is through popular uprising on the streets of Kampala. 

By this, Bobi Wine has to sustain the sweet-talk about standing for the presidency in the forthcoming election – which is absolute baloney, but saves him from jail – but quietly organise for a popular protest.

And quietly he must. Or any opposition players. They have to step outside the media, and avoid any confrontation with regime authorities. The quietness must be deep enough in that it also beats the networks of tapping laid down by the NRM. But for Bobi Wine, his main assignment is keeping his core fans interested.

The point I’m labouring here is this: Bobi Wine has to appreciate that the major contribution he will make to the struggle for change in Uganda is helping set off and sustain a popular protest.

To do this, he has to keep closer to his uneducated and underprivileged folks who, for having too little to lose, are always ready to throw stones and engage authorities in street battles. 

This relationship was created, and is sustained through entertainment. Bobi Wine’s crew has to reinvigorate Firebase Entertainment, think and create more danceable disco-dance bangers. The lyrics do not have to make much sense, they simply have to be entertaining.

The author is a PhD fellow at Makerere Institute of Social Research.


It is alright for this young man to sing and make fun with his political supporters. 

But for the country of Buganda from where Bobi Wine comes from, Who in his political sense is going to stand up and convince the country of Buganda that this current constitution of Uganda is the final document for self determination? 

When President Amin removed Dr Obote from the power of Uganda, the Battaka of Buganda approached him over Buganda self determination. He looked the other way at his own peril. 

The country of Buganda is fed up of being played about or sung about. By the way Yusufu, what the county of Buganda is asking for is very simple and easy indeed. It does not need an army of 100,000 soldiers or ten strong armies from 10 countries!







In Uganda the political parties of the opposition are up in arms over the making of their people's government:

26 February, 2019

Written by URN

Betty Nambooze. Photo: @Ninye_Mugisha

Betty Nambooze. Photo: @Ninye_Mugisha

The Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) is 'shocked' by the level pettifoggery between the Democratic Party leadership and its members recently appointed in the 'people's government.' 
The people's government headed by former FDC president and presidential candidate, Kizza Besigye, is a loose coalition of opposition politicians who believe in the defiance strategy as a means of bringing to an end President Yoweri Museveni's power stronghold to an end.
Besigye appointed DP members including MP Allan Ssewanyana (in charge of Youth and Sports), Betty Nambooze (appointed Information minister) and Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago (named as deputy president) in his people's government composed mainly of FDC members. 
In an angry response, DP president Norbert Mao said the party will not tolerate anymore, politicians who behave as watermelons by being green on the surface but red in the inside. Nambooze in a swift reply also described Mao as a 'pumpkin' which is green on the outside but yellow inside. She went as far as suggesting that Mao is never happy to see opposition join forces in an effort to bring an end to Museveni's 33-year-old rule. 
Now, FDC spokesperson Ibrahim Ssemujju Nganda says FDC is shocked by the name calling in DP over the appointments in the people's government. Ssemujju said FDC appreciates the desire by political parties to strengthen themselves and urged DP to be cognizant of the fact that none its members has assumed a position in FDC. Ssemujju says said Museveni is the chief beneficiary of such quarrels.
"The DP president had a press conference and he was very uncomfortable by colleagues in parliament who are part of the people’s government. In fact, we’re shocked when he was calling the MPs; Hon Nambooze, Hon Ssewanyana and the Hon Lord Mayor watermelons. We’re also shocked that in return, he was dismissed as a pumpkin. In our view, the person who benefits from these quarrels is Mr Museveni." Ssemujju said. 
"The FDC fully understands the desire by the respective political parties to strengthen themselves by mobilization, by recruitment, but we think we still need to work jointly in overcoming the dictatorship which is holding all of us captive. That is why Hon Nambooze and Hon Ssewanyana and the Lord Mayor and others who are aligned to DP, are not appointed positions in the FDC structures. But they are appointed to positions within the people’s government. People’s government is not a political party that you would feel jealous some of your members have joined it." Ssemujju added.


Ssemujju argued that there is a need for DP to appreciate peoples' government as a platform that is stimulating change seeking forces in the country.


The FDC also condemned the the level of impunity showcased by Uganda's ambassador to Burundi Maj Gen Matayo Kyaligonza and deputy attorney general Mwesigwa Rukutana in two different scenes over the last week.


Kyaligonza, also the ruling party National Resistance Movement (NRM) vice-chairperson for the western region and a member of UPDF High Command, was captured on video, looking on as his bodyguards assaulted a traffic officer Esther Namaganda in Seeta, Mukono district on Sunday. Namaganda had reportedly stopped the general's vehicle from making a wrongful u-turn in the middle of road.

The incident triggered condemnation from a large section of Ugandans. The Uganda People's Defence Forces (UPDF) spokesperson Brig Gen Richard Karemire revealed that the two bodyguards; Peter Bushindiki and John Robert Okurut had been arrested and are currently detained at Military Police headquarters. 

Police also said a case file of threatening violence and assault has been slapped against Kyaligonza. Police spokesperson Patrick Onyango on Monday morning said Kyaligonza will be summoned through Internal Affairs minister, Gen Jeje Odongo to defend himself.


The Kyaligonza fracas came a few days after an ugly exchange between Rukutana and the head of the Land probe Justice Catherine Bamugemereire. Rukutana had been summoned by the Land Probe to provide clarify on how and why the government paid out Shs 24 billion to Dr Muhammad Kasasa for a piece of land in Mutungo. Rukutana told Bamugemereire 'to go hang' and report him to the president and God if she so wished. 

Ssemujju said they are concerned by the high level of impunity and disregard of the law shown by the two senior government officials. He said it's increasingly becoming difficult for ordinary citizens to respect the law without senior government officials leading by example.

"FDC is concerned with the increasing impunity now publicly being displayed by senior government officials. These officials to make matters worse are accompanied by people in UPDF uniform and I want to presume that they are soldiers. Uganda’s ambassador to Burundi, Maj Gen Matayo Kyaligonza together with men who were dressed in UPDF uniform roughed up and according to the statement she recorded, slapped a traffic woman on duty." said Ssemujju.
"And then you all witnessed when Mwesigwa Rukutana who is the principle adviser of government on legal matters was quarreling, shouting at a judge of court of appeal. It has become increasingly difficult for ordinary citizens to obey the law when those whose duty it is to enforce the law are taking the law into their hands."


Indeed it is all about political shock. Because every sensible  citizen of Uganda wonders. Under what national constitution of Uganda does the FDC  peoples government subscribe to? This country is not going to accept a new Uganda constitution every 10 or 15 years! This is what is causing shock not only for the Democratic party of Uganda but for all the rest of the concerned citizens of this country.


Therefore for the FDC peoples government, it is got to pronounce itself to lead the people of Uganda with amended National Constitutions of the political party of the UPC or with decrees as it was with dictator President Amin during 1972/79, plus the Interim Military Government of Paul Muwanga with M7 as his Vice President during 1980/82. We the people of Buganda need the rule of law and respect for human rights. We are fed up with useless civil wars and endless dodgy lectures about African liberation.






In Uganda, Members of the majority NRM Parliament, are pretending to  question Defence officials, about the dodgy political insecurity that is prevailing in the poor country:

September 27, 2018

Written by URN

Maj Gen Peter Elwelu and Lt. Gen Wilson Mbadi

Commander of Land Forces Maj Gen Peter Elwelu and deputy CDF Lt Gen Wilson Mbadi


Members of parliament on the Defence and Internal Affairs committee have tasked officials from Uganda People's Defence Forces (UPDF) to justify the on-going recruitment of 24,000 Local Defense Unit (LDU) personnel.

The MPs questioned why LDUs are being recruited and yet the president announced that crime preventers were part of the UPDF reserve force.

Appearing before the Defence Committee on Wednesday led by the state minister for Defence Sam Engola, UPDF officials denied knowledge of the 12 million crime preventers.

This was after MPs Muhammed Muwanga Kivumbi representing Butambala county, Lwemiyaga county MP Theodore Ssekikubo and the committee chairperson Doreen Amule raised concern over the on-going recruitment of LDUs by the UPDF.

"So what happens between the LDUs and the currently laid off crime preventers that [have] been officially handed over to UPDF to integrate them into the security system? What is the essence of having LDU recruited and yet we have these locals that are still in police?" Amule asked. 

The deputy Chief of Defence Forces (CDF), Lt. Gen Wilson Mbadi told the MPs that he has no idea about the 12 million crime preventers. He, however, said that the army is aware of only 260 coordinators of crime preventers who he said are currently undergoing training at the National Leadership Institute (NALI) in Kyankwanzi.

"When you look at the criteria of selection of the target groups that we’re recruiting into the LDUs, crime preventers are part of them. First of all, we didn’t have their list, so we had to develop a mechanism of getting their leadership…These crime preventers, they were talking about 5 million but we haven’t seen them…at the moment we’re engaging them [leaders] in training in Kyankwanzi so that we know what kind of people we’re dealing with." Mbadi said. 

Mbadi further explained that the LDU recruitment is part of the elaborate counter security measures being put in place as announced by the president.

"We have to put stop-gap measures and the LDU system is part of the stop-gap measures. And in law when the reason, situation for which we recruited them is no longer existing, then we’re at liberty to put them back in. That is why recruiting from their own areas and operating from their own areas as foundation security security becomes easier to disengage them once we no longer require them." Mbadi added. 

Ssekikubo, questioned the UPDF if there is proper assessment of the recruitment and arming of the LDU with guns to move around the city. However, Mbadi told the committee that the recruitment of LDUs was discussed in the National Security Council as the best option. 

"But we also lay off soldiers; it doesn't mean that at the stage of retiring, we should not. We will not fear to retire people because they have been handling guns or that when they go out there, they are likely to turn into criminals. If they turn into criminals, they will be followed by security agencies," said Mbadi.

In March, while meeting a group of crime preventers at Lugogo indoor stadium in Kampala, President Museveni announced that the crime preventers who were initially under police will be integrated into the UPDF. 

For long, crime preventers had been seen as former police chief Kale Kayihura project, whose first recruitment kicked off in 2013 under their umbrella body, National Crime Preventers Forum (NCPF). The objective of the crime preventers was to promote community policing.

But their existence raised many questions from the public on their legal existence, with sections of the public accusing crime preventers of engaging in criminal acts, instead of crime prevention.


What exactly is causing insecurity in this poor country so that more money is spent on Defence and the Police? One is of the opinion that many citizens of Uganda agreed that the major cause of insecurity and poverty in the history of this country was the leaders who arm themselves and afterwards do not want to leave power at any cost. That is why the new Constitution of Uganda 1995 prevailed on 2 terms for the President of Uganda and 75 years old as the age limit for Presidents of Uganda. The Parliament of Uganda right now is fooling the public that something else is causing insecurity other than themselves.

These learned African military men are only trying to do their job to the best of their ability as legislated by this
very Parliament some months ago. They should be allowed to go home as free men. Every Ugandan citizen that participated in the enactment of the 1995 constitution is well aware of who to blame for the current suffering in the country.








The former President of Uganda Twice has left his African warrior tribe with a fight on their hands about who is the boss of their Lango tribe and For How Long?

One of the 15 African tribes that make up the country of Uganda immersed in their cultural output.

15 August, 2018

Written by John Musinguzi

Two individuals are claiming rights over the Lango cultural institution in a rivalry threatening to tear the body apart.

Yosam Odur Ebii and Dr Michael Odongo Okune separately claim to be the legitimate elected paramount chief (won nyaci) of Lango. Each has a cabinet headed by a prime minister, Dr Richard Nam and Luciano Opio Omara, respectively.

Whereas Uganda government still recognises Odur as the gazetted paramount chief of Lango, those supporting Odongo are wondering why the central government is delaying the recognition of Odongo, following a ruling by the High Court in Odongo’s favour.

Peter Ocen Akalo, the member of parliament for Kole South, told The Observer the dispute has now turned into a political battle, with neither side interested in peaceful resolution. Akalo says more than 100 clan leaders out of 155 elected Odongo Okune.

“The incumbent doesn’t want to leave. The two camps even signed the Karuma agreement saying that Odur stays on for two years, but the two years passed long ago and he doesn’t want to hand over,” Akalo said.

Akalo is perplexed that there are two constitutions of the Lango cultural institution registered with the government; one says the paramount chief hands over office, while another says the chief dies in power.

“As Lango parliamentary group, we even called the two to a reconciliation meeting at Lira Municipal Hall but none of them appeared. Now everything is in jeopardy!” he added.

The Observer has also learnt that a mediation offer made by Kwot Lango Forum, an association of the Lango diaspora community, in June 2017 also failed to bear fruit.

Odongo was elected on February 10, 2017 and took the leadership oath on May 12, 2017, after which he was sued in the High court at Lira. An injunction was placed against his coronation. On April 12 this year, court dismissed the case with costs to the petitioner. It also upheld Odongo as the elected king of Lango.

Molly Kia, NRM women’s chairperson for Dokolo district, was dismissive of the whole issue. “I am not in any way interested in those paramount chiefs who mean nothing to the people. Me, I am interested in the affairs of my father’s clan and of the clan I am married in.”

Simon Adoo, a magistrate in Lira and a clan leader, told The Observer that what exists now are two separate institutions: Lango Cultural Foundation of Odur and Lango Cultural Institution (aka Te Kwaro Lango) of Odongo.

He said although the Foundation was dissolved in 2012, it was later resuscitated.

“As a lawyer, I was not surprised that court dismissed the case with costs. But where will the Foundation get the Shs 700 million bill of costs to pay to Te Kwaro Lango? As minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs, we have been meeting these people. We want them to exit gracefully. We prefer dialogue, but they are insistent against that!”

Adoo accused the Foundation leaders of wasting a lot of money in many court cases they could have honourably avoided by vacating the office of paramount chief. He says when any clan leader disagrees with them, they split up that clan, which is causing a lot of disunity in society.

Adoo said Odongo’s team appreciates the work done by Yosam Odur but his time has passed. They credit him for reviving the cultural institution, but they blame him and his council for failing to implement the resolutions of the Lango Conference of 2012. 


It is unfortunate that the United States of Africa  that the Lango National leadership brought to bear on Uganda and Africa is  proving a mirage of the highest order at their traditional home town. True to the saying, charity begins at home!


If you cannot unite your home, how can you unite Uganda's 15 tribes or the whole continent of Africa? Crazy Africans with a violent greed for naked power!






Executive director wa KCCA wano mu Kampala, Mukyala Jennifer Musisi, anaazizzaako abasibe be kkomera lye Luzira ennaku:

By Hannington Nkalubo


Added 3rd June 2018


DAYIREKITA wa Kampala Jennifer Musisi Ssemakula yeerabizza abasibe mu kkomera e Luzira ennaku bw’abagabidde ebintu bya bukadde n’abatwalira n’abayimbi ne babakubira emiziki egibacamudde.


Jeni1 703x422


M/s Jennifer Musisi n’ebintu bye baawadde abasibe.


Abayimbi okuli Mathius Walukagga ne David Mugema abaasasuddwa omusuubuzi Mohamed Ssebuwufu owa Pine naye eyali e Luzira, endongo yabasaanudde nga babayimbira obuyimba obubazzaamu amaanyi n’okubawa essuubi.

Omukolo gwabaddewo ku Lwokutaano mu Upper Prison nga gwetabiddwaako abakulu okuli kaminsona w’ekkomera Serestine Twesigye, akulira ebyokwerinda by’amakomera mu Kampala n’emiriraano, John Bosco Tumwebaze atwala ebyokwerinda by’ekkomera Moses Ssentalo, abakungu ba KCCA n’abakulira amakampuni ag’enjawulo omuli Movit, Harish International, ofi isi ya Katikkiro n’endala.

Jennifer n’abakungu be yabadde nabo baabalambuzza ekkomera, ekifo abasibe we bakolera ebibajje omuli entebe, ebitanda, ffi riigi ezikolebwa mu miti n’ebirala.

Oluvannyuma baalambudde ebibiina abasibe mwe basomera n’ekkomera ly’abakyala eno ng’abasibe bwe bayimba.

Oluvannyuma Walukagga ne David Mugema baayimbye ne bategeeza nti, Mohamed Ssebuwufu ye yabaweerezza basanyuse ku basibe kubanga naye ennaku y’ekkomera agimanyi.


 alukagga ngabiibya nabamu ku basibe
Walukagga ng’abiibya n’abamu ku basibe.


Musisi yategeezezza abasibe nti embeera gye balimu si ya nkomerero wabula mitendera omuntu Katonda mw’amuyisa okumutuusa ku ddaala eddala era tebeekubagiza Katonda takola nsobi.

Yagambye nti yakolaganye n’emikwano gye okugula ebintu ebyo era agenda kweyongera okubasakira ebintu abatwaalire.

Yategeezezza nti Ssebuwufu yabagulidde ente gye baavuginyizzaako mu mizannyo egy’enjawulo, n’abagulira emigaati 1,000 era nti agenda kwongera okubaweereza obuyambi.

Atwala ebyokwerinda by’amakomera mu Kampala n’emiriraano, John Bosco Tumwebaze eyabadde ne kaminsona w’amakomera Serestine Twesigye n’atwala ebyokwerinda bya Luzira Moses Ssentalo baasabye abalina obusobozi abalala bongere okuyamba ekkomera. “Naffe abaserikale tulinga basibe kubanga abantu baatwerabira.

Ate ffe tuli bubi kubanga abasibe balina ebibonerezo ebigere era bwe binaggwaako nga baddayo naye ffe tuli wano. Tusaba mwongere okutulowoozaako kubanga embeera y’abantu baffe gye balimu teyawukana nnyo naffe” Tumwebaze bwe yagambye.

Abakulu b’ekkomera baasanyukidde ebyabaweereddwa omwabadde eppipa z’amazzi, ebidomola bya kasasiro, ssukaali, omuceere, emigaati, butto engoye n’ebitabo n’ebirala.


Singa no buli mwaka musumululayo abasibe nga 100 abalaze empisa enungi omuwi womusolo nawewukako ku ssessolo asasulwayo buli lunnaku okuddukanya Correctional Institution eno eye Luzira! Kisinga ko okusasula omusimbi ogwo gwonna ogwo musolo omuyitirivu ogutukamulwamu, gubasanyusemu olunnaku lumu bweluti, ate oluvanyuma baddeyo ebuzizi okubasiba paka last! Kitalo nyo. Ebyaffe wano e Buganda bifuuse kuwona bwavu, kutunda maggi.






In Uganda, the Judiciary department has failed to investigate its own judges and cancelled all complaints made against a retired NRM comrade judge:


Retired. Justice Steven Kavuma. FILE PHOTO 

By Anthony Wesaka

KAMPALA. The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has called off investigations into numerous complaints against former Deputy Chief Justice Steven Kavuma.
According to JSC sources, who preferred to remain anonymous, the commission deemed it appropriate not to investigate him since he is no longer a judicial officer in service.

