The decision by the Uganda government to amend the existing media laws and introduce new ones is disheartening to say the least, but should not be unexpected.
This is because in the modern world, you have freedom of expression but after expression, you are striped off that freedom.
The move, described by minister for Information and National Guidance Kirunda Kivejinja as aimed at “streamlining the role the media plays in national development,” come hot on the heels of run-ins between the state and independent media houses in recent months.
Latest on the list was the raid of The Independent Magazine newsroom. Several journalists have been interrogated by both security agents and the police, in a bid to slap charges of sedition on journalists who raised issues of accountability.
However like other sections of Ugandan society, the media suffers its own capacity constraints but the path the state has taken only serves to shield the degenerated ruling class from scrutiny.
The press is merely a mirror of society, however, government and other sections of the Ugandan society have instead decided to smash the mirror rather than accept their reflection.
Thursday, 29 May 2008
Tuesday, 27 May 2008
Succession talk-can M7 walk the talk
President Yoweri Museveni or Mzee as his supporters love referring to him recently said he would not groom a successor as requested by his supporters but a system that would eventually produce one.
What a smart thing to say. The opposition and his party members clapped to this and maybe danced and wined to it. But how possible is this?
Peaceful and democratic political succession is very critical for the development of any country; unfortunately very few African countries have succeeded in achieving it.
In Uganda and like many other African, Asian and Caribbean countries, there is wide use of sectional and private reasons to beg incumbents to remain in power.
If only presidents could freely relinquish office, as experience had demonstrated that in doing so-even devils such as Kenyan Daniel Arap Moi -they remain elder statesmen, both in the eyes of the nationals and the international community.
Grooming a system involves a lot of courage and discipline, which many African leaders, even the so called breed-of-new-African leaders-if they still are anyway-shy away from.
EAC region-Tanzania, a successor is groomed but not the system, in Kenya, till today, they don’t know who actually won the December 2007 election and in my Uganda, it is still a dream.
With the establishment of a de jure one party state in Tanzania in 1965, a de facto one party state in Kenya in 1969 and military state in Uganda in 1971, the possibility of changing the head of government through multiparty competitive politics was eroded.
The presidential system, which is practiced, has the potential of creating a perpetual incumbency due to the enormous executive and political powers vested in the presidency, and the capacity of being president as well as party chairman.
The process of political recruitment has also adversely affected political succession. The nomination of candidates for civic, parliamentary and political party posts is heavily influenced by party procedures rather than the ability of contestants.
The final decision is made by party organs, whose discretion may often be coloured by ethnic and religious affiliations, corruption and intra party who-is-who “the Mwenzetu” problems.
So when Museveni said he would groom a system, I wonder, because holding onto to power for two-decades does not spell a character that can groom a system.
Grooming a system would mean a free and fair leadership in nomination processes both within and without political parties, maintenance of fixed terms of political office.
Grooming a democratic system, would mean separation of powers between the arms of government in order to tame wild presidents and promotion of a bottom-up political recruitment process.
While as a country we have romanticised and justified revolutionary violence, in all the situations it has been used, no significant benefit for the people has arisen. It only resulted in to the abandonment of the ideals of the NRM Ten Point Programme.
For Museveni’s rhetoric to come true, he will have to build strong institutions for conflict resolution and an empowered population capable of articulating and implementing necessary change.
Under a groom system, we shall be able to defined institutions as independent and non-partisan bodies with appropriate laws and procedures.
There will be a balance between accountability and impunity, minus witch hunting but a promotion of accountability and justice.
There will be a set procedure to avoid expensive elections that induce corruption
Neutrality and professionalism of army at all institutional levels. It should be capable of defending national interests and not beholden to individuals and an objective attribution of blame.
Political succession is a much larger matter than the issue of term limits that our opposition parties have been ranting about, though an important component of it.
The most powerful tool to ensure political succession is the conduct of free and fair elections. The independence of the electoral commission as well as the passing and the implementation of adequate electoral laws are of prime importance.
To crown it all, in order to ensure positive political succession, the political entities that are vying for power, must be democratically constituted.
NRM, DP, UPC and FDC must be well rooted within their constituents and should evolve around the practiced principles of participation and representation.
Their leaders must be accountable, and their members have a duty to demand such accountability. These qualities are necessary prerequisites for such organisations and individuals to assume responsibilities at the national level.
What a smart thing to say. The opposition and his party members clapped to this and maybe danced and wined to it. But how possible is this?
Peaceful and democratic political succession is very critical for the development of any country; unfortunately very few African countries have succeeded in achieving it.
In Uganda and like many other African, Asian and Caribbean countries, there is wide use of sectional and private reasons to beg incumbents to remain in power.
If only presidents could freely relinquish office, as experience had demonstrated that in doing so-even devils such as Kenyan Daniel Arap Moi -they remain elder statesmen, both in the eyes of the nationals and the international community.
Grooming a system involves a lot of courage and discipline, which many African leaders, even the so called breed-of-new-African leaders-if they still are anyway-shy away from.
EAC region-Tanzania, a successor is groomed but not the system, in Kenya, till today, they don’t know who actually won the December 2007 election and in my Uganda, it is still a dream.
With the establishment of a de jure one party state in Tanzania in 1965, a de facto one party state in Kenya in 1969 and military state in Uganda in 1971, the possibility of changing the head of government through multiparty competitive politics was eroded.
