Category FDC

Hon.Nabila is being fought because she’s a social person who associates with anyone!


Nabilah Naggayi Sempala

By Isaac Balamu via UAH forum

Hon. Naggayi Nabilah’s problem with Besigye dates back long time ago, these are not new unless you are just hearing these issues, but i have put all these issues on the forum before, the reasons why Nabilah is being fought is her closeness to Nasasira, at one time they wanted even to expel her from the party claiming she was soon going to join NRM and this is the problem Besigye has, how can someone not associate with anyone from NRM yet represents a constituency with NRM members. Why should people be divided on such lines?

For those who know Nabilah she was like that right from school days, she was an outgoing person, she is a social person, and why should she change just because she is in politics. Some of the people she is being accused to associate with she knew them long ago before even Besigye run away from NRM, now does she have to drop her friends just because Besigye says so.

It is like a person who falls out with his galfriend and tells all his friends not to associate with the gal as if it concerns them. NRM is the sitting government, MPs have to associate with minsters who are policy makers to bring services to their people. What is happening to Nabilah is the same what happened to the Kumi woman MP.

Dr.Besigye’s street activism won’t take him to Statehouse!



Protesting, activism are not synonymous with building strong political parties. They are essential and acceptable and they have a place to fill in any democracy, however in order for this force to be effective in elections it needs a strong leadership base. You can get people to vote for you by getting involved in a shouting match but when you get to the White House you realize that leadership and governing are far much different from shouting matches.

My simple call is for organized political parties that can be used as a base for Ugandans who want to run for political offices. Not parties that are so dependent on particular personalities. I would rather we have a campaigns with candidates fully supported by all members within different parties. More so if this spills into parliament where members vote for ideologies supported by the parties that sent them other than every man for his or her financial gain. That’s is the reason they are easily paid of because they don’t have to answer to anyone.

By the way there is no loser, every one who participates in any political process contributes to the expansion and improvement of the status quo. They are all appreciated more so if their status is well defined.

Dr.Edward Kayondo
UAH member in USA

MWENDA: YOU HAVE SUNK SO LOW TO SAY M7 IS MORE TOLERANT THAN BESIGYE!


By Apangu Kennedy Fanuel

Mwendah, to suggest that Museveni’s system is more tolerant than Besigye is the climax of your irrelevance. First things first. Do you think TVO is the enemy majority Ugandans face today? TVO is an enemy to the state because it exposes their excesses and plunder of national resources by the few. This actually makes TVO a darling to the majority Ugandans whose voice you work hard to suppress.

Museveni’s system more tolerant than KB supporters? You top my list of Jokers today. Simply look at all the institutions in the country! All the institutions are working to serve the president. How would you justify invasion of courts of law by the security agencies to ‘re arrest suspects? Is there any provision in the law to act in this manner? What of the parliament that only exist by name? Aren’t they performing rituals only without any meaningful business? A kingdom was blown up by the military just last month and all you saw in that was tolerance by the Museveni regime? Mwendah, I can state that you have joined the long list of the enemy Ugandans have had.

Now, a certain king has been appointed to serve in the government in a position that does not exist in diplomatic circles and yet we know cultural institutions are supposed to be independent. If this king was an ally of Besigye, won’t we have another Kasese massacre in Uganda? Mwenda! Mwenda!Uganda is watching you. Many people in Uganda can’t afford all the meals. In my entire village no one can pay school fees in Namagunga, Buddo and many other top schools. 6bn was plundered and yet livestock and humans are suffering in the cattle corridor die to water scarcity. Do you know how many borehole this money would have drilled? Recently a certain friendly country donated rice to Uganda. Shamelessly your officials were there receiving it. Isn’t Uganda an agric economy? Is it only by description? Can’t we grow rice here in Uganda? What’s your government priority?

If your really sure that these people represent the so called Tom Okwalinga . I think you publishing this information is not a wise thing to do but running straight to police or any security agency would b a better idea . These are people who may be charged with a number of counts ranging from treason to the least cyber crime, but again I remember how money hungry you are which makes m question your source otherwise u would have just run straight to the boss himself and walk away with a golden handshake

Guys, let’s not relent. Mwendah has not burried a woman who died in Labour, a child who dies of preventable diseases, has not come across many children who have dropped out of school due to school fees, parents whose children are fighting senseless wars outside there. By the way, they are sent without parliamentary approval. He has not seen mass graves that result from mismanagement of politics.