The complaints were filed against Justice Kavuma when he was still serving at the Court of Appeal.
“The purpose of carrying out investigations against a judicial officer is to reprimand them once found culpable. Since Justice Kavuma has retired, even if he was found culpable, there is no way we could effect punishment,” the source said.

The source said it would be a waste of time and resources investigating the complaints.
Justice Kavuma retired in September last year upon clocking the mandatory age of 70.
He then served out his three months extension to clear pending cases before him until December 29 last year.

Among the complaints that had been filed before the JSC, a body charged with recruiting and disciplining errant judicial officers, was by Opposition activist Kizza Besigye.
In mid-2016, Dr Besigye petitioned the JSC to investigate the suitability of Justice Kavuma as a justice of the Court of Appeal/Constitutional Court. The latter was the deputy chief justice at the time.

In a June 16, 2016 letter which he penned from Luzira prison where he was being held on treason, Dr Besigye said Justice Kavuma was close to the State and that instead of doing judicial work, he was serving President Museveni.

“The conduct of Mr Steven Kavuma, over the years since he joined the Judiciary, was initially frequently suspicious, then later frequently outrageous and currently, predominantly improper to a point of going against the oaths and the standards expected of such a judicial officer,” Dr Besigye’s letter read in part.
When contacted yesterday, the JSC chairperson, Justice Benjamin Kabiito, declined to comment on whether the commission abandoned complaints against Justice Kavuma.

Justice Kabiito regretted that JSC has part-time commissioners who have few sittings to resolve the numerous complaints against judicial officers to ensure their culpability is determined before they retire.

“My wish is for any given complaint against a judicial officer to be investigated and determined within 45 days so that their disciplinary fate is known as soon as possible and not for them to retire without determining their fate,” Justice Kabiito said.


It takes more than a year to investigate and conclude a complaint against a judicial officer. During this period, the particular officer misses out on promotions.






In Uganda there is clear evidence that the Department of Justice is biased:

24 January, 2018

Written by Ssemujju Ibrahim Nganda


Mr Ssemujju Ibrahim Nganda




Mukono South MP Johnson Muyanja Ssenyonga is a very social person and likes cracking jokes.

His joke recently in the parliamentary canteen on a Court of Appeal judgment in an election petition appeal against Nansana MP Robert Kasule Ssebunya (NRM) was most hilarious.

Ssenyonga likened Kasule’s victory in court to a thief who went to steal a goat but returned with a whole kraal full of cattle and goats. Kasule not only got the outcome of the election in which he was a loser overturned, but he was also declared an outright winner by the Court of Appeal.


The real election winner, Wakaima Musoke Nsereko (DP), who polled 25,053 against Ssebunya’s 23,415 votes, was removed from parliament after one year, because his academic and voter registration papers bore different sets of names.

Mind you, in this election, there were other candidates including Rajab Kkaaya of FDC who polled 18,167 votes. Ordinarily, court should have ordered a by-election, but a panel of three judges led by Steven Kavuma simply ordered Kasule Ssebunya to walk into parliament and get sworn in: just like that!

And when it came to Lugazi municipality where NRM’s Isaac Mulindwa Ssozi was also accused of using different names such as Mulindwa Hassan, the same Court of Appeal quoted one of Shakespeare’s lines “what is in a name” and upheld the NRM victory.

Wakayima of DP in Nansana lost a parliamentary seat over names but Ssozi Mulindwa of NRM was saved over the same matter. The decision in a case of Paul Mwiru versus Nathan Igeme Nabeta over Jinja Municipality East elections is perhaps the most embarrassing decision of the Court of Appeal.

Mwiru went to court because his victory was robbed. Nabeta or his agents fabricated results at a polling station called Daida. Nabeta had polled 187 but because his relative was also an Electoral Commission official in the same area, he was given 507 votes.

Mwiru had won at this polling station with 226 votes. And this was a very close contest where Mwiru polled 7,635 and Nabeta 7,770 including the fabricated results.

The High court judge in Jinja ruled that Mwiru should simply walk into parliament because his results had been changed. The Court of Appeal agreed that Nabeta was a beneficiary of this fraud (fabrication of results) but, in this case, ordered for a by-election.

There are many cases of similar facts but with different judgments. A lawyer called them contradictory judgments coming out of our second-most important court in the country. I am told that court judgments almost equal to laws, the reason they are quoted in subsequent submissions.

Two of my roommates at Makerere University were law students and they kept frequenting the library to read “cases”. With contradictory judgements, I don’t know what law students will do.

The integrity of the Court of Appeal is what kept ringing in my head as we assembled evidence to file a petition against the recently-enacted Constitution Amendment (No2) Act of 2017.   

Here, I am referring to the Act that removed the presidential age limits, popularly known as the Raphael Magyezi Bill (Act). The only good thing that has happened in this court is the departure of Steven Kavuma, the former deputy chief justice.

I think Kavuma was a disgrace who should never have been appointed even as a magistrate. But under Museveni, nothing is impossible. Tomorrow you may hear that my namesake Ibrahim Abiriga, the MP for Arua municipality, has been appointed the ethics and integrity minister or minister for national guidance.

The new deputy chief justice, Alfonse Owiny-Dollo, was a fairly good member of parliament and sounded knowledgeable in the 6th parliament. I hope he will have courage to revitalize the Court of Appeal/Constitutional court and rebuild its shattered image.

Many NRM MPs are bragging of how they used the Shs 200 million meant for buying vehicles to compromise court officials. Judges are lucky they are not in parliament to listen to stories told about them.

One female MP even claimed that something similar to sex for marks at Makerere University is taking place in the judiciary. You can influence a good judgment if you have good looks and/or money.

I am not blackmailing court, which is about to hear two cases that I have filed; I am only sounding an alarm before things get worse.

Last year, the public spent Shs 132 billion on the judiciary. I know judges are not the highest-paid public servants but even those of us who sit on a committee of parliament responsible for lobbying for enhancement of their salaries/allowances are in a dilemma.

Judges of the Court of Appeal are affecting our relationship with the whole judiciary. We face the same situation we have always faced with the Uganda Police Force. Not all police officers are bad, but most of those occupying high positions are rotten.

I believe most judges are professionals and experienced. They should see the damage they are causing to our justice system and clean house before it is too late for everybody.

The author is Kira Municipality MP and opposition chief whip in parliament.





In the African democratic country of  Uganda, the NRM political party has amended the national Constitution again – for better or for worse?


Key players. A photo montage of President Museveni (centre), Igara West MP Raphael Magyezi and Government Chief Whip Ruth Nankabirwa. PHOTOS BY ALEX ESAGALA/ ABUBAKER LUBOWA


By Stephen Kafeero

Hours after Parliament passed the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2017, dropping the 75 year upper age limit for presidential candidates and extending the term of Parliament to seven years, Dr Busingye Kabumba, a lecturer at Makerere University and a leading constitutional scholar, voiced his frustration on Twitter.

“How does one practise/teach Constitutional Law when there is, in fact, no Constitution in the actual sense of the word?” he asked, prompting a stream of responses from his followers. Most, if not all, were in agreement that there is a problem with Uganda’s 1995 Constitution.

Dr Kabumba and the group that responded to his concern were not alone in their concerns over the constitutional framework in the country.

People across the country have been vocal either in support or against the amendment of the Constitution to remove the age cap that will see President Museveni continue to contest after 2021, when he would have been ineligible if the age cap remained. Concerns about the sanctity of the Constitution had, until the age limit proposal championed by Igara West MP Raphael Magyezi, been minimal. Such debate had been vociferous in 2005, when Parliament voted to scrap the term limits from the Constitution.

An illusory law
In the lead up to Uganda’s celebrations of 50 years of ‘independence’ from British colonial rule, Dr Kabumba described the 1995 Uganda Constitution as “nothing but an illusory law”.
“All power belongs to President Museveni, who exercises this power through the armed forces.

Article 1 of the Constitution is a lie – and the Constitution in Museveni’s Uganda is an elaborate farce that is cynically perpetrated by the President to consolidate and extend his hold on power. This is one of the great tragedies and challenges of ‘Uganda at 50’ and one that promises to engender more turbulent chapters in our political life,” he concluded in his article titled “The 1995 Uganda Constitution is nothing but an illusory law” published by the Daily Monitor newspaper.

If there was any doubt in Dr Kabumba’s observation, he was vindicated by the debate and events that characterised the process and eventual passing of the age limit Bill.
Gloves were off between December 18 and December 20, with the MPs in support of the removal of the age cap from the Constitution making it clear that it was about President Museveni, unlike before when the move had been sold to the public as an attempt to correct an injustice, particularly the discrimination against those between the age of 18 and 35 and those above 75 years.

People’s voice?
“The people of Koboko said they cannot imagine themselves going to the polling station without Museveni’s name on the ballot. Ninety-nine per cent of the people told me not only to touch the Constitution, but also to squeeze Article 102(b) out of the Constitution,” State Minister of Finance for Investment and Privatisation and one of Mr Museveni’s most vocal supporters, Evelyn Anite, said.

In his 2013 paper “Towards A New Kind of Politics and Constitutionalism in (B) Uganda”, Prof Joe Oloka-Onyango, from the School of Law at Makerere University, writes that Uganda is in the grip of a serious case of presidentialism, brought about by the violation of both the letter and the spirit of the 1995 Constitution, and placing an opaque shroud over the possibilities of achieving democratic constitutionalism.

Killing own child
Prof Olaka-Onyango terms it as ‘Constitucide’, a situation where the framers of the Constitution are the very people involved in its abrogation.

“The case of Uganda is that rare exception where the founders are able to enjoy the fruits of their labour. But instead of nurturing the tree to produce more fruit, the founding parents are involved in its desecration, whether through the amendment of term limits, the lifting of age limits, or in the appointment of army generals to the civilian Cabinet in blatant violation of the Constitution. This is the essence of constitucide—where the founding parents of the Constitution are systematically involved in killing the child to which they gave birth.

To Kampala Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago, the 1995 Constitution has been abrogated and he has called upon Ugandans to invoke Article 3(4) of the same document to defend it and resist attempts to overthrow what remains of the constitutional order in the country. The Article states that; “All citizens of Uganda have a right and duty to protect the Constitution”
“On that fateful day [December 20] in the August House, the representatives of the people committed treason,” he said, adding that the activities in Parliament confirmed what has widely been alleged, that in this country, there is rule by law instead of rule of law.

From the above observations, it appears that the major amendments of the 1995 Constitution have been about nothing but President Museveni’s interests and that he is the major beneficiary of the constitutional mess that the legal scholars and politicians allude to.

Deputy Attorney General Mwesigwa Rukutana, who has been at the frontline of many amendments, says they have only followed aspirations of Ugandans and the framers of the1995 Constitution.
Quoting several provisions of the supreme law starting with Article 259, which provides for the amendment of the Constitution, Mr Rukutana says there is no mess for as long as they comply with the methodology laid down by the framers of the Constitution.

“Those who are saying or implying there is a mess with our constitutional framework have a mess in their heads. We are not in any mess; we have amended the Constitution in accordance with the provisions of the same Constitution,” he said.

The future of the 1995 constitution
Karoli Ssemogerere, a lawyer, has termed the age limit amendment move as the final straw that ends the life of the 1995 Constitution. In an opinion published by this newspaper, he called for the enactment of a new Constitution. “This makes a new Constitution urgent as the current one, after being continuously amended, is becoming a farce,” he wrote.

As she adjourned the House following the passing of the Bill to remove the presidential age limit and a vote to increase the tenure of Parliament and the President from five to seven years, Speaker Rebecca Kadaga informed Parliament that soon, a motion will be presented by the parliamentary commission for an amendment. She did not specify.

Government maintains a constitutional review commission will be established to address the outstanding constitutional questions in the country. The last review was done by the Prof Frederick Ssempebwa-led commission in 2005. The Justice Benjamin Odoki-led commission from 1989 to 1993 wrote the draft Constitution, which was discussed by the Constituent Assembly in 1994, promulgating the new Constitution in 1995.

Appearing on NTV on November 21, a day after passing the controversial amendment, Justice minister Kahinda Otafiire reiterated the promise that has been made by, among others Prime Minister Ruhakana Rugunda, that a constitutional review commission shall be established.

The million dollar question
The question then is what made the Raphael Magyezi Bill so important to be considered yet all other calls for reforms requiring the amendment of the Constitution were set aside to be handled by a yet to be appointed constitutional review commission?

Prior to the 2016 general elections, Speaker Kadaga, on various occasions, requested government to present Bills to amend the Constitution in time for proper consideration before the 2016 general elections. Nothing much came in response to her calls.

In his State-of the-Nation address in June 2014, President Museveni had promised that government would introduce Bills to amend the Constitution in that year’s session of Parliament. Again nothing came of the President’s promise.

A year later, the Constitutional (Amendment) Bill, 2015 was passed without reforms in what Civil Society Organisations, opposition political parties and other groups, said was tantamount to an overthrow of the 1995 Constitution as amended.

In January, Dr Rugunda informed the country that government was in the final stages of establishing a constitutional review commission that would, among other things, consider electoral reforms proposed ahead of the 2016 general elections. It also emerged at the time that names of the people to constitute the commission had been forwarded to President Museveni for appointment.

No effect
Whether the constitutional review commission is established or not and whether it recommends more amendments, Mr Rukutana says it does not matter for as long as the laid down procedure in the Constitution is followed.

In December 2014, constitutional law experts under Kituo Cha Katiba-East African Centre for Constitutional Development, dissected the 1995 Constitution and presented a raft of proposals to the Uganda Law Reform Commission (ULRC). Interestingly, none of their proposals touched on the limitations imposed on eligibility to run for office of President.

Rejected invitation
Makerere University School of Law lecturers did not hide their contempt for any attempts to amend the Constitution in favour of the incumbent. It would be reflected in their letter rejecting an invitation by the committee on Legal and Parliamentary Affairs to have an input in the age limit amendment Bill discussion.

“We would thus strongly urge your Committee to disassociate itself from a process which seeks to unravel the democratic pillars and principles constructed by framers of the 1995 Constitution. We, therefore, regret that we cannot be party to such a process and respectfully decline your invitation,” read the letter, in part.

They advised the Committee to carefully reflect on the constitutional and political ramifications of the amendment.

“The counsel of the School of Law is that your distinguished Committee carefully reflects on the constitutional and political ramifications of engaging in a process that is tainted with a patent distortion of our constitutional order,” the letter further read.

Electoral laws
Lip service has also been paid to proposals to improve the system of elections and general political environment, despite continued promises by government to consider the same. Ahead of the 2016 general elections, parties under the Inter Party Organisation for Dialogue, including the ruling NRM, proposed and agreed on 45 out of the 48 proposed electoral reforms. These, however, were not considered in the Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2015. Other proposals were contained in the Citizen’s Compact and other reports by different organisations.

The 1995 Constitution, promulgated in 1995, was supposed to clear up the anomalies of the pre and post-colonial Uganda. The Constitution makes it clear that supreme power lies in the hands of the Ugandans. Twenty two years later, that belief is in question.





The Constitution of the Republic of Uganda was never to be amended for the benefit of individual people: The Opposition leader has warned.

November 10, 2017


The opposition in parliament yesterday advised that the age limit bill forms part of a long-awaited bill covering wider political reforms alongside proposals contained in a minority report adopted two years ago in the 9th parliament.

The minority report adopted in August 2015 was written by former Jinja East MP Paul Mwiru.

It called for major reforms ahead of the 2016 polls and a total overhaul of the Electoral Commission, reinstatement of presidential term limits and establishment of an independent electoral commission.

LoP Winnie Kiiza makes her submission as MPs Roland Mugume (C) and Joseph Ssewungu look on

While appearing before the legal and parliamentary affairs committee, which is processing the divisive bill, opposition MPs led by the Leader of Opposition Winnie Kiiza said the Constitution has always been amended to accommodate President Museveni’s wishes.

“Repealing Article 102(b) at the moment is very dangerous as it is being done for only one possible beneficiary, the current president and his political party, although both seem to be identical. Constitution amendments are never made for individuals or political parties,” she said.

MPs Roland Mugume, William Nzoghu, Atkins Katusabe, Joseph Ssewungu and Kiiza drew attention to what Speaker Rebecca Kadaga said in September last year, during consideration of a motion by Nakifuma MP Kafeero Sekitoleko that sought to lift the retirement age of judges.

Kadaga said then that there was no urgency, and guided that government establishes a constitutional review commission to carry a comprehensive review of the country’s supreme law.

“The proposals in [Raphael] Magyezi’s bill now before this committee should form part of information that will help the constitutional review commission to gather people’s views across the country. We in the opposition and parliament indeed would be very ready and supportive if the attorney general brought the amendments after the constitutional review commission,” Kiiza said in the opposition statement to the committee.

The group warned against amending Article 102(b) of the constitution, which caps the age for presidential aspirants at between 35 and 75 years, on grounds that it recognises Uganda’s struggle against tyranny, oppression and exploitation.

“The constitution is not a statute which can be amended any time, anyhow, to fit the interests of a few individuals. It is considered to be a blind document that knows no face and voice nor height or size. Rather it is a mirror reflecting the national soul; the identification of ideals and aspirations of a nation, the articulation of the values bonding its people and disciplining its government,” Kiiza said.

The group said they believe Uganda now has highly educated and capable citizens who can succeed Museveni.




This is the legal committee of Parliament that is costing the nation billions of shillings when hospitals in the country are not working because of lack of money.



The opposition said while the Magyezi bill is premised on the Supreme court decisions in the presidential election petition No. 1 of 2016: Amama Mbabazi vs Museveni, the Electoral Commission and Attorney General, it unfortunately misconstrued the ruling.

“The ruling gave instructions to only the attorney general to take actions. This implies that this bill before parliament is premised on erroneous interpretation of the ruling. Hon Magyezi has no locus to bring his amendments basing on the instructions of court as they were never issued to him,” Kiiza said.

“The person responsible to bring these amendments is the Justice and Constitutional Affairs minister (Kahinda Otafiire) assisted by the attorney general. The judgement is dated August 26, 2016 which means the attorney general [still] has more than nine months to bring all necessary amendments. There is no excuse whatsoever that the attorney general is in contempt of court after failing to comply with the judgment [which gave a two-year timeframe for compliance],” Kiiza added.





The long serving President of Uganda is inciting the Uganda administration to spend the country's treasury as if there is no tomorrow:

November 1, 2017

Written by Ssemujju Ibrahim Nganda


Mr Ssemujju Nganda


Seven-month-old Esther Margaret Kakasa from Kayunga is so far, I think, the youngest victim of a state crackdown on Ugandans opposed to the removal of the presidential age limit from our Constitution.