The presidential system, which is practiced, has the potential of creating a perpetual incumbency due to the enormous executive and political powers vested in the presidency, and the capacity of being president as well as party chairman.
The process of political recruitment has also adversely affected political succession. The nomination of candidates for civic, parliamentary and political party posts is heavily influenced by party procedures rather than the ability of contestants.
The final decision is made by party organs, whose discretion may often be coloured by ethnic and religious affiliations, corruption and intra party who-is-who “the Mwenzetu” problems.
So when Museveni said he would groom a system, I wonder, because holding onto to power for two-decades does not spell a character that can groom a system.
Grooming a system would mean a free and fair leadership in nomination processes both within and without political parties, maintenance of fixed terms of political office.
Grooming a democratic system, would mean separation of powers between the arms of government in order to tame wild presidents and promotion of a bottom-up political recruitment process.
While as a country we have romanticised and justified revolutionary violence, in all the situations it has been used, no significant benefit for the people has arisen. It only resulted in to the abandonment of the ideals of the NRM Ten Point Programme.
For Museveni’s rhetoric to come true, he will have to build strong institutions for conflict resolution and an empowered population capable of articulating and implementing necessary change.
Under a groom system, we shall be able to defined institutions as independent and non-partisan bodies with appropriate laws and procedures.
There will be a balance between accountability and impunity, minus witch hunting but a promotion of accountability and justice.
There will be a set procedure to avoid expensive elections that induce corruption
Neutrality and professionalism of army at all institutional levels. It should be capable of defending national interests and not beholden to individuals and an objective attribution of blame.
Political succession is a much larger matter than the issue of term limits that our opposition parties have been ranting about, though an important component of it.
The most powerful tool to ensure political succession is the conduct of free and fair elections. The independence of the electoral commission as well as the passing and the implementation of adequate electoral laws are of prime importance.
To crown it all, in order to ensure positive political succession, the political entities that are vying for power, must be democratically constituted.
NRM, DP, UPC and FDC must be well rooted within their constituents and should evolve around the practiced principles of participation and representation.
Their leaders must be accountable, and their members have a duty to demand such accountability. These qualities are necessary prerequisites for such organisations and individuals to assume responsibilities at the national level.
Tuesday, 20 May 2008
Museveni hit at corrupt leaders-what a bluff!
I broke the story of President Yoweri Museveni expressing shock at the level of corruption within his government.
As I re-typed (for publication) out every sentence in his letter to his Prime Minister Apolo Nsibambi and copied to MPs, I could not help laughing out loud at Museveni’s epistle expressing shock at learning that contract prices are inflated and the money swindled.
Oh dear! I could not help asking loud whether some new fund had been set up by Bush administration, UK or Canada -Government always shouts thief whenever there is a new fund for Africa- which we need to siphon.
Does our dear president have such a poor memory that he could not recall that in 1998 he revealed that he pardoned his brother Gen Salim Sale for inflating the contract for, and in turn delivered junk helicopters
Could someone jog Museveni’s memory that one of his senior NRM cadres now a Cabinet members siphoned off 4,000 litres of fuel after losing his parliamentary seat, on grounds that he rigged elections.
Come on! Does Museveni not remember that he promoted and reappointed two junior ministers to senior ministerial positions after parliament had censored them over corruption, and one repeated the act-Gavi and Global Fund scandal!
The president played a leading role in the creation of Tri-Star which went down with over Ush20bn, and which is on the verge of getting more? Another still birth Textile Company -Phenix Logistics got over Ush4bn-failed to pay back and just last month, government guarantee $5.5m from Japanese’s International Cooperation Agency (JICA) for Phenix.
Government has habitually given out billions of shillings to individual businessmen without parliament’s sanction or any transparent policies governing these donations.
The bail outs to Hassan Basajjabalaba, the head of the NRM Entrepreuers team who got Ush31bn in government bailout on the President's instructions – some of which was money meant to recapitalise Uganda Development Bank.
At the directive of the president, the minister of finance can inject public funds into a private entity without parliament’s knowledge and then declare that those funds translate into government’s shareholding. Moreover the office of the Auditor General cannot audit such firm’s since government is minority shareholder, isn’t that daylight robbery Mr. President?
The list of inflated contracts snakes all the way back to the sanctified corridors of State House. Entebbe State House construction? Inflated. UBC's relocation costs? Inflated. UCB's sale? Murky and inflated. National ID costs? Muddled and Inflated. Army numbers? Inflated, Oil reserves? flawed procurement process.
No Ugandan can fail to point out a murky tendering process or an inflated project
And if all that is news to President Museveni, then, let us tighten our seat belts. Corruption is probably the biggest threat to our existence as a country at the moment
The cancer of corruption and culture of impunity in Uganda can only be cured by vigilant anti-corruption institutions, by strong, sustained and impartial investigation, arrest and trial of all involved -- including those who walk the highest corridors of power!
As I re-typed (for publication) out every sentence in his letter to his Prime Minister Apolo Nsibambi and copied to MPs, I could not help laughing out loud at Museveni’s epistle expressing shock at learning that contract prices are inflated and the money swindled.
Oh dear! I could not help asking loud whether some new fund had been set up by Bush administration, UK or Canada -Government always shouts thief whenever there is a new fund for Africa- which we need to siphon.