Besigye’s lecture at the New York City Bar Association in New York, United States of America on Thursday


 Wrn Kizza-Besigye after featuring on VOA straight talk Africa hosted by legendary host Shaka Sali.

Wrn Kizza-Besigye after featuring on VOA straight talk Africa hosted by legendary host Shaka Sali.

Opening Remarks

Thank you for the very kind introduction and warm welcome, [Name].
I would like to start by thanking the Cyrus R. Vance Center for International Justice for hosting this historic event.
I would in particular like to thank Mr. Alexander Papachristou for his unwavering dedication to the cause of freedom and democracy in Africa. It’s hard to overstate how important it is to have reliable friends when you are in the trenches fighting for freedom.
Alex has been a source of great inspiration to many of us in Africa. I am particularly grateful to him for his wise counsel and support, always reminding us why democracy and the rule of law matters.
Thank you Alex for your support and friendship to the people of Uganda and Africa. I would also like to thank the staff of the Cyrus R. Vance Center who have worked tirelessly to make this event possible. In particular, I would like to single out Dr. Brenda Kombo for her leadership in organizing this event.
I would also like to extend a special thank you to the African Affairs Committee of the New York City Bar for co-sponsoring this event. I understand from reliable sources that you have been a bulwark supporting the rule of law in Africa. I salute you for your dedication and contributions to a better Africa and a better world.
I see in this audience many friends and familiar faces. Thank you for welcoming me and for making me feel at home. It’s good to be amongst friends. And it’s especially inspiring to be amongst those who labor to promote justice and democracy around the world. Distinguished guests, Ladies and Gentlemen.

Begin Speech

Introduction It’s a unique and singular honor to stand here today to address this august institution which represents, in its finest form, the ideals and the pillars of an open, democratic society—the rule of law.
In a democratic society—and in a diverse and pluralistic society—it is to the Temple of Justice that we go for the peaceful and just adjudication of disputes.
It is at The New York State Supreme Court Building that it is written, with good measure, that:
“The True Administration of Justice is the Firmest Pillar of Good Government.”
It is also in the founding document of the modern constitutional government, The Magna Carta of 1215, that is written:
“To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay right or justice.”
These statements go to the very foundation of the rule of law—Justice.

I am an African
And it is justice, at its core, that is the foundation of democratic government, and without which there can be no open society.
It is with this firm understanding of the rule law that I stand before you today to talk about
“Fighting for Justice, the Rule of law, and Democracy in Africa”
I take my lessons from Uganda—that favored land from which I hail.
Despite our many problems, we still like to call it “The Pearl of Africa.”
Whenever I hear “Nkosi Sikelel’ iAfrika”—God Bless Africa—the anthem of Africa
I think of those rolling hills and the rugged ridges of Rukungiri, where I was born.
I think of the verdant valleys of Northern Uganda
The green pastures of the West Nile Mount Elgon and The Mountain of the Moon
I think of the Nile and Bwindi impenetrable forest
I think of the ancient heritage of Buganda and Bunyoro and the Luo
Then I remember, with no small measure of pride—
That it was my ancestors—our people from all across Africa—
That erected the pyramids and invented the hieroglyphics. That the first footsteps of man is to found in the heart of Africa.
When I remember all these, and the rich culture of our people, and the great civilizations they forged and will continue to forge until the end of time—then I find courage to stand here before you.
I find courage in my past and I am buoyed by hope for the future. As Thabo Mbeki would say, I am, after all, an African! A Ugandan, yes! But above all an African!

Personal Confessions

Let me begin with a personal confession.
I stand before you as a man who has been living under the shadow of the law—not in its brilliant and luminous radiance.
I stand before you as a man charged with treason in his land of birth.
I am here today, outside Uganda, by the permission and grace of the Uganda High court, to which I am very grateful.
What treason means
I will begin by explaining the nature of the treason charges against me. There are, specifically, two charges against me.
During the last presidential campaign in Uganda, which culminated in the February 2016 presidential elections, which I contested and which I believe I won convincingly, I campaigned on one radical and threatening idea:
That all Ugandans—all my compatriots—must be citizens and not subjects. That was the core of my campaign: citizens versus subjects.
To understand the force of my argument and the power of our campaign, we must briefly revisit the political history of Africa.

The Colonial State in Africa.