This baby was arrested together with her mother Harriet Nakwedde on October 24 when they had gone to Kayunga district police station to visit colleagues arrested for the same offence four days earlier.

It is at Lugazi regional police headquarters that Paul Mwiru and I found the mother and her seven-month-old baby suspect on October 27. They had spent three nights in a uniport at this regional police base after being transferred from Kayunga.

And if you have any doubt about the collapse of the state, please visit Lugazi regional police headquarters. The wooden door shutters to the two-storeyed office block are rotting away with some parts falling off.

To climb to the second floor where the regional CID sits, you have to keep jumping stagnant water on the stairway. I think this water had just been blown inside by wind during a downpour. Policemen and women at this station constructed during the colonial era have fixed polythene in the ventilators to fight off the rainwater.

What used to be a kitchen, a small cubicle, is now the office of the regional CID boss!

Completely in a state of disrepair, one is able to identify it because they removed everything except one hand wash basin. You can also see holes through which pipes used to pass. By the way, this structure with a clay tiled roof (mategula) is still standing.

And it is surrounded by tile-roofed bungalows which I guess are the residences of the dear policemen and women. Of course they are in the same sorry state as the office block. Blame the colonialists for everything else, but they had constructed a strong foundation for our country.

I have written about police stations (residences and offices) before. What has hit Lugazi is what has hit Naguru, Kibuli, Nsambya, Kira, Jinja Road, Wandegeya, etc. They are all in a state of disrepair.

Yet the budget for the police has grown beyond imaginable proportions since the prince of this regime, Gen Kale Kayihura, took it over in 2005. To be exact, the police budget this year is Shs 524 billion. Trouble is that this whole budget is abused, which has become the main feature of this regime.

For example, Shs 95 billion will be used on classified assets, Shs 20.9 billion on classified expenditure, Shs 29 billion on special meals and drinks, Shs 14 billion on training, Shs 16 billion on electricity, Shs 11 billion on water, etc.

As we were in Kayunga, an order came in to drive the Kayunga suspects back to Kayunga. A day earlier, police had driven Dr Besigye back to Rukungiri after a week at Naggalama in Mukono district in a convoy of about five vehicles.

Many of us have been driven around in convoys because the rulers want to demonstrate power. If half of the money collected from Ugandans was spent on their welfare, few would be lining up for visas to go and sweep roads in Dubai, Qatar, Oman and Saudi Arabia where they end up being abused in several ways.

But our taxes are now being used by the regime to rent support. That is how within a flash, the revolutionary leader has found Shs 13 billion to throw at us members of parliament under the guise of consultations.

The official claim is that parliament knows where this money came from. But even a person of average understanding knows that NRM chief whip Ruth Nankabirwa has been the spokesperson of this money.

And in an NRM Central Executive Committee (CEC) meeting at State House Entebbe, regime senior leaders also demanded and were given money. In fact, each CEC member will be given a brand new vehicle and a monthly allowance of Shs 10 million.

And the 600 members of the NRM National Executive Council (NEC) will each be given cash to convene district and sub-county conferences for consultations!

And who knows, NRM village chairpersons may also demand and be given money to consult their spouses and in-laws.

That is where we have reached as a country. And you don’t have to be intelligent to know why our public debt is now over $10billion (Shs 35 trillion), nearly 40 per cent of our $27 billion GDP.

Money collected from taxes is being used to rent support for our ageing leader who loves calling himself Jjajja! And I fear many may want to take ad- vantage of his advanced age and associated vulnerabilities.

Some of us have returned the Shs 29 million given to each MP for alleged consultations not because we don’t have needs. We are simply saying no to this looting.

There are some simple minds that have tried to equate this money to our allowances and motor vehicle grant. I have proposed a solution for the MPs’ and other public officials’ transport but please don’t ask me to work in parliament for free; earning a salary is not plunder.

The author is Kira municipality MP and FDC spokesperson



Such government expenditures cannot be accepted by the next government of Uganda. That is why most African governments do not want to hand over state responsibilities in a civilized way as they would be accounted for their misdeeds.




The dodgy Electoral Commissioner of Uganda has come out to encourage Mr Bwanika to campaign for a National Referendum on the Presidential age Limit:

Abed Bwanika combines different backgrounds into one fold. He is veterinarian, politician and pastor. The 48-year-old is the president of the People’s Development Party.

He enjoys elections in Uganda and has stood for President of Uganda 4 times without ever winning.

By the New Vision

Added 21st October 2017 


Dr Bwanika wants the people to decide on the amendment not Members of Parliament.


The Electoral Commission has cleared former presidential candidate Dr Abed Bwanika to collect signatures mandated to call for a referendum of the amendment of article 102(b) of the Constitution to lift the presidential age limit. 

The spokesperson of the electoral commission, Jotham Taremwa, confirmed the development.



The referendum will be rigged. The EC has a well known international  profile about rigging elections in Uganda. And for this gentleman he does not mind it since he has suffered it about 4 times. 





In Uganda, the Member of Parliament Mr Kakooza has warned that the age limits of Presidential candidates will be removed, despite the minority opposition noise:

October 20, 2017


As debate for or against scrapping the 75-year age cap for presidential candidates rages on, and despite recently being accosted by some people, Kabula MP JAMES KAKOOZA insists voters support the removal of age limits.

Speaking to Baker Batte Lule last week, Kakooza said despite the opposition's resistance, article 102(b) of the constitution will be amended.

Kabula MP James Kakooza

Is Uganda better 12 years after you spearheaded the removal of presidential term limits?

Democracy has grown; now people understand who they want to vote for. Since the final verdict is the choice of the people, I don’t think there was any problem lifting the term limits.

I also don’t regret the role I played in lifting term limits. By then people didn’t think that the constitution can be amended. Now people are enlightened, the other time it was a taboo. Even now 12 years after, they have realised that there are other things which need to be aligned in the constitution.

Before, people didn’t have that mindset; they were very hard to convince...People never wanted to hear about changing the constitution, but now they are yearning for it. They are saying, ‘yes, we made the constitution but it grows; it must move with the prevailing environment’.

When I started saying this in 2003, people were saying ‘no way.’

Was it an oversight in 2005 not to amend article 102 (b); or you never thought Museveni would want to stand beyond 75 years?

No, a constitution doesn’t have time. Whenever there is need, Ugandans will decide how to amend it. It is cowardice to say, why didn’t you amend it then?

Once you put an enabling article on how the constitution can be amended, anytime people can choose to amend it so long as the need arises.


So, has that need arisen now?


Yes, people are saying you can’t discriminate against us using provisions of the constitution. People are saying we are Ugandans who have the right to vote but can’t be voted for because we have reached or are below a certain age. People are correct.


Which people are you talking about?


It doesn’t matter which people, the bottom line is it [article 102b] is discriminating. What people in the opposition and those opposed to this amendment should know is: politics goes with environment.

That is the nature of democracy. If people choose who they want, that is the end of the story; you can’t gag people and deprive them of what they want.

They say beyond 75 [years of age] we want people to contest. So long as there is a process of regular elections, I have no problem letting people exercise their rights.

I’m consistent, I always defend my opinion and I wish to send a message to those who say it is not correct; they should convince us. But their argument is, we are amending the constitution for one person. That is not the reason.

We are saying that people are free to choose the people they want and there is a system for choosing their leaders. So, the opposition should stop being arrogant and intimidating people... That kind of politics can’t work. We are in the politics of free choice and free will.


Don’t you think you have a low opinion of Ugandans by telling us that you are not amending this constitution for President Museveni?


Well, that is for you. For us we are saying this amendment is not targeting an individual; we are opening up for everybody who this constitution had locked out. We, in the NRM, still think that Museveni is very useful to our party and the country. Many members would wish to see him stand again.

Why is the opposition afraid of Museveni being in the race? It’s like in football, Arsenal [cannot] begin to say we don’t want this and this player in Manchester United. Let them organise their team and we meet for the match. Let them not choose who of our players we should bring and who we shouldn’t.


You say that every position is competed for in NRM but we have seen cases where people have been stampeded out of the race. Remember the [Museveni] sole candidate resolution?


In NRM, we arrive at everything by consensus and where we have disagreed we go for elections. But in any case, if majority of the NRM people say they want Museveni, it is your loss for those of you who don’t want him.


How far are you willing to go with this amendment?


We have witnessed unprecedented episodes in parliament...

What you saw in parliament is a clear case of indiscipline on the part of a few members who after losing the debate decided to resort to rioting. But I can assure you the greatest number of our people support this amendment and it will go through despite the loud noise from the minority.


But do you justify the invading of the house by Special Forces Command soldiers?


I don’t know whether they were SFC or not, what I can say is that the speaker ordered the sergeant-at-arms to evict members she had suspended. By the way, the sergeant-at-arms is a well-trained officer and has other well-trained officers who work under him.


Some people say when you amend article 102(b) nothing will be left in that 1995 constitution.


Those people making noise never appended their signatures on that constitution because they said the constitution had gaps. People are coming up to fill these gaps and they are saying no whereas they never agreed with it.


But the gaps you say you want to fill are not the gaps they pointed out then; they say you are introducing more gaps.


But they didn’t believe in that constitution; then what are they defending? If you don’t believe in a document, then what are you defending? Isn’t that a contradiction?


There is talk that many of you support this constitutional amendment for selfish reasons. Remember when you vigorously defended [former premier] Amama Mbabazi and you were rewarded with a ministerial position.


For Museveni to appoint you in any position, he must have done a lot of background checks. He spies on you for almost six months or one year. Some of us don’t reveal these things but we know.

For Museveni to appoint you a minister, he must have made thorough investigations. You remember he said one of the toughest jobs for him is to appoint people. He doesn’t appoint people anyhow. I was invited by President Museveni who told me he had work for me to do. Him being the fountain of honour, I said fine and I waited for it and it came.


The general view is that you people are looking for money or other favours from Museveni.


But I have been a minister, I have been around. Go and ask Museveni if he has never given me a single coin. I repeat it; he has never given me a single coin to support him. No way.

Some of us have been around and we know the history of this country. We know what we want. I have been around since the [dictator Idi] Amin times, I participated in the revolution. I know what I’m doing because I’m alive to the history of this country.


Many people are resisting this amendment. We saw what happened to you in Masaka. Why are you pushing ahead with it?


First of all I was never assaulted. [Masaka municipality MP Mathias] Mpuuga is my friend, I went for his father’s burial and left without incident.

Second, I’m not a Constituent Assembly delegate; I’m a member of parliament. As an MP, I’m supposed to use my intellectual capacity to make good decisions for the country.


Are you sure removing age limits is a good decision when almost everybody in the country believes it’s a wrong decision?


What yardstick are you using to determine that this proposal is unpopular all over the country? Haven’t you seen districts making resolutions in favour of this amendment?

Haven’t you seen other people demonstrating in favour of this amendment? It’s you journalists saying that everybody is against this bill. But even in your newspapers, I have seen people writing in favour of the bill.


If Kabula people tell you they don’t need this amendment, would you still support it?


I have been leading my constituency for 20 years and my people have been approaching me to support that amendment although there are some few who are yet to understand why we still need President Museveni.

But the majority, even if you take a referendum there, will tell you they still need to have choice every time we have an election. Don’t disenfranchise people because of their age. Let the people choose whether they want to be governed by an 80-year-old or a 20-year-old president.



That is why Amin was wiser than these many revolutionary Africans during 1974/79. He chased home these Members of Parliament without pay, locked up the democratic Parliamentary Chambers and started ruling as best he could with a small team of Military Officers. Despite all the noise and uproar in the country and the whole of the East African Community! Democracy is all about accepting the majority and respecting the minority. Mr Kakooza, of all the 31 years of NRM revolutionary rule, why did it not transpire to your intellect that a human being of over 75 years is able to vote and be voted on as a leader? 

Much has been written to make the point on the continent of Africa so that a House of Elders is created in the political Arena to give a soft landing to political bandits who need to retire but continue gambling in their games of politics until the end of their lives. This is a bill worthy the paper it is written on in 2026.


In Kenya, the Democratic National Election have been cancelled by the Supreme Court: 

Reported by Simon Maina


By Daily Nation

There are celebrations among Nasa supporters after the Supreme Court nullified the re-election of President Uhuru Kenyatta in the polls conducted on August 8, 2017.


Judges stand to deliver their verdict at the

Judges stand to deliver their verdict at the Supreme Court in Nairobi on September 1, 2017, ordering a new presidential election within 60 days after cancelling the results of last month's poll.


Kenya's Supreme Court nullified President Uhuru Kenyatta's election win last month and called for new elections within 60 days. 

There were huge celebrations in Kisumu following the delivery of the judgement in Nairobi by judges led by Chief Justice David Maraga.

Reacting to the judgement, Kisii Governor James Ongwae said Nasa has finally been vindicated in its insistence that "the poll was doomed and could not be relied to give a proper outcome".



The President of Uganda is attending another African meeting called the African Intergovernmental Authority on Development in Nairobi, Kenya: 



Museveni (right) soon after arriving in Nairobi  PHOTO PPU

President Yoweri Museveni is in the Kenyan Capital Nairobi for a two-day special summit on durable solutions for Somali refugees.

President Museveni joins other Heads of State under the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), an eight country trade bloc that includes governments from the Horn, Nile Valley and the African Great Lakes to seek sustainable solutions to the Somali Refugee crisis.

The President who arrived to a colourful welcome party mounted by Kenya armed forces was received at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport by Kenya’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Amina Muhammed and Uganda’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Sam Kutesa among other officials.

During the 28th Extra-Ordinary Summit of IGAD assembly of Heads of State and governments held in Mogadishu Somali in September 2016, the regional leaders decided to convene the refugee summit this year.


More than two million Somalis have been displaced in one of the worlds’ worst displacement disaster now in its third decade. According to reports, 1.1 million people are internally displaced within Somalia while nearly 900,000 are refugees in the region including 324,000 in Kenya, 241,000 in Ethiopia, 255,000 in Yemen, 39,500 in Uganda and 13,000 in Djibouti.

It is hoped that the summit will galvanise recent developments at national, regional and global levels supported by the international solidarity and renew efforts to find durable and sustainable solutions.

The summit organized in collaboration with the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and supported by the European Union will also discuss and seek solutions that support infrastructure and stabilization in Somalia to ensure sustainable reintegration.

During his stay in Nairobi, President Museveni is expected to hold side bilateral meetings with President Uhuru Kenyatta of Kenya and the new Somali President Abdullahi Mohamed Farmajo among other leaders.



Interesting about these inter government love stories. This is one of the ways lots of tax payers money is wasted to talk and make love of hot air. Look now what is happening to the attitudes of some of these long term leaders when they wake up after such passionate love conferences. They want to leave these same associations as soon as they turn their backs on them. They are no good. They are useless!



In the recent formed Republic of Southern Sudan, the leadership is forcing famine and all the war miseries on the African civilian population:




Added 24th March 2017 

President of South Sudan, Salva Kiir. Photo/AFP


South Sudan's famine is a disaster created by its leaders, say analysts who argue that while food may save some lives now it is only peace that can bring lasting relief.

But peace is as distant as ever with an international community that appears paralysed, while the men ruling over the country's misery are unmoved by pleas for them to lay down their weapons.

There is no catastrophic drought in South Sudan, no natural driver for the famine afflicting 100,000 and threatening a million others.

Rather there is a nasty, stop-start three-year civil war in which starvation has become a battlefield tactic.

"Only a political plan to end South Sudan's national crisis, not food aid, can bring actual famine relief to South Sudanese," said Alan Boswell, a conflict analyst and writer on South Sudan.

The crisis is "not accidental but by design" Boswell said, adding that the government uses "food blockades as a weapon of war".

It is no coincidence that areas afflicted by famine are opposition areas, home to mostly ethnic Nuer and controlled for the most part by rebels, as a leaked report by United Nations investigators said.

"The bulk of evidence suggests that the famine in Unity State has resulted from protracted conflict and, in particular, the cumulative toll of repeated military operations undertaken by the government in southern Unity beginning in 2014," said the confidential 48-page report.

South Sudan government forces and allied militias have denied access to –- and sometimes attacked –- aid workers and looted relief supplies.

Michele Sison, the US deputy representative to the United Nations, told a Security Council meeting on Thursday that the government's obstacles to humanitarian work in the famine-struck areas "may amount to deliberate starvation tactics."

The United States, Britain and France on Thursday once again raised the idea of sanctions or a weapons embargo which was rejected by the Security Council in December with eight of the 15 members abstaining.

Downward spiral

South Sudan's leaders fought for decades for independence, but once they got it in 2011, the fighting turned inward.

A long-standing power struggle between President Salva Kiir and his former deputy Riek Machar sparked fighting in Juba in December 2013 which quickly turned into a conflict throughout the country between Kiir's Dinka supporters and Machar's Nuer community.

It has been characterised by appalling brutality on both sides with ethnic massacres, the use of child soldiers, mass rape, sexual slavery, murder, torture, abduction and, in a few recorded cases, forced cannibalism.

Roughly a third of the population -– 2.5 million people -– have been forced from their homes while 5.5 million rely on food aid to survive.

East Africa's regional Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) was tasked with leading peace efforts, however these collapsed along with a 2015 power-sharing peace deal when conflict again erupted in Juba in July last year.

Since then the fighting has metastasised, spreading across the country and among ethnic groups jockeying for political and military advantage and to protect their communities.

Regional peace efforts have borne no fruit and the UN has been unable to push through an arms embargo or compel Kiir's government to accept the deployment of a regional protection force.

War lucrative for leaders

UN chief Antonio Guterres on Thursday denounced "a refusal by the leadership to even acknowledge the crisis or to fulfill its responsibilities to end it."

Instead, just days after famine was declared on February 20, triggering a ramping up of humanitarian efforts, Juba raised foreign worker visa fees a hundred-fold to as much as $10,000 (9,300 euros).

Foreign media access to South Sudan has also been curtailed with new bureaucratic barriers erected to deny access to journalists who have reported critically on the government in the past.

Critics say the silence of South Sudan's government and rebel leaders is fuelled by corruption.

"The ultimate prize is control of a kleptocratic, winner-take-all state with institutions that have been hijacked by government officials and their commercial collaborators for the purposes of self-enrichment and brutal repression of dissent," said John Prendergast, founder of the Enough Project advocacy group, who has many years' experience of South Sudan and knows its leaders personally.

Meanwhile, reports, including from the Enough Project, have exposed the squirreling away of money and the purchase of properties and luxury goods by leaders and their associates on both sides of the conflict.

"War has been hell for South Sudan's people, but it has been very lucrative for the country's leaders," said Prendergast.