Does our dear president have such a poor memory that he could not recall that in 1998 he revealed that he pardoned his brother Gen Salim Sale for inflating the contract for, and in turn delivered junk helicopters
Could someone jog Museveni’s memory that one of his senior NRM cadres now a Cabinet members siphoned off 4,000 litres of fuel after losing his parliamentary seat, on grounds that he rigged elections.
Come on! Does Museveni not remember that he promoted and reappointed two junior ministers to senior ministerial positions after parliament had censored them over corruption, and one repeated the act-Gavi and Global Fund scandal!
The president played a leading role in the creation of Tri-Star which went down with over Ush20bn, and which is on the verge of getting more? Another still birth Textile Company -Phenix Logistics got over Ush4bn-failed to pay back and just last month, government guarantee $5.5m from Japanese’s International Cooperation Agency (JICA) for Phenix.
Government has habitually given out billions of shillings to individual businessmen without parliament’s sanction or any transparent policies governing these donations.
The bail outs to Hassan Basajjabalaba, the head of the NRM Entrepreuers team who got Ush31bn in government bailout on the President's instructions – some of which was money meant to recapitalise Uganda Development Bank.
At the directive of the president, the minister of finance can inject public funds into a private entity without parliament’s knowledge and then declare that those funds translate into government’s shareholding. Moreover the office of the Auditor General cannot audit such firm’s since government is minority shareholder, isn’t that daylight robbery Mr. President?
The list of inflated contracts snakes all the way back to the sanctified corridors of State House. Entebbe State House construction? Inflated. UBC's relocation costs? Inflated. UCB's sale? Murky and inflated. National ID costs? Muddled and Inflated. Army numbers? Inflated, Oil reserves? flawed procurement process.
No Ugandan can fail to point out a murky tendering process or an inflated project
And if all that is news to President Museveni, then, let us tighten our seat belts. Corruption is probably the biggest threat to our existence as a country at the moment
The cancer of corruption and culture of impunity in Uganda can only be cured by vigilant anti-corruption institutions, by strong, sustained and impartial investigation, arrest and trial of all involved -- including those who walk the highest corridors of power!
Sunday, 11 May 2008
I fear for Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe's opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai has said he will return home to contest a presidential run-off, despite fears of widespread poll violence.
Speaking in South Africa, he said people would feel "betrayed" if he did not run, and vowed to return within two-days.
Violence has been growing in Zimbabwe since Robert Mugabe and his cronies realised that his arch competitor Tsvangirari won the election, though he didn’t gunner the required 50+1 majority win.
Horrific TV pictures and stories coming out of Zimbabwe is worrying, it shows that the re-run could be one of the ugliest. There is a further claim that the military are poised to shoot to kill any opposition leader who will be in their sights.
The story by the BBC of teachers, who acted as polling officers being beaten and awarded certificate to show they have received beating by the military, with the full knowledge of ZANU-PF officials is the most ridiculous.
BBC claimed the paper even had a date stamp and the signature of the leader of the group.
I don’t know whether to believe this or not, something tells me its propaganda by the UK media. However, given past raids of opposition offices and crack down on Movement for Democratic Change(MDC) supporters by police, I cannot just brush it off.
To Mugabe and the ‘war veterans’ (Mugabe’s biggest terrorising machinery), letting Tsvangirai rule Zimbabwe is equivalent to allowing the British re-colonise Zimbabwe.
The level of political patronage in the country has been portrayed in the way the National Electoral Commission and the High Court handled the election petition filed by MDC.
What remains to be seen is whether Mugabe will allow full access by international monitors and media as demanded by MDC and it supporters.
President Thabo Mbeki's silent diplomacy has so far failed.
Speaking in South Africa, he said people would feel "betrayed" if he did not run, and vowed to return within two-days.
Violence has been growing in Zimbabwe since Robert Mugabe and his cronies realised that his arch competitor Tsvangirari won the election, though he didn’t gunner the required 50+1 majority win.
Horrific TV pictures and stories coming out of Zimbabwe is worrying, it shows that the re-run could be one of the ugliest. There is a further claim that the military are poised to shoot to kill any opposition leader who will be in their sights.
The story by the BBC of teachers, who acted as polling officers being beaten and awarded certificate to show they have received beating by the military, with the full knowledge of ZANU-PF officials is the most ridiculous.
He was told to produce it whenever someone else wanted to beat him as proof that it had already been done.
BBC claimed the paper even had a date stamp and the signature of the leader of the group.
I don’t know whether to believe this or not, something tells me its propaganda by the UK media. However, given past raids of opposition offices and crack down on Movement for Democratic Change(MDC) supporters by police, I cannot just brush it off.
To Mugabe and the ‘war veterans’ (Mugabe’s biggest terrorising machinery), letting Tsvangirai rule Zimbabwe is equivalent to allowing the British re-colonise Zimbabwe.
The level of political patronage in the country has been portrayed in the way the National Electoral Commission and the High Court handled the election petition filed by MDC.
What remains to be seen is whether Mugabe will allow full access by international monitors and media as demanded by MDC and it supporters.
President Thabo Mbeki's silent diplomacy has so far failed.
Mexican’s most wanted journalist
Mexican’s most wanted journalist Lydia Cacho won this year’s price for freedom of speech Award.