Colonialism in Africa stood for one radical idea: that no African could be a citizen.
And that by the edict of nature and some inscrutable faith, an African was forever consigned to be a subject. Under apartheid, Africans were “drawers of water and the hewers of woods.”
The colonial state—and the entire edifice of the colonial system—were based on the belief and the simple premise that Africans were inferior human beings—beings destined to be governed by a stern state or a stern master.
This is the colonial idea of tutelage. Africans were projected as naturally backwards and in need of tutoring in the art of modernity and civilized existence.
Upon this ideology was erected the concept of people as subjects. In fact, people as chattels. In colonial Africa, Africans were simply subjects—people to be governed from a distant metropolis by unaccountable but “enlightened” despots. Colonialism meant total domination: No power to decide how and by who people would be governed and no power over their resources (including their labor).

The Neo-Colonial State in Africa

After independence, the African elites inherited the colonial state and hardly buried or interred the colonial ideology that Africans are merely subjects. The African elites have
used the same coercive tools to perpetuate monopolization of decision making, State institutions and resources.
The neo-colonial state –and most states across Africa are neo-colonial state—continue to treat Africans as subjects.
The colonial states turned Africans into subjects and the neo-colonial African states have perpetuated that colonial ideology.
Kwame Nkrumah Patrice Lumumba Steve Biko Nelson Mandela—all the heroes of the pan-African liberation struggles—revolted and waged pitch campaigns of defiance against this racist ideology.
They refused—and defiantly did so—to accept Africans as mere subjects and not citizens. They refused to accept that we, as Africans, are children of a lesser God.

Pan-Africanism Redefined

Thus, at the core of the pan-African liberation ideology is the radical belief that every African is a citizen.
That we are children of a benevolent God just as any other race of this earth. That, my friends, is our campaign in Uganda. That is our campaign of defiance.
The campaign that every woman and man and child in Africa is a citizen. That every African—by birthright—is a citizen of our beloved continent. That we, as citizens, determine how and who governs; that we control State institutions and our national resources.
Masters, not Servants—My Act of Treason
Where there are citizens, the people are the masters and the state is the servant. Where there are subjects, the state is the master and the people are the servants. This distinction—between citizens and subjects—is at the heart of our campaign in Uganda. We are simply seeking to democratize Uganda—to have free and fair elections, and to have basic human rights, including the right to free speech and assembly. That is the profound nature of our struggle.
That is the act of treason I have been charged with—that I dare, in the face of corrupt power, to say that Africans are citizens.
That is my act of treason. And to that I plead guilty. It’s an honor to plead guilty. And I carry that charge, as an African and as a human being, as a badge of honor. In the face of oppression and injustice, one must bear witness. Today in Uganda I am a witness. The second treason charge leveled against me is about the outcome of the February 2016 presidential elections.
With almost no exception, all election observers declared that the elections were deeply flawed and comprehensively rigged. For example, the Commonwealth Observer Group, the European Union Election Observer Mission, and United States Government declared as “deeply inconsistent with international standards and expectations for any democratic process.”
The election returns received by my own party, the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC), show that I won the elections convincingly.
But a thoroughly compromised National Electoral Commission (NEC) declared the loser to be the winner. So I did something entirely radical.
I asked for an independent international audit of the elections.
I said let’s determine the winner of these disputed elections through an impeachable empirical audit.
For that I was charged with treason.
I was charged with treason for questioning the outcome of the rigged elections and for proposing that an objective audit should resolve the dispute.

Free and Fair Elections and the Rule of Law

You might ask, rightfully, what do free and fair elections got to do with the rule of law?
The Rule of Law v. Rule by Law
You can have oppressive laws and you can have undemocratic laws. Nazi Germany and apartheid South Africa illustrate why the phrase “the rule of law” can be meaningless, even dangerous, without the constraints or the requirements of justice.
The rule of law alone, in itself, is not sufficient in a democratic society.
The rule of law, to be beneficial and enlightened, must be undergirded by justice. That is, the rule of law must be morally defensible. In modern terms, it must be democratic; it must satisfy certain core requirements of an open and democratic society.
The two—the rule of law and democracy—are inextricably linked. You cannot, in an enlightened society, have the rule of law without democracy; and you cannot have democracy without the rule of law.