- See more at:

"We are not targeting African leaders" - the International Criminal Court apologises to African leaders. This is indeed a very weak Court that apologises to the likely culprits of this court.

This court must continue to sound out its determination to bring justice to all aspects of the lives of all modern human beings on this planet as a whole. Much more there should be an international economic court where political leaders are prosecuted for intentionally using economic policies that lead to catastrophic civil wars, environmental human degradation and misery, starvation and mass immigration from countries of abode etc.

1st March, 2017



The symbol of the International Criminal Court at the Hague in the European country of The Netherlands.




The International Criminal Court (ICC) president, Judge Silvia Fernández de Gurmendi, has assured African leaders that the world court is not targeting only African leaders to have them prosecuted but rather the court is playing its role of dispensing justice world-wide.
Judge Fernández was, however, quick to admit that the court initiated its investigations legally called situations mainly on the African continent.
The ICC president’s assurances follow last year’s pronouncement by the governments of South Africa, Burundi and The Gambia to withdraw their membership from the ICC over what they described as disproportionate targeting of the continent’s leaders. In particular, President Museveni has on several occasions lashed out at the ICC for allegedly targeting African leaders before referring to them as a bunch of ‘useless’ people.
“It is a useless body, they are a bunch of useless people,” Mr Museveni hit out at the ICC in his swearing-in speech last year at Kololo ceremonial ground.
In April 2013, while speaking at the swearing in ceremony of Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta, Mr Museveni lashed out at ICC saying the West is using The Hague-based court to eliminate certain African leaders they don’t like.
But while responding to questions raised by journalists during a press briefing in Gulu Town yesterday, Ms Fernandez denied that the ICC targets leaders from Africa. She explained that the world court was created out of the Rome Statute to bring individual perpetrators to justice.
“The court indeed focused most of the years on the situations in Africa. But most of them were brought to court by the state partners concerned, the court started its investigation upon request where some of the atrocities were committed,” Ms Fernandez said.
In further defence to prove the court is global, the ICC president gave an example of how the office of the ICC prosecutor opened investigations into crimes committed in Georgia.
She cited the Uganda government, a signatory to the Rome Statute Treaty, which established the ICC Hague-based court, as being among the first African countries to refer cases to the ICC. Uganda referred the LRA’s Joseph Kony situation to the ICC in December 2003.



All human beings on this planet need real universal justice. This is very clear when one looks at the victims that suffer because of errant political leaders all over the world who are greedy for power and go all the way to cause war and loss of life to rule other human beings.

One seemed to be preaching with almost messianic zeal that a corrupt and hopelessly compromised judiciary like the one we have in Uganda today can be relied upon to deliver even the tiniest modicum of justice. 

They have to use extra-legal and even illegal routes to end Rwandan
occupation and  liberate themselves.

More Faith and Trust in the Ugandan National Resistance Movement Judiciary

Well, Well,

They have ruled today, 31 March 2016 on the so-called election petition of Mr Amama Mbabazi and the habeas corpus application of Mr Christopher Aiene. In both of these cases, their decisions are completely predictable, and I warned you of this. I also warned you about the folly of leading Ugandans down the garden path.

A judiciary packed with cadres of a gangster organisation like the NRA will only deliver a gangster's justice. It gives me no pleasure at all to remind you of what should be your urgent task, which is not to lead the
people down blind alleys. Going down the legal route is not an option at the moment for Ugandans.








On a historic note: The Electoral Commission in Uganda is promising to declare a Military Coup in Uganda as the 18th February 2016 National General Elections get near.

Thank You.


The Supreme Court is wrong on Mbabazi petition says Mr Kanyeihamba


Justices George Kanyeihamba, John Wilson Tsekooko and Benjamin Odoki


By Isaac Imaka, Anthony Wesaka & Ivan Okuda

Posted  Saturday, April 2   2016 


Kampala, UGANDA The Supreme Court’s ruling on Thursday dismissing a petition by former presidential candidate Amama Mbabazi seeking annulment of the February 18 presidential election result has been criticised by retired Justice George Kanyeihamba.
In a unanimous ruling, the nine justices of the Supreme Court upheld the declaration of Mr Yoweri Museveni as the validly elected president. Justice Kanyeihamba says in so doing, they erred in law and in the way they reached their conclusion.
In an interview with this newspaper on Friday, retired Supreme Court judge Kanyeihamba, who dissented in the 2006 presidential petition ruling that also upheld the election of Mr Museveni, said the Bench ought to have inquired into the petition by digging deeper into observer reports and evidence outside court instead of solely relying on what the petition had put before them “as if they were conducting a normal trial.”

“The justices of the Supreme Court deliberately narrowed the grounds of the inquiry and confined it to the evidence supplied to them by the parties whereas they should have dug deeper and wide,” he said.
Asked whether the 2006 Bench which he was part of, inquired past what had been presented before it, Kanyeihamba answered in the affirmative. “That’s why we (in the Constitution) called it an inquiry and not a trial. We based on observer reports and we called in a witness who was an expert in a matter that was being argued in court [Note: The expert statistician was brought in by Dr Besigye in the 2006 petition as his witness to crunch figures for the court – Editor]

“But it’s not about who brought and what we did. It is a statement of fact in the law,” he said.
Justice Kanyeihamba’s argument had earlier been raised by Mr Amama Mbabazi who, in a press conference after the ruling, castigated the court for failing to live to true what the framers of the constitution envisaged when they chose to give Supreme Court powers to inquire into as opposed to simply hearing a presidential election petition.
“What we envisaged in the short run was that court would use its powers to call in experts from outside what was presented, take for example, the Inspector General of Police to come and explain,” he said.

“The Supreme Court is not fettered by the usual use of technical rules in conducting hearings. It has the freedom to go beyond what is presented at the hearing. I thought this was a serious matter that deserved attention,” Mr Mbabazi said.
That argument, however, has elicited mixed reaction from the legal fraternity. Retired Supreme Court Justice John Wilson Tsekooko said court could only rule on what is presented before it and cannot go out digging for evidence.
“It is basically a trial. You hear the two sides and make a ruling,” he said. “You can’t go and look up evidence. You can only check on the law.”

Lawyer Peter Walubiri, however agrees with both Mr Mbabazi and the retired Kanyeihamba saying the Bench ought to have followed the constitution.
Mr Walubiri said the command to the Supreme Court to inquire as stipulated in article 104 of the constitution was narrowed by the Presidential Elections Act, which stipulated that court can only rely on affidavit evidence. “But court should have known that the constitution is supreme. The court had a duty to conduct an inquiry, especially that the 30 days are not enough.

The right way
The intention of the constitution was that you do not only rely on affidavit evidence but you call up election records and also examine people who conducted the election. They could have done a forensic audit of the election computers. That’s the kind of inquiry that could have done justice,” he said.
During his submission, Mr Jude Byamukama, one of Mr Mbabazi’s lawyers, challenged the court not to rush through the petition but take time off to do more inquiry, including calling experts to determine how much time the biometric voter verification machines takes to verify a voter.
There had been an argument over the issue with the Mbabazi legal team saying it takes about two minutes while the Electoral Commission said it takes 30 seconds.

Former Chief Justice, Benjamin Odoki, however disagrees with the notion of inquiry saying inquiries are done “in things like shoddy road constriction, purchase of junk helicopters but not a presidential election petition.”
“The problem here is that the constitution is being read in isolation instead of being read in its entirety. The people are just picking one word that says court must inquire into the petition but there is nowhere in the constitution it says there should be a public inquiry. An inquiry is a hearing, what is the difference? The rules of hearing are set by the body that hears it.”

“But for the future, when the rules are changed into having an inquiry, more time should be created since the 30 days currently mandated to dispose off the presidential petition is such a short period,” the retired chief justice said.
Justice Kanyeihamba further argued that it is unusual for all nine justices of the Supreme Court to think alike and have the same opinion on all the grounds that Mr Mbabazi lodged before court in challenging the victory of President Museveni.
He also expressed suspicion why court did not believe in the petitioner (Mr Mbabazi) and his witnesses but believed in the arguments of the respondents (Museveni, EC and AG) and their witnesses saying, “Such a scenario needs an explanation.”
“Usually, in election petitions, each judge is asked to give their own opinion as to whether what they have found substantially affected the final results. You cannot tell me that all the nine justices were unanimous on every ground,” he said.

In their ruling, the Bench held that although there was some elements of noncompliance with the electoral laws on the part of the Electoral Commission like late delivery of voting materials, the same did not substantially affect the final result to warrant overturning Museveni’s win.
While reading the ruling, Chief Justice Katureebe noted that Mr Mbabazi failed to provide election observers reports and other evidence yet he had said, in his sworn affidavit, that he had attached them.
He also noted that by failing to have sufficient evidence, Mr Mbabazi’s lawyers failed to shift the burden of proof from the petitioner to the respondents yet it was a very important thing to do if they had wanted to have an edge in the case.

Museveni praises judges
In a note to this newspaper after it sought his comment on the ruling, Mr Museveni praised the nine Justices referring to them as reasonable men and women and was therefore not surprised that they came to the conclusion unanimously.
“As the Monitor newspaper, notwithstanding your nature, would realise, judges are ‘reasonable men and women’. That is how they became judges in the first place. I am not surprised ... they found that the general elections ... reflected the will of the people of Uganda. In fact, the NRM scored more votes but many of them were suppressed as invalid vote – almost 5 per cent of the total votes cast. We did not bother to complain about this because we had enough votes to decisively win. Why inconvenience Ugandans with unnecessary alterations? It also shows how institutions of the state have grown and recovered from the problems of the 1960s, 1970s and early 1980s.”



This sounds as if these respectable NRM African judges do not cast their votes in an African election.

How Kabaka Yekka, UPC political marriage was hatched 1961/62:

Kabaka Mutesa (L) and former prime minister Milton Obote at a public function in the 1960s. Obote’s UPC formed an alliance with Kabaka Yekka, the political party of Buganda, to gain a majority in the 1962 general election.


By Barbara Kimenye

(Editorial of her book is being serialized in the week-end Uganda newspaper- The Monitor)

Posted  Sunday, November 1   2015

Immediately before full independence, on March 1, 1962, there was self-government, and the Democratic Party (DP), led by Ben Kiwanuka, had the majority after the parliamentary elections.
Kiwanuka, who automatically became prime minister, was a shrewd lawyer possessing a dry sense of humour as well as a beautiful wife, Maxi, and numerous children.
The Democratic Party had the backing of the Roman Catholic Church: indeed, Kiwanuka and Maxi had special prie dieus [a piece of furniture for use during prayer] at the front of Rubaga Cathedral, and priests did not hesitate to tell congregations to vote DP. In some cases they made it sound like a mortal sin not to.

One particular monsignor, a Muganda, up at Rubaga Cathedral, an absolutely beautiful man whose black, red buttoned and sashed cassock seemed to be designed for him alone, went a bit too far in exhorting his flock to forget traditional ties with the Kabakaship and henceforth concentrate on the Democratic Party.
Before he realised what was happening, he was escorted by Kabaka’s askaris to the palace to explain himself.

The Kabaka was sufficiently annoyed that his subjects were more or less being advised to ignore him, but when the monsignor grandly announced that nobody had jurisdiction over him because he was a prince of Rome, Mutesa lost all sense of diplomacy and had the man carted off to the Omukula we Kibuga’s office.
As soon as word passed of the arrest, Catholics converged on the cathedral, weeping and wailing and tearing their hair.
Meanwhile, the monsignor was receiving tea and courtesy from the Omukula we Kibuga who frankly did not know what to do with him. Nobody was more relieved than the Omukula when a message arrived from the palace to the effect that that tiresome priest was to be released immediately.

I went up to Rubaga that evening out of curiosity. The monsignor was walking up and down the upper terrace, smiling in a saintly fashion and pausing every other step for yet another sympathiser from the milling crowd to kiss his hand.
From the way he and his supporters behaved, anyone might have thought he had just evaded the lions in the Coliseum.

I relate this little story for very good reason: last time I was home in Uganda, I walked along Kampala Road and there on the opposite pavement was this smarmy monsignor with a group of people, the same saintly smile pinned to his face.

My companion and neighbour, Chris Mulumba, a man about the same age as my sons and therefore only able to go on hearsay and legend, reverently pointed out the priest as the someone who had defied Mutesa II and been imprisoned under torture.
For this reason alone, everybody had been surprised when he did not succeed Archbishop Joseph Kiwanuka as Cardinal of Uganda.
My only comment is that despite its many faults, the church is never slow in spotting a fraud. Cardinal Emmanuel Nsubuga, who succeeded the well-loved Kiwanuka, was never prominent in the popularity stakes.

While he was an ordinary White Father, he once threw me out of the cathedral because my two dogs followed me inside during mass - but he did more for the poor and disabled than was thought possible during the turbulent and destructive eras of Obote and Amin.

No sooner were the DP in power, however, than up sprang Kabaka Yekka, a movement intent upon retaining the Kabaka’s superior position over any and everybody on Buganda soil: which since the Parliament buildings and government offices were in Buganda, made difficulties for someone heading the State of Uganda as a whole.

Translated, Kabaka Yekka means Kabaka Alone or Only, and it became a common greeting: e.g. one person called out ‘Kabaka!’, and the other responded with ‘Yekka!’, and both stuck a forefinger in the air.

This greeting became so common that once when His Highness had been to play squash with an Asian family on Kololo Hill, and he and I were sitting in George Malo’s car waiting for lights to change on a main road, a couple of people shouted ‘Kabaka’ through the car window, and the Kabaka absently replied ‘Yekka ‘, casually raising the obligatory finger.

Kabaka Yekka developed into the political party of Buganda with the blessing of the government and great Lukiiko.
As general election for the national government which would be in power at the time of independence approached, Mengo was in the mood to do anything to remove the Democratic Party and Ben Kiwanuka.

Ben had been guilty of a flippant remark, “I’ll go up to Mengo and see what’s bothering him,’ in reply to a reporter asking how he intended to deal with the Kabaka’s insistence on special status for Buganda in an independent Uganda.

The machination of Mengo broke up this political partnership with a breath-taking degree of cunning.

From then on, his name was mud at the palace. So when Milton Obote, leader of the Uganda Peoples Congress, made overtures towards a liaison between his party and Kabaka Yekka to gain a majority in the coming elections, the Kabaka Yekka top shots thought they had made it.

I had met Obote casually over the years, the first time when he and his wife of the time went with Abu Mayanja and me to see the South African musical ‘Golden City Dixies’ and later when Abu, purporting to be a nationalist, was trying to whip up support all over the country for the various political parties they started before the UPC took off, and Obote asserting that Abu would be Uganda’s first prime minister. He never entered anybody’s head that he already saw himself as Uganda’s president.

Abu was a known firebrand long before he returned from Cambridge and being called to the bar in Britain. He had led a rebellion against something or other at King’s College Budo, the Kabaka’s alma mater, and had thrown a spanner in the works at Makerere University. Everybody seemed to have been thoroughly relieved when governor Cohen somehow got him away to Cambridge.
He came home with none of his energy diminished, however. He sprang into my life while I was still working in the ministry of Education. I can see him now, small, wiry, large eyes behind thick glasses which he had a habit jerking upwards as he talked, and a way of clenching his teeth and grimacing while he talked.

His political activities before independence and before the disastrous speech were nevertheless productive, and they worried Mengo.

Clever and articulate, but ruining the effect by sometimes trying to sound audacious and only succeeding in being embarrassing: e.g. in his maiden speech as a Kabaka Yekka Member of Parliament, he couldn’t resist a reference to a maidenhead which disgusted some members and grossly offended others.

Many plots were hatched as to how to silence the heretic, but the chief plotters saw their big chance when Abu was invited to the United States of America to talk about the pre-independence situation in Uganda.

After all, he was a Muganda, and because what he had to say and what he wrote about Uganda as a united country was logical and persuasive, there was every danger, in the minds of the traditionalists, of his carrying along a vast section of Baganda society.

While he was gone, Kassim Male, the Kabaka’s government minister of education, died. His appointment had been motivated by the notion that it was time for a senior cabinet post to be the preserve of the Muslim community, in the same way that the Katikkiro was traditionally an Anglican, and the Omulamuzi (Chief Justice) a Roman Catholic.
To those at Mengo to whom Abu Mayanja was an irritating prodigal son, Kassim Male’s death was seen as the answer to their prayers: what better way of silencing the rebel than to offer him the ministry of Education and bring him back into the fold?

Abu did not spring from a Baganda aristocracy, and beneath the intellectualism which gave him a high profile on the political scene was a traditional Muganda gratified to be recognised by the court at Mengo.
And it was surely the height of flattery to be summoned home from across the seas to play a leading role in his own king’s government, and that the summons should be backed by a personal message from Prince Badru Kakungulu, the Kabaka’s uncle and leader of the Sunni Muslims in Uganda.

I don’t think that anybody who knew Abu believed he would accept. Apart from the Mengo plot to silence him being immediately recognisable for what it was to all and sundry, he was a dedicated nationalist and hardly likely to change his stand at the onset of independence: or so it was imagined.
What very few understood was the ease with which someone, anyone, can revert to type, given the right pressures.

When Abu returned from the United States, he had not yet replied to the offer of the ministry but the old guard at Mengo were not short on psychology.

A huge crowd was organised to give him a rousing welcome at the airport, and Prince Badru was there in person to embrace him and lead him ceremoniously to the open car which was all set to drive him to the palace.

The next time I saw him was at his okwyanza in the new Bulange, wearing, rather awkwardly, a kanzu and busuti; and the excitement of the occasion caused his movements to be more nervously jerkier than ever.

Obote and several of his henchmen were also waiting to receive their political colleague, but Abu was barely given time to shake their hands before he was swept along to the cheers and ululating of the crowd.
Even from a distance, it was obvious that he was moving in a delighted daze. He had never before in his life had such a fuss made of him, and it was heady stuff. The private audience with the Kabaka and the cabinet of ministers must have sent him soaring with the clouds. From then on, the chances of his refusing the ministerial post were nil.

They showed no surprise, however. When it was learnt how he was deliberately excluded from every important cabinet meeting and deprived of any political clout whatsoever. He was, in fact nearly driven mad with frustration, and everybody in his ministry was aware of it.

It seemed at first that he was in the Kabaka’s government with the cautious blessing of Obote and the rest of the UPC hierarchy.
They, with equal caution, accepted Abu’s reasoning that he was in a position to further their cause and shape political opinion from within the Kabaka’s government.

He was getting down to business on the back seat when the girl’s boyfriend gave chase, drove Abu’s car off the road and, with the aid of friends, gave him and brother a good hiding. The most startling aspect of all is that afterwards Abu actually went to the nearest police station and tried to lay a charge of assault.