Joe Thloloe, President of the jury of 14 professional journalists and editors from all over the world, and Press Ombudsman of the Press Council of South Africa, explained the choice of this year’s laureate:
"Members of the jury were impressed by the courage of Lydia Cacho Ribeiro as she continues to expose political corruption, organized crime and domestic violence in the face of death threats, an attempt on her life and legal battles. For me, a journalist who knows the antagonistic environment in which he or she operates and continues to do the right thing by keeping readers, listeners or viewers informed about their society deserves recognition for their contribution to freedom of expression around the world. Lydia Cacho is such a laureate."
Cacho is a big encouragement to investigative journalist, my friend Benon Herbert Oluka, first prize winner in the 2007 Africa Education Journalism Award, who was at the same function described his encounter with Lydia as a wake up call.
Below is Cacho’s acceptance speech.
Mr. President, Mr. Director General of Unesco, Ministers, Ladies, Gentleman and fellow colleagues:
I feel honored to be with you tonight. This award may not protect me from death threats or from death itself. But it certainly helps to protect my written work and to enable a broader audience to know and understand the Mexican reality and the impact of the global crimes of trafficking in persons and of child pornography. By honoring me tonight you are recognizing the talent of my teachers, of the hundreds of women, men and children who have trusted me with their personal histories, their tragedies and their triumphs. Somehow they knew I would honor their trust by doing my job as a journalist. When I was tortured and imprisoned for publishing the story of a network of organized crime in child pornography and sex tourism, I was confronted with the enduring question of the meaning of life. Should I keep going? Should I continue to practice journalism in a country controlled by 300 powerful rich men? Was there any point to demanding justice or freedom in a country where 9 out of every 10 crimes are never solved? Was it worth risking my life for my principles? Of course the answer was… yes. Mexico, my homeland, is a country of 104 million people, a land of great landscapes, of magnificent rivers and unending green fertile mountains. Nonetheless Mexico exports 400 thousand people every year, men and women who flee to the United States, to escape hunger, poverty and violence. I grew up in a middle class neighborhood in Mexico City. My mother, a feminist psychologist, took me to the slums around town and told me that those kids—kids who were just like me—had no food and no chance to get an education. In this way she prepared me to be a citizen and what is now called a human rights activist. I was born a woman. I found in feminism a philosophy based on equality and peace. It led me to view life from a gender perspective. For years I have lived and moved between two worlds: being a feminist advocate against violence is the way I act as a citizen; being a journalist is the way I practice my profession. Every day I try to enlarge my ability to listen, to understand, to feel empathy, to question, to be truthful, to be ethical. By listening to peoples’ stories I learn ways to add insight and perspective to my coverage of human tragedy and human development. And also I test - as many of my colleagues do - my ability to stay alive. I am 45 years old, and I have spent most of my life trying to understand human nature. What makes us able to survive, to change, to evolve, to save or to harm each other? I’ve been watching the news and reading newspapers most of my life. I thought I understood the macro structures of oppression. I knew how the political system works to protect the rights of the elites, at the expense of the majority. But I was not aware what it felt like to be the subject of repression myself. When the mechanisms of state repression were used against me, I found myself in the strange position of being seen as a heroine simply for exercising –with some dignity– my right to freedom and justice. Thousands of people marched on my behalf. Most of the Mexican media covered my case for almost two years, until the powerful were finally able to buy the silence of some of them. Millions of citizens echoed my demand for freedom of the press and for the rights of the child victims I wrote about. I stood before the Supreme Court with a heart full of hope that they would defend our constitutional right to tell the truth without being tortured or incarcerated. Many thought there was so much hard evidence in this case that there would be no room for corruption. It seemed all of Mexico was hoping for a chance to believe that change was possible. Standing against us was a handful of well dressed lawyers in dark blue suits who defended the politicians I had accused of an unsavory relationship with pedophiles. But this handful of men was able to lobby the majority of Supreme Court judges to dismiss my freedom of the press case relating to child pornography and organized crime. And so I lost and so did my country. But here I am. I was lucky enough to elude death. I had the opportunity to report my own case, to live inside the story of an orchestrated campaign to protect the marriage between organized crime, businessmen and a corrupted government. But most of all I had the chance to keep my promises to the little girls who were abused by pedophiles and child pornographers, and who asked me to tell their stories. We journalists tend to believe that the shock provoked by reading such stories cannot fail to unite people of good will. That is one of the reasons we keep going against all odds. We know the power of compassion. As journalists we should never become messangers of the powers that be.Nor sould we surrender to fear and self censorship. And that is why we are here in Mozambique. We know there is something wrong with a world that favors a war economy instead of education, that favors silence instead of freedom and truth. A world in wich millions of chldren orphans of the HIV-AIDS pandemia are unimportant to the rest of the world.There is something wrong in a world where racism and sexism separates us from each other.
This gathering symbolizes our determination to keep on going…with cool heads and warm hearts…and to keep on writing. To keep on living with hope.
——– Lydia Cacho Ribeiro Maputo, Mozambique. May 3rd 2008
Joe Thloloe, President of the jury of 14 professional journalists and editors from all over the world, and Press Ombudsman of the Press Council of South Africa, explained the choice of this year’s laureate:
"Members of the jury were impressed by the courage of Lydia Cacho Ribeiro as she continues to expose political corruption, organized crime and domestic violence in the face of death threats, an attempt on her life and legal battles. For me, a journalist who knows the antagonistic environment in which he or she operates and continues to do the right thing by keeping readers, listeners or viewers informed about their society deserves recognition for their contribution to freedom of expression around the world. Lydia Cacho is such a laureate."