Democracy and Citizenship

But what is democracy in the modern context? Simply defined, democracy is rule by the people. It means that the people are the masters. It means that a community of citizens and not a community of subjects.
It means, at its core, universal suffrage and the accountability of the government to the electorate.
But the people cannot govern as a mob. Democracy is not an exercise in mob rule. It must be structured through free and fair elections.
Free and Fair Elections
It means, therefore, that the will of the people must be expressed through regularly scheduled free and fair elections.
So democracy means, in brief, rule by the electorate through universal suffrage expressed through regularly scheduled free and fair elections. That is also the definition of citizenship: the people as the electorates.
For elections are the instruments through which the people—not acting as a mob—exercise their power and will.

Where there are no free and fair elections—the process by which the government is held accountable—there can be no citizenship, and there can be no democracy.
In Uganda, we have not had genuinely free and fair elections since 1963. Democracy and citizenship are inextricably linked. We can therefore redefine and restate what democracy means.
It means government by citizens who exercise their rights of citizenship to hold their government accountable through regularly scheduled free and fair elections based on universal suffrage.
The Rule of Law Restated
Allow me, then, to redefine the rule of law as I understand it. As a civilian.
The rule of law must be based on rules made in a democratic society by citizens who exercise their rights of citizenship through governments that are elected through free and fair election based on universal suffrage.
That is the basic requirement and the foundation of the rule of law: free and fair elections based on universal suffrage.
But our restatement is still incomplete. It is still not sufficient.
The modern rule of law must, at a minimum, have protections of minorities, and must enshrine and respect the freedom of speech and assembly and the free exercise of religious beliefs.
For without these freedoms—freedom of speech, of assembly, and religion—you cannot have free and fair elections or a free society. Without these freedoms you cannot have a government that is accountable to the electorate.
And there is one other requirement: that good laws must be impartially enforced. In our case, we have on several occasions challenged presidential election rigging. Unfortunately, the courts have failed to enforce the law so that the candidate that rigs does not benefit from rigging.

Citizenship and the Rule of Law

We have defined citizenship as the right to hold the government accountable through regularly scheduled free and fair elections based on universal suffrage.
And you cannot have free and fair elections without the basic freedoms that I have just enumerated.
The rule of law, therefore, must be firmly based on the freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion—the pillars and foundations of a free, democratic society. They are also the foundations of citizenship.
Without citizenship you cannot have the rule of law—understood as laws based on substantive justice.
These, then, are the theoretical and ideological foundations of our struggle in Uganda and Africa: the rule of law as the quest for justice and democracy.

The rule of law as the product of citizenship, and as the product of free and fair elections. The problem of democracy in Africa

As I have stated earlier, the problem of democracy in Africa is the problem of elite politics divorced from the masses.
Effectively, in Africa, it often is the rule by minority—family, ethnic, racial, religious, Or a criminal syndicate, that has monopoly of coercive forces.
In Africa, the state has been the master, and the people have been the servants. Instead of citizens, we have subjects. Instead of accountability of government, we have a predatory and parasitic government.
We have had a society of subjects and not citizens. This is the colonial legacy in Africa—a legacy our political elites have heartily embraced.
The people of Africa have, for the most part, remained supplicants to their governments. The strong man owns the country. The resources of the country are his own. “My army”;” my oil.”

Legitimacy and the Rule of Law

In a society of subjects, the concept of legitimacy is reversed. Instead of the government being accountable to the people, it’s the people who are now accountable to the government. It is no longer government of law but government by law. More appropriately, government by fiat and dicta.

The government makes the law as it pleases. It holds the people accountable to its edicts, however grievious, bizarre or oppressive or predatory. Even the constitutions are merely indicative. In a non-democratic society, there is no government of law.
For without citizenship, defined as participation in governance through free and fair elections based on universal suffrage, undergirded by the freedom of speech, assembly, and religion, there can be no rule of law.

Africa, Pan-Africanism, and the Rule of Law

The struggle in Africa is the struggle to reclaim citizenship and, therefore, to develop and enshrine the rule of law.
The colonial powers saw Africans merely as subjects. The African elites have continued that racist ideology of treating Africans as subjects and not citizens.
Let there be no doubt that no one can credibly claim to be a pan-Africanist or a defender of the African people who does not defend the right of every African to citizenship. Please allow me to redefine pan-Africanism.

Pan-Africanism is an ideology which insists that every African is a citizen with indefeasible rights, which must include the rights to free and free and fair elections through universal suffrage, and the freedom of speech, assembly and religion which make possible the rights to free and fair elections.
Let no African dictator claim, therefore, to be a Pan-Africanist.
Lessons from Uganda

Our struggle in Uganda has been singular. How to restore the citizenship of our people. That is my only commitment in politics: to finish the struggle for the African liberation. To allow every African to be a citizenship.