He might have been well advised to swallow his pride, drop the lot and go back to the UPC. Instead, he took to a pattern of behaviour more fitting to barbaric chief of the 19th Century than a minister in a government trying to present itself as moving with the times.

His sexual exploits were notorious. On one occasion, he attended a function, picked up a girl and took her in the car he was sharing with his brother and a driver.

Abu remained in a political wilderness for years. Like so many others, he felt the brunt of Obote’s spite during the terrible years of the Obote presidency, and eventually taught in an up-country primary school.

It wasn’t long before he was bragging about the number of children he had sired here, there and everywhere. It was almost as though his political frustration was vented in the contempt he showed for women, treating women as sex machines put on earth for man’s use. The only one he respected was his mother.

I remember him joining us one day when I was asked to show some British journalists over Lubiri. The journalists were keen to have his political opinions: Abu, with a sort of bitter relish, insisted upon describing the effect of worms on his many offsprings.

His bitterness in everything was understandable. As a member of the Kabaka’s cabinet of ministers, he had little option to becoming a member of Kabaka Yekka, which gained him the reputation of a turncoat, and when pre-independence conferences of districts and kingdoms were held up and down the country, he received a barrage of insults to this effect every time he stood up to speak.
I left out these embarrassing exchanges from the notes I was there to take for the Kabaka, but I know that they were gleefully reported to him by members of the Baganda delegation.
The same attitude greeted Abu later in the national assembly where he sat as a Kabaka Yekka member after the Kabaka Yekka/UPC alliance won the elections in the run up to full independence.

He returned to active politics with President Museveni’s and the National Resistance Army’s takeover in 1986, and immediately became minister for Information.

His former friend and guru, Milton Obote oiled his way into Mengo as an unassuming chap more than willing to accommodate Baganda aspirations.

The Kabaka was pleasantly surprised to find him so agreeable. He made the big mistake of believing he was dealing with a gentleman, while the old guard flattered themselves that they had brought yet another politician to heel.

The trouble was that their form of politics was grossly out of date. The ancient art of palace intrigue was no match for a wily politician who had sprung from the soil.

By promising the Kabaka Yekka party that if they formed an alliance with the UPC and won the crucial elections, as they were almost certain to do, considering that Buganda comprised about one-third of the whole country, the Kabaka would be made President of Uganda, Obote was home and dry.

That such an arrangement was bound to increase the general animosity already directed at the Baganda’s presumption of superiority and claim for special treatment was regarded at Mengo as of no special regard.

William Wilberforce Nadiope, the then Kyabazinga of Busoga and a number of UPC hierarchy, indignantly let it be known that he too had been led to expect the presidency.

Nor was he shy about threatening dire reprisals against Obote if he, Nadiope was not installed in Government House, (to be called the State House after Independence) Entebbe, on the day of Independence.

The other hereditary kings were also annoyed, to put it mildly, when news of Obote’s machinations was leaked, but all was sweetness and light in the new love affair between Mengo and Obote.

The Elites of Mengo at that time did not know that they were dealing with the world’s greatest living liar.

Uganda neglects Electoral Reform at its own peril: 

Posted: 31/08/2015

By Crispy Kaheru

Come 2016, Uganda will go to the polls with yet again the question of an unresolved “legal map”.  Whereas we may boast of having had a “road map” several years before the next election, the “legal map” for the 2016 election has again not been clearly defined especially to the people’s expectations.  

The borders and boundaries of this “legal map” have since 2001 been a big issue – with several stakeholders unremittingly suggesting how this can be plugged, but in vain.  

Since 2001, one of the highlights of each subsequent election cycle has always been to postpone concrete electoral reforms – talk about shelving a problem and deferring a solution.  That is exactly what it has been!  

Someone else could look at it differently; the small incremental reforms that have been undertaken since the early 2000s could be seen as mere soothers to a serious malignancy.  Of what use would it be to take an aspirin capsule once a week with faith that it will cure a fully blown cancer?

Similarly, one would be quick to ask, what’s the impact of a well laid out road map without a corresponding proper legal infrastructure? Imagine a road plan without clear traffic signage; wouldn’t it be a recipe for disaster especially for the road users? Imagine if the “black spots” on some of the Kampala roads were not clearly marked?

The 2016 election comes as one of those elections where those in charge of reforming the electoral process have no excuse whatsoever with respect to why necessary electoral reforms have not been adopted.  It was never a question of time, neither was it a question of lack of content or public will.  

Unlike previous electoral cycles, formal calls for reforms this time round, featured as early as 7th December 2011 when the Citizens’ Electoral Reform Agenda (CERA) was officially unveiled to government, law makers and other stakeholders.  

The CERA outlined the major reform proposals including: reinstatement of presidential term limits; strengthening the Electoral Commission to make it more independent, credible and impartial; instituting a clean, accurate and credible voters register extracted from the national ID system; streamlining special interest group representation in Parliament; streamlining the role of security agencies in elections and partisan politics; instituting heavy sanctions on persons who commit electoral offences; instituting a framework through which a presidential runner-up candidate is represented in Parliament and introducing stringent frameworks to streamline campaign financing and the use of public resources in elections.

The lack of comprehensive and substantive electoral reforms as outlined in several consensus documents including the CERA, the Citizens’ Compact, the proposals from the Inter-Party Organisation for Dialogue (IPOD) among others will definitely create lapses that could have the potential of compromising the integrity and outcome of the next set of elections.  

In essence this “missed step” automatically puts the 2016 elections in an awkward context making it easy to challenge both the process and outcome – notwithstanding the incremental administrative improvements that have been undertaken.

Only the major and bold changes to our electoral system would have provided the permanent solution to the ever-going cycle of electoral complaints and counter-complaints. 

Because the “legal map” of the forthcoming election has not been defined in accordance with the wishes of the people, it is now time that the citizens explore alternative approaches to safeguarding their vote, making their vote count and ensuring that they make the electoral process much more meaningful even in the wake of a limited electoral law support system.  

In the current context, (active) citizen vigilance is going to have to be a major recourse in plugging any gaps that could provide opportunity for electoral malpractices and manipulation. 

Even with the recourse to the citizen vigilance stance, the risk of any positive momentum towards elections dissipating will continue being real in Uganda unless the whole question of electoral reform is addressed concretely, conclusively and timeously.

The writer is the co-ordinator of the Citizens Coalition for Electoral Democracy in Uganda (CCEDU)

The official Opposition in Uganda is abandoning constitutional co-operation with the ruling political party of NRM

Leader of Opposition in Parliament Wafula Oggutu (L), DP president Norbert Mao, former Buganda Katikkiro Joseph Mulwanyamuli Ssemwogerere (standing R),and Pro- change’s Hope Mwesigye (seated) after a press conference at The Democratic Alliance offices yesterday. Photo by Abubaker Lubowa

By Stephen Kafeero

Posted  Friday, August 14  2015 


Opposition political parties under The Democratic Alliance (TDA) yesterday announced their immediate withdrawal from all forums of dialogue with the ruling National Resistance Movement as a sign of discontentment with the passing of the Constitutional Amendment Bill 2015, without the major reforms they had proposed.

On the other hand, IPOD comprises all the registered political parties with at least one seat in Parliament.
These include the Conservative Party (CP), the Democratic Party (DP), FDC, Justice Forum, (JEEMA), Uganda Peoples Congress (UPC), and NRM.

Flanked by leaders of the different parties that make up the alliance, Prof Frederick Ssempebwa, the TDA chair, recounted different engagements to have reforms, which he said had been ignored by the government prompting them to make the move.
“All political parties under the alliance will commence a process of withdrawing from the Inter-Party Organisation for Dialogue (IPOD) and from the National Consultative Forum (NCF) with immediate effect.”

The formulation of the NCF laid down in the 1995 Constitution and operationalised under Section 20(4) of the Political Parties and Organizations Act No.18 of 2005 only came to effect in 2011.

The Forum is currently comprised of more than 35 member political parties and organisations with a Secretariat at the Electoral Commission. The EC secretary also acts as secretary of the Forum. It is currently chaired by NRM and deputised by the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC).

By ignoring what he said are people’s views, Prof Ssempebwa, who in the past chaired the Constitutional Review Commission, said the executive and Parliament had left the Opposition with no choice.

He added that donor and tax- payers’ money to the tune of Shs 5b spent on 1POD and Shs 1b on the National Consultation on Free and Fair Elections exercise, which developed the Citizen’s Compact, had gone to waste.

“The actions of this government led by President Museveni and the decision of the 9th Parliament are clearly at variance with the will of the people of Uganda. We feel that they have absconded from their representative duty and overthrown the power of the people as enshrined under our Constitution. It is increasingly clear that comprehensive reforms can only be undertaken under a new government.”

“The TDA pre-occupation will be to accelerate our efforts to bring about the end of this regime in order to bring about a transitional government of national unity. To achieve this objective, all options to bring this regime to an end sooner than later remain our focus.”

The law don observed that government no longer listens to citizens and so, it was incumbent upon Ugandans to do everything constitutionally possible to cause regime change so that meaningful constitutional reforms can be undertaken.

Citizen’s Compact reforms

Deputy government spokesperson Shaban Bantariza said the opposition was free to do whatever they want as long as it was within the confines of the law. “What we are witnessing is political freedom. They have the freedom to leave IPOD. They can do whatever they think will give them political mileage, the population will be the final arbiter,” he said.

Following protracted negations, NRM and the Opposition political parties under the IPOD arrangement, on February 5, agreed on 43 out of a total of 48 reforms discussed. The remaining four, including the reinstatement of presidential term limits, were deferred for further discussion. But when government tabled reforms, it also ignored those that it had agreed on with the Opposition.

IPOD proposed reforms

•President’s tenure should be restored to two five-year terms.
•Size of Parliament should be reduced in line with modest resources of the State.
•New independent and impartial electoral commission must be established. 
•New verifiable register of all voters, which should include eligible Ugandans in the diaspora, must be compiled.
•Voting for LC3, LC5, Parliament and President should be conducted on one day.

•An independent Electoral Commission (EC).
•Judicial Service Commission to appoint a select committee which will identify suitable candidates. 
•Want the number of members of the EC increased from seven to nine and their term restricted to seven years. 
•Making the appointment process of the members of the EC more transparent. 
•Strengthening the EC autonomy by removing the requirement to consult the Finance minister in order to pay persons it engages for the elections.

Multi-party Democracy wa Uganda.


All smiles, President Museveni
with the Electoral Commission
chairman Badru Kiggundu and
other EC officials at Bombo Military 

       Barracks, Uganda.


President Yoweri Museveni has defended his victory in the February 18 elections, saying he was validly elected in accordance with all electoral laws.

This is contained in Museveni's defense to the presidential election petition filed by independent presidential candidate, Amama Mbabazi challenging his re-election.
“I was validly elected in accordance with the principles laid down in the provisions of the constitution, the Electoral Commission Act and the Presidential Elections Act.” Museveni states in his response.

The defense was filed this afternoon before the Supreme Court by Museveni's lawyers led by Kiryowa Kiwanuka. Museveni asks the Supreme Court to dismiss the petition with costs, arguing that none of the cases of malpractices attributed to him by Mbabazi were not committed by him personally or with his knowledge.
Museveni denies every bribery allegation level against him by his former secretary general. On the allegations of distributing hoes to the people of West Nile aimed at stopping them from voting Mbabazi and other candidates, Museveni says that this is part of an ongoing government program to support farmers with agriculture implements and to improve household incomes.
He adds that this same program started well before the 2015/16 campaign and election period. On the allegation of giving out Shs 250,000 to voters in every village throughout the country, Museveni says the money was paid out by the NRM to its branches to support their activities.
 He also denies the allegations of using abusive language during the campaigns when he threatened Dr Kizza Besigye and Mbabazi and their supporters that they cannot touch the anus of the leopard and go scot free, saying the reference was figurative to illustrate the recklessness of anybody breaking the law.
On the accusations of threatening voters against voting for Mbabazi on any candidate saying Uganda would go to war, Museveni said that what he meant was that Ugandans should exercise their right to vote carefully to protect the gains and progress the country has achieved since 1986.
With the filing in of Museveni's defense that of Electoral Commission and Attorney General, court can now ably hear the election petition and dispose of it within 30 days from the date of filing.




1- Mr museveni has never won a National democratic election anyway ?

2- In 1985 after the establishment of a government of National Unity in Nairobi, Kenya, the rebel leader of NRM staged a coup and announced himself President of Uganda in 1986. Mr Ssemwogere in 1996 won the election, this very leader staged another coup and announced himself President of Uganda. 

3-This process followed the years of 2001, 2006, and 2011 against his rival Dr Kizza Besigye. It now seems the same process is repeating itself in 2016.  19 Feb 2016 this same leader has put on a Military Uniform and is staging another coup right in the eyes of the citizens of Uganda as his rival, who won the election, is detained in his home. 


4-Himself and his political party cannot be disqualified from participating in all those elections and the next ones!

Omusango ogugaana ekibiina kya KY okwewandiisa mu NRM


Owekitibwa Omulamuzi A.E.N. Mpagi-Bahigeine

Owekitibwa Omulamuzi S.G. Engwau.

Owekitibwa Omulamuzi C.N.B. Kitumba.

Owekitibwa Omulamuzi C.K. Byamugisha

Owekitibwa Omulamuzi S.B.K. Kavuma

Omusango gwa Ssemateeka No. 22 ogwa 2006.


Okugaana okuwandiisa ekibiina kyobufuzi ekya

Kabaka Yekka.

1. Paul Kafeero………………………………………….

2. Herman Kazibwe…………………………………..Abawaabi bo musango


1. Akulira ebyokukuba akalulu no kulonda governmenti mu nsi Uganda

2. Munnamateeka wa Government ……………Abaloopebwa

Okusalawo kwo Musango okw’Omulamuzi Kitumba.

Omusango guno guleteddwa wansi we bitundu bya Ssemateeka 137 (3) ne 50(1) ne (2). Ate era omusango guno guleteddwa wansi wa mateeka amalala agakwata ku buyinza ne ddembe lyo buntu aganama ddala nga bwegasaanye okukwatibwa ate era nokukwasibwa mu Bantu.

Omusango guno gwatekebwa mu file ya Court eno nga 11/05/2005 ate negukyusibwamu nga 02/07/2007. Abaloopa bano Paul Kafeero ne Herman Kazibwe batuuze be nsi Uganda era bemulugunya nga wansi omusango guno bwegugamba.


a) Abawabi bano bemulugunya nti tebayisiddwa bulungi era banyigiriziddwa olwensonga ezitakwatagana bulungi nakatono okusinziira mu Ssemateeka w’ensi ya Uganda eya Republic .

b) Abawabi bano bemulugunya nti No 1 aloopebwa yagaana okuwandiisa ekibiina kyabwe ekirina amanya “Kabaka Yekka” nti kubanga erinya limenya etteeka 5 (1) ate neddala 16 (1) agali mu tteeka ekkulu erifuga ebibiina byobufuzi eryayisibwa 2005. Era erinya lino liyinza okuleeta okutabulatabula Nobwakabaka bwa Buganda .

c) Abawabi bano era bemulugunya nti okusalawo obutawandiisa kibiina kyabwe “Kabaka Yekka” kikontana nekitundu kya Ssemateeka ekya 72 (1) ekiwa obuyinza bwonna obujjuvu obwabawabi bano ate era nabantu bonna abatuuze ba Uganda okukola ebibiina byobufuzi bo byebaba beyagalidde.

d) Abawabi bano era bemulugunya nti okusalawo obutawandiisa kibiina kyabwe “Kabaka Yekka” kikontana nekitundu kya Ssemateeka wa ensi Uganda eya Republic ekya 29 (1) (e) ekiwa eddembe abantu ba Uganda okukwatagana nokukolagana nga bo bwebaba bagadde.

2: Abawabi bano era bongera ekwemulugunya nga bwebanyigirizibwa mubukyamu olwengeri omuwaabi ono gyagenda nga yeyongera okugaana nga bwassamu nokukozesa ensonga zino ezebitundu 5 (1) (a) ne(2) mu tteeka erifuga ebibiina eryayisibwa 2005. Kino kyongera kumenya amateeka agali mu bitundu 72 (1) ne 29 (1) (e) ebya Ssemateeka wensi ya Uganda eya Republic .

3: Aloopebwa asooka mukwetegereza enyo nokukwasisa empisa abaloopa bano ebitundu 5 (1) (a) ne (2) mu tteeka lino erifuga ebibiina eryayisibwa 2005 lilemesa nokuteeka obukwakkulizo ku ddembe lyabawabira bano nebalemererwa okwetayaya obulungi. Era okugaanibwa kuno kubanyigiriza ekisukiridde nekiyitawo nyo ddala mubantu bonna abalina eddembe lyabwe eryanama ddala lyebamanyidde mu Democracy nga Ssemateeka bwakikakasa nokukilambika obulungi mukitundu ekya 43 (2).

4: Abawabi bano babonyebonye nyo nokufuna obuzibu era nokufiirwa ebyabwe bingi olwokulemererwa kwaloopepwa asooka okugaana okuwandiisa ekibiina kya “Kabaka Yekka”.

5: Abawabi bano bagamba nti olwensonga ezo waggulu ezogeddwako mubitundu 1, 2, ne 3, ebikolwa by’awabirwa asooka nga bwabikozesa kukibiina kya “Kabaka Yekka” amenya mateeka ga Sssemateeka era asanidde okubikomya mbagirawo.

Abawabi bano basaba Court essalewo nebiragiro ebyamatteeka bwebiti:

a) Court essalewo nti ekibiina kya “Kabaka Yekka” kyatukiriza ebisanyizo byonna ebisabibwa mumatteeka okuwandiisa ebibiina byobufuzi.

b) Court essalewo nti okugaana oba okulemererwa kwalopebwa asooka okuwandiisa ekibiina kya “Kabaka Yekka” kikontana nebitundu 72 (1) ne 29 (1) (e) ebya Ssemateeka.

c) Court essalewo okuwa ekiragiro alopebwa asooka okuwandiisa ekibiina kyobufuzi ekya “Kabaka Yekka”.

d) Court essalewo okuwa ekiragiro okubalirira okufiirizibwa kwabaloopa bano okuvudde mukugaana oba okulemererwa kwalopebwa asooka okuwandiisa ekibiina kyobufuzi ekya “Kabaka Yekka”.

e) Court essalewo okuwa ekiragiro abawabirwa bano okusasula sente zomusango guno.

Okuwabira kuno kukkakkassibwa mukulayira kwobubaka bwa Paul Kafero omuwaabi asooka.