Cacho is a big encouragement to investigative journalist, my friend Benon Herbert Oluka, first prize winner in the 2007 Africa Education Journalism Award, who was at the same function described his encounter with Lydia as a wake up call.
Below is Cacho’s acceptance speech.
Mr. President, Mr. Director General of Unesco, Ministers, Ladies, Gentleman and fellow colleagues:
I feel honored to be with you tonight. This award may not protect me from death threats or from death itself. But it certainly helps to protect my written work and to enable a broader audience to know and understand the Mexican reality and the impact of the global crimes of trafficking in persons and of child pornography. By honoring me tonight you are recognizing the talent of my teachers, of the hundreds of women, men and children who have trusted me with their personal histories, their tragedies and their triumphs. Somehow they knew I would honor their trust by doing my job as a journalist. When I was tortured and imprisoned for publishing the story of a network of organized crime in child pornography and sex tourism, I was confronted with the enduring question of the meaning of life. Should I keep going? Should I continue to practice journalism in a country controlled by 300 powerful rich men? Was there any point to demanding justice or freedom in a country where 9 out of every 10 crimes are never solved? Was it worth risking my life for my principles? Of course the answer was… yes. Mexico, my homeland, is a country of 104 million people, a land of great landscapes, of magnificent rivers and unending green fertile mountains. Nonetheless Mexico exports 400 thousand people every year, men and women who flee to the United States, to escape hunger, poverty and violence. I grew up in a middle class neighborhood in Mexico City. My mother, a feminist psychologist, took me to the slums around town and told me that those kids—kids who were just like me—had no food and no chance to get an education. In this way she prepared me to be a citizen and what is now called a human rights activist. I was born a woman. I found in feminism a philosophy based on equality and peace. It led me to view life from a gender perspective. For years I have lived and moved between two worlds: being a feminist advocate against violence is the way I act as a citizen; being a journalist is the way I practice my profession. Every day I try to enlarge my ability to listen, to understand, to feel empathy, to question, to be truthful, to be ethical. By listening to peoples’ stories I learn ways to add insight and perspective to my coverage of human tragedy and human development. And also I test - as many of my colleagues do - my ability to stay alive. I am 45 years old, and I have spent most of my life trying to understand human nature. What makes us able to survive, to change, to evolve, to save or to harm each other? I’ve been watching the news and reading newspapers most of my life. I thought I understood the macro structures of oppression. I knew how the political system works to protect the rights of the elites, at the expense of the majority. But I was not aware what it felt like to be the subject of repression myself. When the mechanisms of state repression were used against me, I found myself in the strange position of being seen as a heroine simply for exercising –with some dignity– my right to freedom and justice. Thousands of people marched on my behalf. Most of the Mexican media covered my case for almost two years, until the powerful were finally able to buy the silence of some of them. Millions of citizens echoed my demand for freedom of the press and for the rights of the child victims I wrote about. I stood before the Supreme Court with a heart full of hope that they would defend our constitutional right to tell the truth without being tortured or incarcerated. Many thought there was so much hard evidence in this case that there would be no room for corruption. It seemed all of Mexico was hoping for a chance to believe that change was possible. Standing against us was a handful of well dressed lawyers in dark blue suits who defended the politicians I had accused of an unsavory relationship with pedophiles. But this handful of men was able to lobby the majority of Supreme Court judges to dismiss my freedom of the press case relating to child pornography and organized crime. And so I lost and so did my country. But here I am. I was lucky enough to elude death. I had the opportunity to report my own case, to live inside the story of an orchestrated campaign to protect the marriage between organized crime, businessmen and a corrupted government. But most of all I had the chance to keep my promises to the little girls who were abused by pedophiles and child pornographers, and who asked me to tell their stories. We journalists tend to believe that the shock provoked by reading such stories cannot fail to unite people of good will. That is one of the reasons we keep going against all odds. We know the power of compassion. As journalists we should never become messangers of the powers that be.Nor sould we surrender to fear and self censorship. And that is why we are here in Mozambique. We know there is something wrong with a world that favors a war economy instead of education, that favors silence instead of freedom and truth. A world in wich millions of chldren orphans of the HIV-AIDS pandemia are unimportant to the rest of the world.There is something wrong in a world where racism and sexism separates us from each other.
This gathering symbolizes our determination to keep on going…with cool heads and warm hearts…and to keep on writing. To keep on living with hope.
——– Lydia Cacho Ribeiro Maputo, Mozambique. May 3rd 2008
Friday, 18 August 2006
Juba talks: A cat and Mouse game
From my old blog-Friday, August 18, 2006
The peace talks currently underway between the Government of Uganda (GoU) and Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) are the best opportunity in over a decade to end the twenty-year war in northern Uganda.
The involvement of South Sudan government as a mediator in this process, gives this process serious potential to succeed in both ending active violence and providing a framework to address deeper social and political grievances
However, what we are seeing now is an apparent end to the evident openness of the LRA and GoU to end the conflict that was exhibit at the beginning of talks.
It is over a month since the talks started and no serious issues have been arrived at and it is to that end that we undertake this analysis, to ask the government of Uganda and the LRA to refocus priority.