Mukudamu mukuwawabirwa kuno, abawaabirwa bombi begaana emisango gyonna egyogedwa mumusango guno. Abawaabirwa bano bagamba nti munsonga esooka, eyokubiri, eyokusatu ne yokutano zalusaago naye ate nga zireeta obusungu. Badamu bwebati nga bawa ensonga zaabwe:

3. Okuddamu kwabwe ku No.1(a-c) 2, 3, ne 5 mukuloopa kuno bagamba bwebati:

(i) Omuwaabirwa asooka yali mumateeka amatufu okugaana okuwandiisa ekibiina kyobufuzi ekya Kabaka Yekka kubanga okukiwandiika kiba kumenkya mateeka 5 (1) ne (a) (b) ate ne 16 (1) agali mu tteeka erifuga ebibiina byobufuzi elyayisibwa mu mwaka 2005 (PPO Act). Era sikukoma awo woka naye nokutabulatabula Obwakabaka bwa Buganda .

(ii) Mukuddamu kwokuwoza kwa No 1. (b) Omuwaabirwa ono era yegaana nga bwatamenya mateeka gomu kitundu 72 (1) mu Ssemateeka okulemesa Abawaabira bano nabantu abalala abatuuze ba Uganda , okwekolera ekibiina bo kyebeyagalira nga era kyebelondedde.

(iii) Mukuddamu kwokuwoza kwa No 1 (c) Omuwaabirwa ayongera okwegaana nga bwatamenya mateeka gomu kitundu 29 (1) mu Ssemateeka okulemesa Abawaabi bano okwegazaanya muddembe lyabwe elyokukolagana nga abantu abakulu abateegera kyebandyagadde okukola mu ddembe lyabwe.

(iv) Mukuddamu kwokuwoza kwa No 2 Omuwaabirwa ayongera okwegaana nga bwatamenya mateeka bwagenda mumaaso nokukozesa obuyinza bwe obuli mu kitundu kye tteeka lya PPO Act okulemesa Abawaabi bano okuwandiisa ekibiina kya Kabaka Yekka nga Ssemateeka bwabawa eddembe eryo, mu kitundu 72 (1) ne 29 (1).

(v) Omuwaabirwa ono ayongera okukakasa nga obuyinza obuli mu kuziyiza okuwandiisa ekibiina kino obuli mu tteeka lya PPO Act mu kitundu 5 (1) (a) ne 2 butuufu era busanidde mubuntu bulamu obulimu democracy nga era bukwatagana bulungi nekitundu kya 43 (2)(c) ekya Ssematteeka wa Uganda.

(vi) Omuwaabirwa asooka ayongera okukakasa nga okusalawo kwonna kukibiina kya Kabaka Yekka bwekuli munsonga entuufu zonna eziri mu tteeka lya PPO Act ate nga etteeka lino lissimbukira ddala mu Ssematteeka wa Uganda . Nolwekyo okusalawo kuli mu Ssematteeka yenyini.

(vii) Abawaabirwa bano basaba Abawaaba balemesebwe okulongosa mumusango guno naddala nga bwebalemeddwa okugoberera obukodyo obukozesebwa mu kutakiriza emisango gy’ etteeka lya PPO Act bwewabaawo okugaana okuwandiisa ekibiina kyobufuzi.

(viii) Abawaabirwa bano basaba nti omusango guno munafu nyo era tegwetaaga bunyonyozi bwa Ssematteeka.

Okuddibwaamu kwomusango guno kuliko obukakafu bwa bajjulirwa babiri. Mr Eng. Badru Kiggundu, akulira akakiiko kokulonda akawawabirwa ne Bafirawala Elisha munamateeka wa Governmenti.

Ebyafaayo kumusango guno gulina Abawaabira babiri abasaba Awandiisa ebibiina byobufuzi nebibiina ebirala awandiise ekibiina kyabwe. Omuwandiisa ono nalemerako nga abagamba bakyuuse erinya. Oluvanyuma obuvunanyizibwa bwokuwandiisa ekibiina kino nebutekebwa mumikono gy’Akulira akakiiko kebyokulonda. Omukulu ono naye nagaana okuwandiisa ekibiina kya Kabaka Yekka nga amaze okwebuuza ku Attorney General w’Obwakabaka bwa Buganda . Mu bbaluwa ye eya 28 September 2005 Minister webyamatteeka mu governmenti ya Ssabasajja Kabaka nagamba nti singa ekibiina kiwandiikibwa mu linya lya Kabaka Yekka ekibiina ekyo kijja kumenya amateeka.

Ebbaluwa za M/s Juliet Nassuna, Assistant Registrar of Political Parties/ Organisations nga bebuzzaganyamu ne Minister wa Matteeka e Mengo (Attorney General).---------


Ref: RG/105



23rd September 2005



The Attorney General,

Buganda Kingdom ,








We have received an application to register the above name as a political party and we would like your guidance on the use of this name in respect of political party. I draw your attention to this fact bearing in mind the provisions of sections 5(1) (a) and 16(1) of the Political Parties and Organisations Act 18/2002. We are due to gazette the application and wanted the opinion of the kingdom on this matter.


Awaiting your opinion on this matter. (Enclosed is a copy of the constitution and application)


Juliet Nassuna,

Assistant Registrar of Political Parties/Organisations.


Cc: The Minister for Cabinet Affairs and Information

Buganda Kingdom ,


28th September 2005


katende, ssempebwa & Co.



Fredrick E Ssempebwa John W Katende

LLB Hons (E.A) LL.B. Hons. (E.A)

LL.M ( Belfast ) LL.M (Harvard)

Senior Partner Senior Partner


Assistant Registrar of Political Parties/Organisations

Registrar Generals Office

Amamu House



Attn: Juliet Nassuna


Dear Madam,




We refer to the above matter and to your letter Ref: RG/105 dated 23rd September 2005 and address you as hereunder:


We agree with your interpretation of the law in the above matter, and agree that a party under that name cannot be registered without infringing the law.



Yours faithfully,


John W. Katende.


Cc: The Minister for Cabinet Affairs and Information

Buganda Kingdom


The following year all responsibilities and powers were passed over to The Electoral Commission after the introduction of a multiparty system of democracy. Where the National Movement system of governance metamorphosed into a new single political party and was hurriedly registered under this current electoral commission as one of the current political parties of Uganda . Over 30 political parties were registered apart from Kabaka Yekka. This is the reason given by the letter of the Electoral Commissioner.







LEG 353/01



Plot 53/56 Jinja Road

P.O. Box 22678 .

Kampala . Uganda .





The Chairperson

Kabaka Yekka,

P.O. Box 70229 ,

Kampala .



Please refer to the above outlined subject.

According to available records you were advised by the Assistant Registrar of Parties, to change name because Kabaka Yekka was likely to be confused with the Kingdom of Uganda in contravention of the Provisions of Sections 5(1)(a) and 16(1) of the Political Parties and Organizations Act 2005.


This is therefore to reiterate the advice earlier given to you regarding this matter.


Eng Dr Badru M. Kiggundu



Cc: Ms Luswata Advocates.

Kampala .

Mukirizibwa okukyusiza bonna abagala okuyiga ensonga zino mu nnimi zonna ezisoboka mu Africa .

-----------------------------------------KABAKA YEKKA --------------------------------------(ENGERO ENSONGE)

Ebiseera bino byetulimu byakanayokyani- Byakulowooza nnyo- Byakufumitiriza nnyo. Byakukola nnyo era byakwaabuluza ekyo ekyazimbibwa edda.

Bannange mmwe Abaganda bannannyini Ggwanga mpalirizibbwa okuleeta Engero zino ensonge ennyimpi nga nzitadde mu bitundutundu buli muntu ku ffe yerondere kitundu ki kyalimu?

Era kiki kyateekwa okukola okuvamu okufumiitiriza amakulu gengero ezo.

Okwetegekera ebiseera ebizibu ebijja mu Maaso:


Embuulire tefa yonna.

Ekijja omanyi- kinyaga bitono – Ekiddukano tekinyaga byenda.

Okwerinda si buti – Ensanafu etambula eteze.

Kalina abiri – Olonda ejjinja nga kalaba.

Omuggo oguli ewa munno- tegugoba Ngo mu njuyo.

Gwomanyi enfumita – tomulinda magalula.

Ku kyalo kuno tekuli kabi- yerabira ekisolo ekigenyi


_______________________________KABAKA YEKKA______________________KABAKA  YEKKA

Katudde kumusango gwaffe:

Mukusisinkana okuteesa okwaddirira kyasalwawo okuggumiza onsonga enkulu ezomusango bweziti.

1. Okulemererwa kw’Omuwaabirwa asooka oba okugaana okuwandiisa ekibiina kyobufuzi ekya Kabaka Yekka kiba kwekuba mpawu ezitajja kuggwa oba kumenya mateeka mu bitundu 72(1) ne 29(1) (e) mu Ssematteeka wa Uganda era ekikolwa kino kiveewo nga tekirina muganyulo gwonna.

2. Okwongera okutayiza nokugaana Abawaabi bano okugenda mumaaso nokuwandiisa ekibiina kyabwe Omuwaabirwa ono ayongera kulinyirira ddembe lyabwe nokulabika nga ayitawo ne kwekyo ekya ndyetaagisiza mu bantu abakulu abategeera abatudde emirembe ne ddembe mu nsi ya Democracy ne mubatuuze bannabwe.

3. Waliwo okusalawo obanga Abawaabira bano basanidde okuwulirizibwa nokuddirwamu mumusango gwabwe guno.

Mukugenda mumaaso nokuwuliriza omusango guno Abawabira bakulemberwa Munnamatteeka Ms Eve Luswata Kawuma ate Abawaabirwa bo ne bawolerezebwa Ms Margaret Nabakooza.

Mukuwulizinganya omusango banamatteeka bano okuva kubyebaali bateseza bayongerako no kwogera mu kkooti.

Nze nga Omulamuzi kambitwale mumaddinganwa gaabyo.

Okugaana kw’Omuwaabirwa asooka okuwandiisa ekibiina kya Kabaka Yekka kuwubisa, na kumenya mateeka gebitundu 72 (1) ne 29 (1) (e) mu Ssematteeka era ekikolwa ekyo kikomekkerezebwe kivewo.

Ms Luswata-Kawuma kulwabawaabira yayongera okukigumiza nti Omuwaabirwa asooka okugaana okuwandiisa ekibiina kya Kabaka Yekka kikontana ne kitundu 72 (1) ekya Ssematteeka. Ekitundu kino kiwa obuyinza obutajjulira omutuuze we nsi ya Uganda okuwandiisa ekibiina ye kyaba ayagadde. Era mukugaana kuno okuwanndiisa ekibiina kino Omuwaabirwa ono amenya etteeka mu kitundu kya Ssematteeka ekya 29 (1) (e) ekiwa eddembe abantu okukolagana nga bo bwebaba basobodde mubibiina.

Munnamatteeka ono nategeeza kooti nga byonna ebyetagisa okukolebwa bwebyakolebwa, nga ekibiina kyobufuzi tekinaba kuwandiisibwa ebilambikiddwa mu tteeka erifuga ebibiina byobufuzi (PPOAct). Omuwaabirwa asooka yagaana okuwandiisa ekibiina. Ensonga zaawa azilaga mu bbaluwa jeyawandiika nga abulira Abawabi bano nti erinya “Kabaka Yekka” lyali lijja kutabulatabula n’ Obwakabaka bwa Buganda mu kumenya amateeka agali mu katundu 5(1) (a) ate ne mu katundu 16 (1) mu tteeka lya PPO Act.

Okusinziira ku munnammatteeka ono, Omuwaabirwa ono teyalaga engeri obutundu bunno jebwamenyaamu etteeka lino. Akayana nagamba nti abakulira ekibiina kino era nabo ba members abakirimu tebali mu lukalala lwabantu abogerwako nga abaganibwa mu katundu aka 16 (1) mu tteeka lino. Agatako nti obwa member bwe kibiina kino tebuli mu muttemwa ogugaanibwa mu katundu kano 5 (1) (a) mu tteeka lya PPO Act. Okusinziira ku bujjulirwa obwo Muwaabira asooka obwa member bwe kibiina bulaga enfanana ennungamu nga eva mu Districts 19 ezilungamya ebitundu byamawanga ebitaano ebiri munsi ya Uganda . Tewali nakamu ekiraga nti waliwo okwawula oba okukubira oludda kuludda lwa Bakyala bokka oba oludda lwa Baami oba okusosola mu mawanga. Kino kikakasa nga ekibiina bwekirina byonna ebyetaagibwa mukuzimba eggwanga mubujjuvu. Yasaba kkooti erowooze nyo kumuganyulo gwobutundu buno 5 (1) ate ne 16 (1) mutteeka lya PPO Act nomulimu gwabwo nga esinziira mu makulu ga Ssematteeka wa Uganda .

Okuggumizza kukino yaleetayo okyokulabirako ekyomusango gwa Attorney General lweyawoza omusango ne Salvatori Abuki nga ajjulira mu Ssematteeka ku number 1. mu mwaka 1998.

Munnamatteeka ono akiggumiza nti omuganyulo oguva mu Ssematteeka kwe ku kulakulanya eggwanga erya Democracy, eryesigamiziddwa mu kwegatta, mubwenkanya bwabantu nokugenda mumaaso kwabwe nga bemalirira mubuyinza bwabwe obwabantu abakulu aberowoolereza. Munnamatteeka anyonyola nti mukutuula kwo Muwabirwa asooka ye nasalawo okugaana okuwandiisa ekibiina nga akozesa obutundu 5 (1) (a) ate ne 16 (1) obwetteeka lya PPO Act amenya matteeka ga Ssematteeka agakuuma obuvunanyizibwa nobuyinza bwabantu obulembekeddwa mu bitundu 72 (1) ne 29 (1) (e) mu Ssematteeka wa Uganda .

Munnamatteeka ono asaba kkooti ekirizze okuwaabira kuno.

Munnamatteeka awolereza eggwanga lya Uganda okuwabirwa kuno takukiriza. Aggummizza bulungi nti okusalawo kwa chairman wakakiiko akakola kubyokulonda era nga ye muwalaabirwa asooka yasalawo mubutuufu obutawandiisa kibiina kirina linya lino erya Kabaka Yekka. Ensonga gyeyawa nga agamba nti abantu babulijjo abakulu nga ate bateegera bulungi bajja kutabulatabula erinya lino Nobwakabaka bwa Buganda .Era bwekityo mungeri eyo ekikolwa kino kijja kumenya obutundu 5 (1) (a) (b) ate ne 16 (1) obuli mu tteeka lya PPO Act. Era okusalawo kuno tekulina bwekumenya matteeka nakugaddibaganya mu bitundu bya Ssematteeka 72(1) ne 29 (1) (e). Munnammatteeka ono ayongerako nagamba nti enjogera ettegerekeka mubujjuvu bwokuvunnula Ssematteeka, Ssematteeka yenyini alina okutwalibwa wamu nga omuganda ogumu.

Nagamba nti newankubadde waliwo okuweebwa obuyinza obujjuvu okukola ebibiina byobufuzi mukitundu kino 72(1) ekya Ssematteeka naye ate obutundu (2) ne (3) nabwo bukwtagana nekitundu kino. Ye Munnammatteeka ono mukulowoozakwe agamba nti Ekitundu 72 kiteekeddwa okusomebwa awamu. Ayongerako nti ekitundu 72 (2) ne (3) mu Ssematteeka bitteekwa okukolaganira awamu. Olunyiriri (2) lugamba nti tewali kibiina kijja kuddukanyizibwa okujjako nga kitukiriza ebyo Ssematteeka byakiririzaamu. Ebikiririzibwaamu biri okwegata, emirembe, okwenkanankana, democracy, neddembe. Ate ku lunyiriri (3) Parliament yattekebwawo okukola etteeka lyokulabirira enkola yebibiina byobufuzi. Olwensonga eyo Parliament nettekawo PPO Act nga etteeka.

Munnamatteeka ono agamba nti ekitundu 5(1) (a) ekyetteeka lya PPO Act ligaana omuntu yenna okukola ekibiina kyobufuzi nga kyesigamizzibbwa kubakyala bokka oba abasajja bokka, kumawanga, oba ku langi ezenjawulo ezabantu, ku ggwanga oba obuzaaliranwa, enzikiriza ye ddiini oba ebifananyiriza ng’ ebyo. Ekitundu 5(1) (b) nakyo kigaana okukola ekibiina kyobufuzi ekikozesa ebigambo oba enjogera oba obubonero ebiyinza okuleetawo enjawukana zonna ezinyonyolwako mu lunyiriri (a)

Agamba nti ekitundu 5(1) (a) ate ne (b) biteekwa okusomebwa awamu. Munnamatteeka ono ayongera nagamba nti okusinziira kukitundu 72(2) ekya Ssematteeka. Bwowandiisa ekibiina mu linya lya Kabaka Yekka oba oyonoona ensonga enkulu ddala eri mu kweggatta kubanga erinya ng’ eryo lireeta okusosola mumawanga kubanga Kabaka linya lya mufuzi we nnono omukulembeze mu bwa Kabaka bwa Buganda . Abantu abalowooza obulungi bajja kukitwaala nti akulira ennono ate wuno yeyingizza mu bibiina byobufuzi ekitakwatagana na kitundu 246(3) (e) ekya Ssematteeka ate era nekitundu 16 ekye tteeka lya PPOAct. Obwakabaka bwa Buganda nabwo bwagaana okuwandiisa ekibiina kyabawaabira bano nga “Kabaka Yekka.” Abawaaba bano bagana okukyusa erinya newankubadde nga baweebwa nyo amagezi bakyuse erinya.

Nolwekyo Awawabirwa asooka okugaana okuwandiisa ekibiina kyobufuzi ekya Kabaka Yekka talina kyamenya matteeka mu kitundu 72(1) ate era ne mukitundu 29(1) (e) ebiri mu Ssematteeka. Munamatteeka wa governmenti wano nasaba kkooti okugaana omusango guno.

Nga sinaddamu ensonga esooka nina okukakasa kunsonga enkulu ddala mukuvunula Ssematteeka ezitteekeddwa okulowoozebwako mu kkooti eno. Munnamatteeka owabawaabirwa aleese ensonga entuufu egamba nti bwoba ovunula Ssematteeka ekitabo kyonna olina okukitunulamu mubujjuvu. Ekyokulabirako kye kya Paul K. Ssemwogerere nebane ababiri nga bawoza ne Attorney General mukujjulira mu musango gwa No. 1. ogwa 2002 Omulamuzi Mulenga kulupapula 4 ne 5 wagambira bwati: Lino etteeka lya mugaso munene nyo bwoba ovunula Ssematteeka erigamba nti ebitundu bya Ssematteeka ebikwata kunsonga emu bitteekeddwa okukolagana so si okukontana. Ssematteeka asaanidde okusomebwa nga akwatagana nokugendera awamu. Kkooti enkulu eyo mu America(U.S.A) mu nsonga za Smith Dakota Vs North Caroline 192 US 279 (1940) nazo zalaga ensonga eno bweti:

Etteeka kulu ddala Ssematteeka bwaba nga azimbibwa nti tewasanye kwawulibwamu bitundu nebilowoozebwako byokka okuva kubinabyo naye kisanidde byonna ebibeera nga byogera kunsonga emu bileetebwe wamu mukulowoozebwako nokutunulibwaamu okusobola okulaga obulungi ekigendererwa ekyomumugaso mu kitundu kya Ssematteeka ono.