In the current GoU-LRA peace talks in Juba, we do not even know the issues of contention. For example, we do not know the government position on economic empowering of the north and its rehabilitation plans.
All we hear of is a “soft landing for LRA.” And the rebels prioritising post-conflict security and livelihood guarantees. The two parties seem not ready to address the multifaceted root causes underpinning the conflict in East and Northern Uganda.
The LRA support networks, scattered in small groups in the Diaspora, should not use the growing media attention, to expose what they believe are the injustices of the present government and gain reparations for past ills.
Coupled with this has been little public attempt to date to interrogate the interests and stakes of those involved in these peace talks. Such analysis is crucial to unpack the potentiality of this peace process and to clarify the short and long term needs for lasting peace in northern Uganda.
It is high time the government must consider several possible outcomes. First, the government must reflect on the needs of people in the north for peace.
President Museveni made it clear both in his campaign manifesto that restoration of peace in the north would be his priority and we think this is a chance for him to do just that.
Government should also consider whether it is willing to facilitate national dialogue and truth-telling mechanisms.
Lasting peace in northern Uganda will require not only disbanding LRA structure, but also addressing northern grievances of social, political and economic marginalisation.
The peace talks currently underway between the Government of Uganda (GoU) and Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) are the best opportunity in over a decade to end the twenty-year war in northern Uganda.
The involvement of South Sudan government as a mediator in this process, gives this process serious potential to succeed in both ending active violence and providing a framework to address deeper social and political grievances
However, what we are seeing now is an apparent end to the evident openness of the LRA and GoU to end the conflict that was exhibit at the beginning of talks.
It is over a month since the talks started and no serious issues have been arrived at and it is to that end that we undertake this analysis, to ask the government of Uganda and the LRA to refocus priority.
In the current GoU-LRA peace talks in Juba, we do not even know the issues of contention. For example, we do not know the government position on economic empowering of the north and its rehabilitation plans.
All we hear of is a “soft landing for LRA.” And the rebels prioritising post-conflict security and livelihood guarantees. The two parties seem not ready to address the multifaceted root causes underpinning the conflict in East and Northern Uganda.
The LRA support networks, scattered in small groups in the Diaspora, should not use the growing media attention, to expose what they believe are the injustices of the present government and gain reparations for past ills.
Coupled with this has been little public attempt to date to interrogate the interests and stakes of those involved in these peace talks. Such analysis is crucial to unpack the potentiality of this peace process and to clarify the short and long term needs for lasting peace in northern Uganda.
It is high time the government must consider several possible outcomes. First, the government must reflect on the needs of people in the north for peace.
President Museveni made it clear both in his campaign manifesto that restoration of peace in the north would be his priority and we think this is a chance for him to do just that.
Government should also consider whether it is willing to facilitate national dialogue and truth-telling mechanisms.
Lasting peace in northern Uganda will require not only disbanding LRA structure, but also addressing northern grievances of social, political and economic marginalisation.
Tuesday, 15 August 2006
Juba Talks-what is at stake
From my old blog-Tuesday,August 15, 2006
On-going Juba talks are the best opportunity in over a decade to end one of Africa’s longest running wars. Yet, the stance of each team is threatening to undermine opportunities to help end one of the world’s worst humanitarian nightmares.
Talks between Ugandan negotiators and representatives of Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) rebels in Juba, southern Sudan came to a halt last week as the LRA delegation stormed out of the talks protesting government refusal to declare a cessation of hostilities.
The first round of talks ended without much progress after the LRA delegation demanded a ceasefire and also accused government of human-rights violation in the north.
Joseph Kony, LRA leader declare a unilateral ceasefire last week, however, Ugandan government has not reciprocated on the ceasefire declaration, insisting that it will agree to one only after a comprehensive peace agreement is singed.
Because of this mistrust, the LRA is said to have relocated its headquarters for fear of attack by Ugandan army, especially since its location is now well known to Kampala following recent confidence building visits by various government functionaries.
The greatest weakness of the Juba talks is now seen as the failure of the Chief mediator, Riek Machar, to insist on ceasefire declaration by both parties, this is the fourth item on the table that is yet to be agreed upon.
By its own initiative, the Government of South Sudan (GoSS) agreed to mediate and host peace talks between the warring parties in May this year. The involvement of such a strategic third party mediator, combined with apparent openness of both parties to end the war gives this process serious potential to succeed.
However there is a lot at stake in this peace process and the might be missed opportunity in this talks begins with the GoSS.
The GoSS has much to gain from peacefully expelling the LRA from within its borders. Elements of the northern-based National Islamic Front regime could easily resume using the LRA as a proxy militia to destabilise the South and derail the Comprehensive Peace Agreement.
The Khartoum government has been quiet about the ongoing peace talks since it started on July 14th.
Further, the LRA is embedded within networks in southern Sudan that have not yet joined the Southern Sudanese government coalition. The GoSS is thus keen to ameliorate the threat and demobilise the LRA through diplomatic means.
The LRA recognises the stakes for its top five lieutenants and also wants to avoid military confrontation with regional forces, the African Union (AU) and the UN to an extent that its cultic leader Joseph Kony and his Deputy Vincent Otti avoided peace talks’ venue for fear of being arrested and whisk off to the Hague.
International Criminal Court (ICC) indictments issued last October for top five LRA commanders have generated new pressure, though not enough will to actually execute warrants. Indicted LRA leadership want guarantees for their post-conflict security and livelihood.
As talks get underway, elevated attention by the United States and donor countries could be decisive to their success. However, The US State Department who announced two months ago that ending the war by end of 2006 was a priority of the Bush Administration has been unclear about its position on the Juba talks.
The US role is most desired as a non-signatory to the ICC, the United States may be able to impact the talks in ways that European countries cannot. The European countries, for their part, can urge the ICC to show restraint and to employ Article 53 of the Rome Statute. Under Article 53(4), the Prosecutor can reconsider a decision at any time “based on new facts or information.”
The GoSS, Kampala government and LRA leadership say that ICC continued disapproval of talks could derail the process when discussions shift to post-conflict security guarantees.
The unknown position of the international community and US also cast a shadow on source of finances resources that will be needed for implementation of peace agreements. The return of displaced peoples, compensation of victims and reintegration of rebel fighters will require extensive international support.
However, for President Yoweri Museveni’s government, the crisis has become an increasing liability for the reputation of the Ugandan government. With Museveni’s repeal of term limits to win a third term in elections, his regime has suffered a significant fall from grace.
Ending the war would not only redeem Museveni’s image abroad, but deal with the rejection his government has met in north for last 20 years. Success of the talks before the 2007 Commonwealth meetings to be held in Uganda would also be an accomplished for the Kampala government.
Museveni has made clear that he will offer amnesty to all rebels if the peace talks succeed within the stipulated period that ends September 12.
While Humanitarian bodies have criticised this as undermining the ICC, northern Ugandan leaders have expressed full support, conveying that long-term issues of justice can be addressed after the cessation of violence.
Acholi Paramount Chief senior aid told The EastAfrican that once the basic rights to their people have been restored, local leaders will help set the agenda for long-term restoration, using traditional restorative justice mechanisms.
The Acholi culture already has a built in mechanism, Mato Oput, to deal with reconciliation. Mato Oput is a process usually facilitated by Rwodi (clan leaders) in which the person who has wronged another or others gives a truthful account of the wrongs, accepts responsibility for what they have done, and makes a gesture of restitution in the form of something physical.
After this gesture is accepted by the aggrieved party, the two share a drink made of bitter herbs in front of witnesses to seal that reconciliation has occurred.
In the ongoing negotiations, the government and LRA will have to consider issues of reconciliation, truth telling and even some form of power sharing. While structural change is unlikely, Northern leaders say all parties should be supportive of the processes that build trust and relationships between segments of society that have been polarized and separated for several generations.
According to parliamentarians from the north and cultural leaders, lasting peace in northern Uganda will require addressing northern marginalization.
The war in northern Uganda has persisted for twenty years and has been described by U.N. Emergency Relief Coordinator Jan Egeland as “One of the worst forgotten conflicts in the world, and worse in magnitude than that of Darfur or Iraq.”
As a result, any form of economic activity has been brought to a grinding halt. A whole culture, people, and their environment are being systematically destroyed by Uganda’s government counter-insurgency policy.
Human development indicators in the north have gone into a free fall: 95percent of population lives below poverty line, 70% of them in absolute poverty. This is a contrast with the situation in the Southern and Western Uganda where 37 percent live below poverty line.
“This situation cannot continue without serious action being taken to reverse the fortunes of Northern Uganda for the better. It is also a threat to peace and stability in Great Lakes region” said Betty Amongin, a legislator from the North
However in the 20 years of conflict there have been opportunities for resolution. Even greater opportunities have existed for conflict management, which could reduce the destructiveness of this confrontation.
One could even go as far as to say that the continuation of this conflict is the legacy of missed opportunities. The peace talks of 1988, Operation North in 1991, the Bigombe talks of 1994 are all examples of missed opportunities that had the potential to end this conflict.
The Government undertook a number of operations to end this insurgency in its initial phase including mobilisation of civilian population to form defense units. Lack of technical competence in the armed forces to deal with insurgency is said to have prevented complete victory.
The LRA, now based in Garamba, DR Congo have terrorised the northern population to challenge the Ugandan government and sustain its existence. It has abducted more than 25,000 children, using them as cannon fodder and sexual slaves and displaced 1.6million.
On-going Juba talks are the best opportunity in over a decade to end one of Africa’s longest running wars. Yet, the stance of each team is threatening to undermine opportunities to help end one of the world’s worst humanitarian nightmares.
Talks between Ugandan negotiators and representatives of Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) rebels in Juba, southern Sudan came to a halt last week as the LRA delegation stormed out of the talks protesting government refusal to declare a cessation of hostilities.
The first round of talks ended without much progress after the LRA delegation demanded a ceasefire and also accused government of human-rights violation in the north.
Joseph Kony, LRA leader declare a unilateral ceasefire last week, however, Ugandan government has not reciprocated on the ceasefire declaration, insisting that it will agree to one only after a comprehensive peace agreement is singed.
Because of this mistrust, the LRA is said to have relocated its headquarters for fear of attack by Ugandan army, especially since its location is now well known to Kampala following recent confidence building visits by various government functionaries.
The greatest weakness of the Juba talks is now seen as the failure of the Chief mediator, Riek Machar, to insist on ceasefire declaration by both parties, this is the fourth item on the table that is yet to be agreed upon.