Tewali alina buyinza obwo okujjako kkooti ya Ssematteeka eweereddwa obuvunanyizibwa bwokutuukiriza obwenkanya buno.

Ebitundu mu Ssematteeka ebyo ebikwatagana ne ddembe erryannamma ddala, nga bwekiri mu musango guno bisaanidde okuweebwa okuvunnula okukkakkamu mundowooza yo buntu. Nga bwekigambibwa Omulamuzi Mayindo mumusango gwa Major General David Tinyefuza nga awoza ne Attorney General kumusango gwa Ssematteeka No1. mu 1996 kumuko gw’olupapula 16 agamba bwati:

Mukulowooza okwange ebitundu bya Ssematteeka bisanye okutwalibwa mpola nga tebitawanyizibwa munsonga ezamanyi enyo. Newankubadde nga lwo olulimi lwa Ssemateeka telukyuuka naye ate embeera zabantu zikyuuka neziwa amakulu amalala ebitundu bino.Ekitundu kya Ssematteeka ekikuuma eddembe lyobuntu eryomuwendo omunene ekitundu kino kibererawo emirembe gyonna. Kkooti kyeva esaana okubeera enegenderevu mukulaba nga ekwataganya ensonga eziwerako mukulungamya omugaso gwa mateeka gano eri abantu bonna nebyo byebaba bagala okutukiriza. Mubigambo ebirala Kkooti essaanide okugaziya so si kufunza ebitundu bya Ssematteeka bino. Ebitundu bino bisaanidde okukozesebwa mubugazi bwabyo okutukiriza eddembe lyobuntu kwabo abateekwa okufuna eddembe lino.

Omuwaabira yenna bwalaga obukakafu mukuyikirizibwa mutteeka nga lino eryeddembe atteekwa okuweebwa obuyinza bwe amangu ago.

Naye ate kkooti eyinza okugaana okumuwa obuyinza bwe singa ekizzuula nti mukifo kyokutwaala mumaaso eddembe lino nokulikozesa obulungi ate kijjawo ddembe nabutali bwenkanya. Oba kkooti bwekiraba nga tekiri nakamu mubwenkanya olwokubanga waliwo ebikolwa ebiguddewo nebikyuusamu kumbeera. Nze mukulowooza okwange mba siraba njawulo nnenne nyo wakati wobukulu bwe tteeka lyeddembe lino ate era netteeka eryabulijjo.

Mukwemulugunya kwabawaabira bano munsonga esooka bagamba nti ekikolwa ky’Awawabirwa asooka ekikolwa kyakola kiba kimenya ekitundu 72(1) ate era ne kitundu 29(1) (d) ebiri mu Ssematteeka.

Kambiwandiike nga bwebiri:

Ekitundu 72(1) kigamba bwekiti:

Okusinziira ku bitundu bya Ssematteeka omuntu waddembe okukola ebibiina byobufuzi nebibiina byonna ebirala ebyabulingeri era eddembe lino lyabwemage

Ekitundu 29(1) (e) kigamba bwekiti:

Buli muntu yenna alina eddembe; okwetaba munkolagana yonna era nokwetaba mukukola oba okwenyijira mubiina byonna oba bya Union mubusuubuzi nemukupakasa oba ebyobufuzi oba okkukkulakulanya eggwanga.

Ekitundu 72(1) kiweera ddala omutuuze wa Uganda okukola ekibiina kyobufuzi naye ate obuyinza buno bulina okukwatagana nensonga za Ssemmatteeka. Mukitundu kino kigenda mumaaso nekiwa ekyokukolerako mubitundu no. 2 ate era ne no. 3 bwekiti:

(2) Ekibiina kyonna tekijja kuddukkanyizibwa nga ekibiina kyobufuzi oba ekirala kyonna okujjako nga kimaze okutukiriza ebikulu ebilembekeddwa mu Ssemmatteeka era nga kiwandiisiddwa.

(3) Olukiiko lweggwanga mumatteeka lujjanga kulabiriranga enfuna ya sente awamu nemirimu gye bibiina bino ebyobufuzi.

Abawaabira bano kyebasinga okwemulugunyamu kwekukwasisa amateeka okuli mu kitundu 5(1) ate ne mukitundu no.(2) ne no. !6(1) ebiri mu tteeka erifuga ebibiina- PPOAct. Ensonga zino ziremesa okusaba kwabwe okuwandiisa ekibiina kya Kabaka Yekka.

Obuyinza bwa Bawaabira bano okukola ekibiina kyobufuzi buteekwa okulabibwaamu nebitundu ebiri mu tteeka lino PPOAct.ate era ne bitundu ebiri mu Ssematteeka.

Ssemmatteeka wa 1995 yesigamiziddwa ku nsonga enkulu enyo ezokwegatta, emirembe, nobwenkanya, democracy, eddembe nobuntu bulamu obusaanidde mubantu nga bukulakulanya nensi.

Ekitundu 5(1) eky’etteeka lya PPOAct. ligamba bweliti:

“Omuntu tajja kukola kibiina kya bufuzi oba ekibiina kyonna ekyengeri endala yonna-

a) Ababaka baakyo bwebaba nga besigamiziddwa ku musajja oba mukazi yekka, amawanga, langi oba eggwanga, obuzaaliranwa bwomuntu, eddini, oba ebyawula ebirala byonna, oba

b) Ababaka abakozesa ebigambo, enjogera, oba obubonero obuyinza okuleetawo enjawukana zonna ezinyonyoddwako waggulu mu katundu ka (a).

c) Ekitundu 16(1) ekye tteeka lya PPOAct omufuzi we nnono oba ow’okubuttaka takirizibwa kwenyigira mu bibiina byabufuzi byonna.

Akulira akakiiko ko kulonda nga omuwaawaabirwa asooka kyava yesigama kubitundu 5(1) (a) ate ne 16 (1) ebiri mu tteeka lya PPOAct nagaana okuwandiisa ekibiina kya Kabaka Yekka ekya bawaabira bano. Ensonga ye enkulu emuganyisa agamba nti kijja kuleetawo okutabulatabula mu Bwakabaka bwa Buganda awamu nokumenya amatteeka agali mu tteeka lya PPOAct.

Nze nga Omulamuzi simatiddwa nsonga za munammatteeka wabawaabira bano nti nga bwebamaze okukola buli kyetaagisa okusobola okuwandiisa ebibiina by’obufuzi mu Uganda nga bwekirambikiddwa mu kitundu no.7 mu tteeka lya PPOAct., omukulu wakakiiko kokulonda asaanidde okuwandiisa ekibiina nga tafuddeyo ku linya lyaakibiina ekyo. Nze kubwange nina endowooza eyange nti newankubadde nga ekibiina kino kirina ababaka baakyo mu districts 19 eza Uganda, era nga balina enjawulo mu langi, gyebava mubuzaaliranwa, ne ddiini, era nga mulimu abasajja na bakazi naye ate erinya kintu kikulu nyo. Omukulu wa kakiikiko akadukanya okulonda nga yaloopebwa yalina okusalawo okuwandiisa oba obutawadiisa kibiina kino mulinya lya Kabaka Yekka. Naddala nga waliwo ensonga entuufu olwekikolwa kye ekyo.

Kakati eno ye bbaluwa yomuwaabirwa asooka: Chairman w’akakiiko kebyokulonda mu Uganda

LEG353/01 17/02/2006.

The Chairman

Kabaka Yekka

P.O. Box 70229



Please refer to the above outlined subject.

According to available records you were advised by the Assistant Registrar of Parties to change name because Kabaka Yekka was likely to be confused with the Kingdom of Buganda in contravention of the Provisions of Sections 5(1)(a) and 16(1) of the Political Parties and Organisations Act 2005.

This is therefore to reiterate the advice given to you regarding this matter.

Eng. Dr. Badru M. Kiggundu




Nzikiririza ddala mukusalawo kwamunammatteeka wo muwaabirwa asooka nti abantu babulijjo abalina endowooza entuufu batandiika okulowoolereza nti Kabaka wa Buganda yeyingiza mubibiina byobufuzi nga ate aganibwa mu kitundu kya 246(3)(e) ekya Ssemmatteeka wa Uganda . Ensonga eno eyinza okuleetawo enjawukana etetaagisa era nekileetawo okwekutulakutulamu okwabantu okutateekwa mu Ssemmatteeka wa Uganda alimu ensonga enkulu eyokwegata awamu.

Olwensonga eyo waggulu ninna okulowooza kwange nti okugaana kwomuwaabirwa asooka okuwandiisa ekibiina kyobufuzi ekya Kabaka Yekka kituufu era ekikolwa kye ekyo tekimenya kitundu kya tteeka 72(1) ne 29(1)(e) mu Ssemmatteeka. Abaloopa bano tebaganibwangako mubuyinza bwabwe obwanamwa ddala okwetaba mu kutuula nokukola ekibiina kyobufuzi. Ensonga esooka eyabwe njiganye era njigobye.

Kangende nate kunsonga eyokubiri:

Okugaana kwa wawabirwa asooka ono nga akozesa ekitundu kya 5(1)(a) ate ne kitundu kya 16(1) ekye tteeka lya PPOAct 2005 nga anyigiriza abawaabira bano nebatetayiza bulungi mubuyinza bwabwe neddembe lyabwe eribaweebwa mubujjuvu oba mukipimo kya democracy wa Bantu abeddembe ng Ssemmatteeka bwalagira.

Munnammatteeka wa bawaabira bano nga awoza yesigama kukitundu 43(2) (c) ekya Ssemmatteeka kunsonga eno eyokubiri. Obuyinza obuweebwa mukitundu kino ate nebukozesebwa okunyigiriza nokukotoggera abawaabi bano bussukawo mukulabirira eddembe lyobuntu mubantu abatudde obulungi munkolagana eya democracy. Munnamatteeka ayongera okuwoza nagamba nti obanga obuyinza bwe tteeka lino busanidde bwebutyo okunyigiriza abawaabi bano kkooti essanidde okusooka okulowooza kuddembe lino eriyimirizibbwa ate nobukulu bwe ddembe lino mubantu abatudde obulungi mu mbeera za democracy eyesigamye kuddembe lyobuntu nobwenkanya, ate era nekiseera nomugaso ebiri mu kuyimiriza eddembe lino.

Okusinziira kumunnammatteeka ono obuyinza bwabawaabira bano bukotoggeddwa era ensonga eno nkulu nyo. Abawaabi bano tebali mu kibinja kyabo abaganibwa abali mu kitundu no.5 ekyetteeka lya PPOAct. Agumizza nagamba nti okukola ebibiina byobufuzi ate era nokwetaba mukukolagana nabantu bonna abalina endowooza emu kikkulu ddala mu nsi. Nasaba kkooti ekirize omusango gwabawaabira bano.

Munnammatteeka wabawaabirwa ate ye nagaana. Agamba nti okukottogera nokugaana okuli mu kitundu 5(1)9a) ate ne 16(1) mu tteeka lya PPOAct kusaanidde era kukirizibwa mubantu abatudde awamu obulungi muddembe lya democracy. Nayongerako nagamba nti ebitundu bino byateekebwawo okutuukiriza obwetaavu obusibuka mukitundu 72(3) ekya Ssemmatteeka. Nagamba nti nga Ssemmatteeka mu kitundu 72(2) bwekiwa Olukiiko lweggwanga obuyinza okukyuusa munkola nokulunggamya mubibiina byobufuzi nebirala byonna tekiri eri kkooti mubuyinza bwayo okubuliriza buliriza mu tteeka eryamala edda okussibwawo. Nayongerako nti abawaabi bano tebanaba nakamu kuleeta bujjulirwa obukakasa nti kyebemulugunyamu kimenya Ssemmatteeka.

Munnammatteeka ono era naleeta nekyokulabirako mukuwoza nga ajjuliza omusango wakati wa Attorney General nemunnamajye Major General David Tinyefuza ogwawozesebwa Omulamuzi Kanyeihamba. Omulamuzi ono kulupapula 11 yalamula bwati.

“Tekisaanye kuggumizzibwa nga ekitamanyiddwa nti mu democracy kkooti tezisaanye kweyingiza munyombo ezisanidde okutawuluzibwa abakozi abalala aba Governmenti. Kkooti zissaanidde kuyingira munsonga zino bwekirabika nga abakozi abo bayisizzawo mubuyinza bwabwe nebalabika nga bakozeseza mubukyamu obuyinza bwabwe nebaleeta obulabe nokulumya.”

Munnammatteeka ono kwekusaba Omulamuzi kunsonga eno eyokubiri ajigaane.

Ekitundu43(1) kigamba bwekiti:

“Okukkotoggera obuyinza bwomuntu obwekkomeredde ne ddembe lye elyobuntu.

(1) Mukusanyukira mubuyinza buno ne ddembe ebiri mu kitundu kino tewali muntu yenna ate ateekwa okunyigiriza omuntu omulala yenna mumbeera ze naye zabeeramu wakati nga attudde mubantu bonna.

(2) Okutula mubantu bonna mukitundu kino kitegeeza nti tewali kukkirizibwa -

(a) Okubonyabonyezebwa mubyobufuzi;

(b) Okusibibwa nga tewali kuwozesebwa.

(c) Okukugirwa mukweyagalira mu buyinza ne ddembe lino nga ekitundu kya Ssemmatteeka bwekikiriza newabaawo okuyitiriza mukulalika mubutenkanya obwandisangibwa mu Bantu abatudde entende mu democracy nga Ssemmatteeka bwalalika.”

Ekiwandiiko “okuyitiriza mukulalika mubutenkanya obwandisangibwa mu Bantu abatudde entende mu democracy” tekinyonyolwa nakamu mu Ssemmatteeka.

Omulimu gwokunyonyola (Okutaputa) guli eri kkooti eno. Kkooti eno yakikola mu musango wakati wa Zachary Olum nomulala ate ne Attorney General mumusango gwa Ssemmatteeka no. 6 ogwatuula nga 1999.

Muganda wange Omulamuzi Okello yagamba bwati:

Enjogera: “abantu beddembe abatudde entende mu democracy” kyalowoozebwako mu kkooti eziwerako. Nga mu nsi ye Canada , Kkooti enkulu eri mukitundu kya The Queen Oakes [1987] (Const) 477 awo 498 – 9 egamba bweti.

“Enyinyonyola oba enzivunula eyokubiri (ey’ekitundu no.1) ekozesa enjogera “abantu beddembe abatudde entende mu democracy”. Okukozesa ebigambo bino nga ebyenkomeredde mukukomya kubuyinza ne ddembe lyo buntu kitwala kkooti okujjulira kunsonga zenyini ezagobererwa mu Ssemmatteeka wa Canada mu Bantu abatudde entende mu democracy. Kkooti erina okugoberera ebyomugaso era nga bikiririzibwaamu mu mu Bantu beddembe abatudde entende mu democracy. Ensonga zino ezikiririzibwamu zikwatagana kukusamu ekitiibwa obuyinza bwabantu, obwenkanya nokusala amazima, okuwa ekitiibwa munzikiriza ezenjawulo, okuwa ekitiibwa empisa zobuzaaliranwa ne nnono, nokukiriza okuwa ekitiibwa nobwesige mubukulembeze obukulakulanya omuntu oba abantu bonna. Abantu abeddembe abatudde entende mu democracy bye bibala ebirungi ebireeta obuyinza ne ddembe lyobuntu ebyenkomeredde. Wano wewali ekipimo ekyenkomerero ekikakasa okukoma kwobuyinza ne ddembe lyo buntu newankubadde nga oluvanyuma kyandirabise mungeri endala nemu democracy omulala.”

Okuzziyiza oba okugaana okuli mukitundu 5(1)(a) ate ne 16(1) mu tteeka lya PPOAct, mukulowooza kwange, kulimu omugaso munnene nenzikiriza entuufu essannidde okubeera mubantu abeddembe abatudde entende mu democracy nga ne Ssemmatteeka wa Uganda bwa kakasa. Ebirungi ebikiririzibwaamu nga bwekyogerwa waggulu kwekwewayo mukuwa ekitiibwa obwenkanya nokusala amazima, ate era nokukiriza okussamu ekitiibwa enzikiriza zabantu abalala, obuzaaliranwa bwabwe, ate era ne nnono zabwe.

Omuko ogwa 16 ogwa Ssemmatteeka gutekawo ekitebe nobuyinza bwabafuzi be nsikirano nga ate era bannono. Era nokusinga, Ekitundu 246 (1) ate ne 3(e) bigamba bwebiti:

1. Okusinziira ku nsonga eziri mu Ssemmatteeka ono, ekitebe kya bakkulu ba battaka bano nga Bankansanggwawo nga era bebakkulu be nnono, basanidde okubeerawo mu bitundu byonna eby’ ebyensi ya Uganda okusinziira kumpisa zobuzaaliranwa ne nnono era awamu nokusiima kwabantu abo bekikwatako.

3 (e) Omuntu yenna nga ye mukkulu we bika ne nnono nobuzaaliranwa bweggwanga, takirizibwa kwetaba mu bufuzi bwebibiina.

Mukulowooza okwange kiba kikyamu okukiriza omufuzi akulira ekitebe kyennono okubeerawo ate ekiseera kyekimu nawandisibwa kukibiina kyebyobufuzi “Kabaka Yekka.” Ekikolwa kino kiyinza okuleetawo okukyamukirira nokusalasala mumawanga gabantu gyebasibuka.

Okwongerako kukino abawaabi bano singa bakirizibwa okuwandiisa ekibiina kyobufuzi mulinya lya “Kabaka Yekka”, bayinza okulinyirira obuyinza ne ddembe lyabantu ba Buganda abatudde entende mu Bwakabaka bwa Buganda so nga bo bagala kubeera mumirembe jjabwe egibasanyusa mu nnono yabwe nomukkulu wabbwe oyo.

Nze nfumitiriza nyo ekirowoozo kyange nti okugaanibwa era nokuziyizibwa nga bwekinyonyolwa mubitundu ebiri waggulu kikolwa ekissannidde era ekyobwenkanya mu Bantu abatudde awamu entende mu ddembe lyabwe mu democracy.