By its own initiative, the Government of South Sudan (GoSS) agreed to mediate and host peace talks between the warring parties in May this year. The involvement of such a strategic third party mediator, combined with apparent openness of both parties to end the war gives this process serious potential to succeed.
However there is a lot at stake in this peace process and the might be missed opportunity in this talks begins with the GoSS.
The GoSS has much to gain from peacefully expelling the LRA from within its borders. Elements of the northern-based National Islamic Front regime could easily resume using the LRA as a proxy militia to destabilise the South and derail the Comprehensive Peace Agreement.
The Khartoum government has been quiet about the ongoing peace talks since it started on July 14th.
Further, the LRA is embedded within networks in southern Sudan that have not yet joined the Southern Sudanese government coalition. The GoSS is thus keen to ameliorate the threat and demobilise the LRA through diplomatic means.
The LRA recognises the stakes for its top five lieutenants and also wants to avoid military confrontation with regional forces, the African Union (AU) and the UN to an extent that its cultic leader Joseph Kony and his Deputy Vincent Otti avoided peace talks’ venue for fear of being arrested and whisk off to the Hague.
International Criminal Court (ICC) indictments issued last October for top five LRA commanders have generated new pressure, though not enough will to actually execute warrants. Indicted LRA leadership want guarantees for their post-conflict security and livelihood.
As talks get underway, elevated attention by the United States and donor countries could be decisive to their success. However, The US State Department who announced two months ago that ending the war by end of 2006 was a priority of the Bush Administration has been unclear about its position on the Juba talks.
The US role is most desired as a non-signatory to the ICC, the United States may be able to impact the talks in ways that European countries cannot. The European countries, for their part, can urge the ICC to show restraint and to employ Article 53 of the Rome Statute. Under Article 53(4), the Prosecutor can reconsider a decision at any time “based on new facts or information.”
The GoSS, Kampala government and LRA leadership say that ICC continued disapproval of talks could derail the process when discussions shift to post-conflict security guarantees.
The unknown position of the international community and US also cast a shadow on source of finances resources that will be needed for implementation of peace agreements. The return of displaced peoples, compensation of victims and reintegration of rebel fighters will require extensive international support.
However, for President Yoweri Museveni’s government, the crisis has become an increasing liability for the reputation of the Ugandan government. With Museveni’s repeal of term limits to win a third term in elections, his regime has suffered a significant fall from grace.
Ending the war would not only redeem Museveni’s image abroad, but deal with the rejection his government has met in north for last 20 years. Success of the talks before the 2007 Commonwealth meetings to be held in Uganda would also be an accomplished for the Kampala government.
Museveni has made clear that he will offer amnesty to all rebels if the peace talks succeed within the stipulated period that ends September 12.
While Humanitarian bodies have criticised this as undermining the ICC, northern Ugandan leaders have expressed full support, conveying that long-term issues of justice can be addressed after the cessation of violence.
Acholi Paramount Chief senior aid told The EastAfrican that once the basic rights to their people have been restored, local leaders will help set the agenda for long-term restoration, using traditional restorative justice mechanisms.
The Acholi culture already has a built in mechanism, Mato Oput, to deal with reconciliation. Mato Oput is a process usually facilitated by Rwodi (clan leaders) in which the person who has wronged another or others gives a truthful account of the wrongs, accepts responsibility for what they have done, and makes a gesture of restitution in the form of something physical.
After this gesture is accepted by the aggrieved party, the two share a drink made of bitter herbs in front of witnesses to seal that reconciliation has occurred.
In the ongoing negotiations, the government and LRA will have to consider issues of reconciliation, truth telling and even some form of power sharing. While structural change is unlikely, Northern leaders say all parties should be supportive of the processes that build trust and relationships between segments of society that have been polarized and separated for several generations.
According to parliamentarians from the north and cultural leaders, lasting peace in northern Uganda will require addressing northern marginalization.
The war in northern Uganda has persisted for twenty years and has been described by U.N. Emergency Relief Coordinator Jan Egeland as “One of the worst forgotten conflicts in the world, and worse in magnitude than that of Darfur or Iraq.”
As a result, any form of economic activity has been brought to a grinding halt. A whole culture, people, and their environment are being systematically destroyed by Uganda’s government counter-insurgency policy.
Human development indicators in the north have gone into a free fall: 95percent of population lives below poverty line, 70% of them in absolute poverty. This is a contrast with the situation in the Southern and Western Uganda where 37 percent live below poverty line.
“This situation cannot continue without serious action being taken to reverse the fortunes of Northern Uganda for the better. It is also a threat to peace and stability in Great Lakes region” said Betty Amongin, a legislator from the North
However in the 20 years of conflict there have been opportunities for resolution. Even greater opportunities have existed for conflict management, which could reduce the destructiveness of this confrontation.
One could even go as far as to say that the continuation of this conflict is the legacy of missed opportunities. The peace talks of 1988, Operation North in 1991, the Bigombe talks of 1994 are all examples of missed opportunities that had the potential to end this conflict.
The Government undertook a number of operations to end this insurgency in its initial phase including mobilisation of civilian population to form defense units. Lack of technical competence in the armed forces to deal with insurgency is said to have prevented complete victory.
The LRA, now based in Garamba, DR Congo have terrorised the northern population to challenge the Ugandan government and sustain its existence. It has abducted more than 25,000 children, using them as cannon fodder and sexual slaves and displaced 1.6million.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