Okugaanibwa kuno kuli ne mu Ssematteeka wa Uganda .

Ensonga eyokubiri nayo sigikiriza.

Katudde kunsonga eyokussatu:

Nkitwala nti Abawaabira bano tebasanye kusasulwa sente zebafiriddwa mumusango guno oba nokuliyibwa kwona.

Omusango ngugobye Nabawaabira basasule Abawaabi.

Dated at Kampala this 30th day of April 2008.

C.N.B Kitumba















Why the catholic political party of Democracy in Uganda has failed to re-capture power in Uganda.

Democratic Party president Norbert Mao

Democratic Party president Norbert Mao during the 2011 presidential campaigns.

Despite DP(African Catholicism) being the oldest political party in Uganda, it has not

held political power since 1961.


By Kavuma Kaggwa


Posted  Sunday, March 1   2015 

Recently, I was travelling to Kampala in a public taxi with many other passengers. A group of young men with very good education and conversant with international affairs, according to the way they were speaking, confronted me with a serious challenge. They asked me to tell them why the Democratic Party (DP), the oldest in Uganda, has not held political power since 1961.

One of them said: “We always read your articles in Daily Monitor and other papers; we want you to write in Daily Monitor giving your answer to our question”.

I told them that DP won the general elections in 1961 because there was no vote rigging as it is today. Vote rigging is not only rife in Uganda but Africa has also been gripped by the bad practice of vote rigging because people are hungry for political and state power.

Now people understand what it means to hold power. Basically it means being a leader and developing your area. But there are people who think that holding a political office means what they call “eating” or “falling into things” as former President Godfrey Binaisa once said.

Good system of democracy

I told them that what helped us in Uganda, and other countries of Africa, was that the British colonialists left us with a good system of democracy, the rule of law, having a Constitution, and holding general elections every five years so that a political party seeks the people’s mandate to govern the country. That mandate is a social contract which forces that party to fulfil what it has stated in its election manifesto.

Recently, Daily Monitor of February 7, 2015, quoted an ex-Museveni aid having said sorry for rigging votes. Daily Monitor reported: “Lt Bahati Kabahena, the former head of discipline and VIP protection at State House, has apologised to the public for his involvement in rigging votes for Museveni since 1996”. He was speaking at Kabale Municipal Stadium at a rally for grassroot mobilisation activities by the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) to build party structures.

It is important to look at the origin of DP, what it has done and its achievements since its inception.

Founded on October 6, 1954, at Rubaga, it was basically a party for all Catholics in Uganda. It had a strong pillar of the Catholic Church and the strength of a highly educated class of young Catholics, to spread its gospel and objectives. It came with an enduring motto of Truth and Justice.

The Party colours are white meaning peace, and green meaning the green colours of the country. The party stood for national unity and it fought for Uganda’s independence alongside the Uganda National Congress (UNC).

DP had much more solid support in western Uganda especially in Ankole, in Acholi and West Nile –Madi than in Buganda. The DP’s campaign slogan of DP egumire nka ibaare originated from Ankole.

DP was founded in Buganda by young Catholics headed by Matayo Mugwanya who was the son of the famous Stanslus Mugwanya, who was Omulamuzi (minister of Justice) in Buganda and Regent in 1900 and was a signatory to the 1900 Uganda Agreement with the British.

Matayo Mugwanya was in the background at the formation of the Democratic Party in 1954 because he was the minister of Justice in the Kabaka’s Government at Mengo.

The Democratic Party was formed by the Catholics of that time because they were not dominant in the Kabaka’s government. Their plan was to look at the central government with an intention of taking power in an independent Uganda.

DP was founded by eight young revolutionary Catholics to fight for Uganda’s Independence and National Unity. These were the products of the famous Catholic schools:- Namilyango College, St. Mary’s College Kisubi, St Henry’s College Kitovu and St Peter’s Secondary School – Nsambya.

They were Joseph Kasolo who was the founding President General, Joseph Kasule founding Secretary General, S. B. Kibuuka, P. Nsubuga, A.B.Serubiri, L.M. Tyaba, M. Kiddu and Alphonse Ntale. Later on in 1956, Matayo Mugwanya took over the leadership of the party.

In 1956, a young charismatic British trained lawyer Benedicto Kiwanuka took over the leadership of the party from the conservative Matayo Mugwanya.

Ben Kiwanuka (as he was popularly known) straight away transformed DP into a party of all tribes and all religions. In January 1959, when the British government announced the “road map” for Uganda’s independence, Ben Kiwanuka mobilised the people throughout the country to register as voters. He said every Ugandan must register to vote in 1961 “because Independence is coming”.

He worked closely with J.W. Kiwanuka who was the chairman of UNC to defy Mengo and the Buganda Lukiiko who had told the Baganda to boycott the registration because “the British government had not stipulated clearly what will be the position of Buganda and the Kabaka in an independent Uganda”.

Polling took place in March, 1961 and Ben Kiwanuka / DP got massive support outside Buganda. In Buganda he got less votes and what he got was because of the support of the Catholic Church.

He formed the internal self-government in March 1961 and became the first Prime Minister of Uganda. That was the first achievement of DP.

In his government, he included three leading Protestants: Balamu Mukasa, Stanley Bemba and John Sonko. Prof. Senteza Kajubi who was a staunch DP member since its inception declined a ministerial post because he was a lecturer at Kings College, Budo.

Just before Independence, Ugandans approved the Independence Constitution in London which granted Buganda a federal system of government and also authorised the Buganda Lukiiko to appoint all the 21 Buganda Members of Parliament. There was no direct election in Buganda and Ben Kiwanuka / DP were automatically left out.

Possible outcomes 

Had we had direct elections in Buganda, then Ben Kiwanuka could have been elected in Masaka and DP could have won in Buganda and outside Buganda. Ben Kiwanuka could have continued as the executive prime minister and could have been the one to receive The Instruments of Independence at Kololo on October 9, 1962.

In April 1980, DP participated in the first second general election since 1962 under the leadership of Paul Kawanga Semogerere but was defeated by UPC’s Milton Obote amid claims of widespread rigging that sparked off the five year NRM Liberation War in Luweero 1981/ 1986.

There was another general election in 1996 when Mr Yoweri Museveni was already the President. Some vote rigging was reported (and Lt Bahati Kabahena has said it). Because of rebuilding peace in the country after a long period of political turmoil, Dr. Paul Semwogerere had served in the NRM Government as minister for nine years until 1996 when he left the government to fight for the reintroduction of the multi-party system against the Movement system.

The second biggest achievement of DP for the people of Uganda therefore was the return of the multiparty system of governance in 2005 after a landmark Constitutional Court ruling in a case championed by Paul Ssemogerere challenging the constitutionality of the Movement as a political system. The court ruled that the Movement was a political party and not a system as its promoters claimed and that it had all the characteristics of a political party.

DP is now under the leadership of Norbert Mao as president general, Mathias Nsubuga, MP, as Secretary general, Isa Kikungwe as treasurer and Mr Kenneth Paul Kakande as publicity secretary. It is quite evident that Ugandans are now living in relative peace and tranquility because of the multiparty system which DP fought for and it is here to stay.

The party has 15 Members of Parliament and at the moment it has embarked on an aggressive and vigorous mobilisation campaign to capture more parliamentary seats in the forthcoming general elections of 2016. Let us wait and see whether this will eventually put it in power The voters are the deciding factor. 

Uganda Political Drama as Mr Mbabazi's wife storms National Resistance Movement political party that is sitting in a democratic meeting.

Ms Mbabazi (C) sits outside the conference room where she waited until the

President walked in yesterday.


By Monitor Team


Posted  Wednesday, March 25  2015 


Drama ensued yesterday when President Museveni’s guards denied the wife of ex-prime minister Amama Mbabazi entry to the NRM Women’s League conference.

Ms Jacqueline Mbabazi is the national chairperson of the women’s league. However, when she arrived in the morning hours, Special Forces Command officers informed her she was not on the list of the accredited 112 NRM district chairpersons who were supposed to attend.

For several hours, Ms Mbabazi was locked out of the meeting. She sat disconsolate and vowed to stay put until the party chairman, President Museveni, arrives in the afternoon.

Ms Mbabazi told journalists that she suspected the decision to lock her out was pre-planned.

“As the chairperson, I have been locked out of the meeting which I am supposed to chair, how is that possible? Ms Mbabazi said. “But as a person who was elected, I can only be removed by an election, and if these are the democratic principles that we stand for, how can they block people from participation?”

“The SFC claim my name is not on the list but who drew that list yet I am the chairperson,” she added. Ms Mbabazi alleged women’s league executive members Ms Susan Muhwezi, Ms Aisha Kabanda and Ms Hajjira Namagogwe were responsible for her woes.

Souring relationship

The relationship between Ms Mbabazi and some of her NRM colleagues deteriorated after Mr Mbabazi was sacked as prime minister in September last year over reportedly harbouring presidential ambitions.

The rift widened when Ms Mbabazi signed a petition challenging the NRM delegates conference that technically removed Mr Mbabazi from the position of Secretary General.

No love seems to be lost between the couple and the party after Mr Mbabazi reluctantly signed the NRM MPs petition endorsing Mr Museveni’s sole candidature during a retreat at Kyankwanzi last year.

However, in a further dramatic spin, at around 1pm, Ms Mbabazi was later admitted and she joined her executive to welcome the President. Delegates heckled her when she entered the conference hall as some shouted, “shame, shame on you.”

For some minutes, Ms Mbabazi remained transfixed as she did not have a seat at the high table where the executive sat. She took a seat in the audience. However, after the anthems were played, the President beckoned her and helped her take her seat next to him. Mr Museveni held Ms Mbabazi by the hand as he led her to the chair that had just been brought in.

Ignored throughout the meeting

Ngora Woman MP Jackie Amongin, the NRM Women’s League secretary general, was the event’s mistress of ceremonies. However, throughout the occasion, she did not refer to Ms Mbabazi as chair or even recognise her presence.

“I would like to thank Ms Susan Muhwezi who has mothered this group and I would like her to come and give brief remarks,” Ms Amongin said.

Ms Muhwezi, who assumed the role of chairperson, indicated to the meeting that she did not summon the one-day women symposium but President Museveni did.

When President Museveni’s turn came to address the gathering, he recognised Ms Mbabazi as the chairperson.

“I would like to recognise the chairperson, NRM Women’s League, Ms Jacqueline Mbabazi and the league’s vice chairpersons,” he said amid murmurs.

The President then took the women through a self-empowerment lecture with special emphasis on wealth creation and how to generate homestead incomes using available resources.

“And you hear people saying that President Museveni should go. I am not short of address where to go but how about your people? Are they empowered?,” Mr Museveni asked.

Harassment claims

In an exclusive interview with Ms Mbabazi after the meeting, she explained that she was being harassed because of her uncompromising stance against Mr Museveni’s sole candidature project.

She claimed that the meeting had been called purposely to throw her out as the league’s chairperson and to endorse President Museveni’s sole candidature. “They wanted to move a vote of no confidence in me and they thought this time I would be out of the country but I got information from my women about their plot. They never invited me for the meeting as chairperson,” Ms Mbabazi said.

Invitation not necessary

However, the league’s vice chairperson for eastern region, Ms Phibby Awere Otaala told Daily Monitor that the meeting was summoned by the President to equip the women party leaders with empowerment skills. “But in any case, she is the chairperson so why did she want us to invite her?,” Ms Otaala asked. However, brochures circulated at the meeting had all names and pictures of the league executive apart from the chairperson’s.

The constitution

Under the NRM party constitution, it is only the national chairperson, women’s league who is mandated to call for a women’s league meeting.

“I would have gone to court to stop the meeting but I did not because I am the one supposed to call it. But I felt this would be selfish of me. I never wanted to deny my fellow women a chance to benefit from the meeting,” she said.

Scribes quizzed

President Museveni’s guards, the Special Forces Command (SFC), yesterday detained and quizzed four journalists working with Daily Monitor and NTV after they sought to interview ex-Prime Minister Amama Mbabazi’s wife, Ms Jacqueline Mbabazi, on why she was blocked from attending an NRM women conference.

Ms Mbabazi haggled with security for hours and later gave up after she was told she was not on the list of guests despite being chairperson.

She sat outside the hall, demanding she would only leave once President Museveni arrives.

As she took a stroll, she was confronted by journalists who interviewed her about what had transpired. She readily responded to all questions saying her predicament was the work of some members of the executive, working closely with State House.”

“As the national chairperson, I have been locked out of the meeting which I am supposed to chair,” she said: “I cannot be removed unless there is an election.”

No sooner had the journalists finished interviewing Ms Mbabazi than the guards pounced and dragged the journalists to the sides; accusing them of compromising the president’s security.

They confiscated their equipment including mobile phones and cameras, amidst a barrage of threats of blacklisting them from never covering any Presidential function again or even arresting and detaining them.

The soldiers rummaged through all the equipment and deleted all photos and video recordings. 

The detention and quizzing lasted for about two hours with the soldiers claiming they were protecting their jobs.

As 2016 progress in Uganda, Dr Besigye, a presidential candidate is arrested for a fourth time in 8 days:

Journalists jostle to take pictures

of FDC presidential candidate

Kizza Besigye as he is arrested

by police officers at his home in

Kasangati yesterday.

Photo by Abubaker Lubowa

Posted  Tuesday, February 23   2016 

UGANDA, Kampala: Forum for Democratic Change’s Dr Kizza Besigye spent the whole of yesterday in a cell at Naggalama Police Station in Mukono District, after he was arrested in the morning as he attempted to leave his home to go to the Electoral Commission offices.

Dr Besigye said he wanted to collect results declaration that he could use in a possible election petition.

He has now been arrested four times in a space of only one week. He was first arrested two days to the elections, then again at a secret police facility in Naguru shortly after the counting of votes had started at polling stations countrywide.

He claimed that pre-ticking of ballot papers in favour of Mr Museveni was going on at a house on Naguru Hill Road, and that an illegal tally centre had been set up there to change results from districts before they reached the national tally centre.

Dr Besigye was arrested one more time a day after the elections, when he, together with Maj Gen Mugisha Muntu, his party president, and Ms Ingrid Turinawe, the FDC secretary for mobilisation, were arrested from a party meeting at Najjanankumbi and again detained at Naggalama.

Dr Besigye and the FDC party, which sponsored his candidature in the February 18, presidential election, rejected the results declared by the EC at the weekend, which showed that the ruling NRM candidate Yoweri Museveni had won with close to 60.7 per cent of the votes while Dr Besigye had scored 35 per cent.

The party said the election was riddled with “massive” irregularities, ranging from pre-ticking ballots in favour of Mr Museveni and stuffing ballot boxes with ballots pre-ticked in Mr Museveni’s favour, to manipulating election results while Dr Besigye said the results were “based on fiction”.

He said the Opposition leader, who was still in custody by press time, would be released and returned to his home.

Heavy deployment
The government deployed the army and police in Kampala and across different towns during and after the elections.
The Inspector General of Police, Gen Kale Kayihura, speaking at the EC offices yesterday, said Dr Besigye was “not special”, adding that the Opposition leader had not abided by the requirement of notifying the police three days in advance that he would hold a procession to the Electoral Commission.

When Dr Besigye was arrested just outside his gate, he was with only his driver in the car and when the police barricaded the road, he walked out of the car and said he would then march to the EC offices.
The police in the process of forcing him into a waiting van to drive him to Naggalama, sprayed pepper in the eyes of at least two photojournalists who were scampering to take pictures.
Speaking to the media on Sunday, Dr Besigye said he was pressed for time to collect evidence in case he is to file an election petition since the law grants only 10 days after the declaration of results. With yesterday also gone, Dr Besigye has eight days left starting today.

Ms Turinawe was also arrested last evening as she drove from the FDC party headquarters in Najjanankumbi to Naggalama where Dr Besigye was still detained.

At Najjanankumbi, Ms Turinawe had joined Maj Gen Muntu and party chairman Wasswa Biriggwa in a meeting with a team of election observers from the European Union. The trio had after the meeting been joined by the lawyer Yusuf Nsibambi, who played a central part in Dr Besigye’s campaign, to go check on Dr Besigye in Naggalama.

Mr Patrick Onyango, the spokesperson for Kampala Metropolitan police, had not got back to us with details of where Ms Turinawe had been detained as he had promised, but he had told Daily Monitor in regard to the people rounded up at the FDC headquarters that they were suspected of being coordinators of Dr Besigye’s Power 10 network. Ms Turinawe is the head of mobilisation in the party.

"Boycott elections", Sejjusa tells Opposition political parties but not the Uganda mandate:


Former coordinator of intelligence services Gen David Sejusa.

Photo by Abubaker Lubowa


Posted  Tuesday, April 14  2015 


The embattled former coordinator of intelligence services Gen David Sejusa has encouraged opposition political parties to boycott and disrupt the forthcoming 2016 polls, if the electoral reforms are not implemented.

He made the remarks during a courtesy visit to Democratic Party (DP) headquarter in Kampala on Tuesday where he was welcomed by DP leaders.

“This time the message for change must be different. If these issues(reforms) are not resolved we shall not have elections, there is a need for capacity building especially in political parties these are the issues which must be discussed and resolved what we do is always defined by the results,” Gen.Sejusa said.

He also urged opposition leaders to identify the nature of the struggle they are fighting to cause change in the country.

The recent formed Political Democratic Alliance  in Uganda condemns the on going  arrests of Mr Besigye, and Mr Mbabazi:

The summit of the Democratic Alliance convenes

at Eureka Hotel in Ntinda, Kampala.

Photo by Ivan Okuda

By Monitor ReporterPosted  Thursday, July 9  2015

A press briefing by the Democratic Alliance is underway at Eureka Hotel in Ntinda a Kampala suburb.

Among others in attendance is: UPC president Olara Otunnu, Conservative Party chairman John Ken Lukyamuzi, Former Vice President Gilbert Bukenya, he president of JEEMA, Hon Asuman Basalirwa among others.

Mr Basalirwa has condemned the arrest of Dr Kizza Besigye and Mr Amama Mbabazi claiming that the duo has not committed any crime save aspiring for presidency.

“This is not the first time Dr Kizza Besigye is being arrested for ‘nothing’ by the police, we may be tempted to ask Ugandans to fight for selves” Mr Basalirwa posed.

Former prime minister Amama Mbabazi was arrested on Thursday 09/07/2015 morning time in Njeru Jinja as he tried to force his way to Mbale where he was due to hold consultative meetings with his supporters.

Dr Kizza Besigye was also arrested as he left his home in Kansagati to address a rally in his neighbourhood and later in Kawempe. The two are currently being detained at Kiira road police and Nagalama respectively.