And freedom begins with reclaiming one’s citizenship.
Kwame Nkrumah was right: “seek ye first the political kingdom.”
I say, seek ye first to be a citizen before other blessings can be bestowed upon you. Seek ye first to be free.

That is our campaign of defiance in Uganda—to complete the vision of Kwame Nkrumah and Patrice Lumumba and Steve Biko.
Just as during the struggle against colonialism and apartheid, we do not beg to be free. You must walk for your freedom; you must march for freedom, and you must fight, with every senew, for freedom if you are to be free.
Freedom is not given. Freedom is earned.
You go to jail for it, as did Mahatma Gandhi;
as did Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr;
as did Rosa Park;
as did Vaclav Havel;
as did Nelson Mandela;
as did Wangari Maathai;
as did Aung San Suu Kyi; among the great heroes of the universal struggle for freedom.

Totalitarianism and Oppression Require Silence

Totalirarianism and oppression succeed by enforcing silence. ·
They want to silence the victims · They want to silence the people of conscience · They want to silence the witnesses ·
They want no testimony or evidence against their evils
That is why totalitarian regimes and dictators rule by fear. They want to force the victims to police his or her conscience and remain silence.
They oppose freedom of speech and freedom of assembly because they want silence.
They muffle the press and the voices of freedom because oppression can only thrive where there is silence.

They jail their opponents because they want silence. So I refuse to be silent.
Because there is only one moral response to oppression and injustice: you must stand up and bear witness.
The path to serfdom is paved by silence.
We must refuse to remain silent in the face of injustice and oppression.
§ Mahatma Gandhi refused to be silent
§ Kwame Nkrumah refused to be silent
§ Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr refused to be silent
§ Jomo Kenyatta refused to be silent
§ Julius Nyerere refused to be silent
§ Jaramogi Oginga Odinga refused to be silent
§ Patrice Lumumba refused to be silent
§ Leopold Senghor refused to be silent
§ Steve Biko refused to be silent § Rosa Park refused to be silent
§ Vaclav Havel refused to be silent
§ Nelson Mandela refused to be silent
§ Elie Wiessel refused to be silent
§ Aung San Suu Kyi refused to be silent
Please stand up and bear witness. Please refuse to be silent in the face of oppression. Refusing to silent is our campaign of defiance in Uganda.

DEFIANCE: This means that our people minds must be freed for them to take on the new status of citizens; they must acquire organizational tools that allow them to speak and act together in challenging domination; and lastly, they must together deny the dictators their cooperation until they concede that people are supreme.

Let me end by quoting a great African hero: “It’s the little things citizens do. That’s what will make the difference. My little thing is planting trees”
That was the late Professor Wangari Maathai.
Please do your little thing. In Uganda, I am doing my little thing by refusing to be silent. And that is how we defend the rule of law and freedom and justice and democracy.

Please do your little thing!
Thank you!

GEN. MUGISHA MUNTU – A GREAT LEADER AT THE WRONG TIME AND PLACE


Maj Gen Mugisha Muntu,President of Forum for Democratic Change

Maj Gen Mugisha Muntu,President of Forum for Democratic Change


At the tender age of 23 years, Muntu left Makerere University after doing his last paper for his political science course to join Museveni’s bush war. He was driven by the urge to restore rule of law and human rights to Uganda that had broken down at the time courtesy of Yoweri Museveni who had created a situation to justify his bush war. Being a son of a prominent UPC leader (Enock Muntuoyera) who was a personal friend of the then President Obote, Muntu would have been given a better job in government but his resolute character and urge for the freedom of others took him to the bush. Initially, in the bush he was placed under close watch on suspicion that possibly the UPC government had sent him to spy on guerrillas.

In the bush Muntu belonged to the category of ‘intellectuals’ whom the senior Commanders majority of whom were non university graduates so much detested and harassed. Because of the greed mentality of these commanders at one time Muntu together with other NCOs and led by Enock Mondo at one time planned to escape from the Museveni’s NRA and form their own fighting group. In the bush he was shot in the leg and chest and was smuggled to Kampala for treatment. Upon recovery, he rejoined the bush war. During the same time the remains of his father who had died in exile during Iddi Amin’s regime were brought back and accorded a state funeral that was graced by the then President Milton Obote who used the occasion to call on the young Mugisha Muntu to abandon the bush and return home but to no avail.

In the bush Muntu rose through the ranks to become first the Director of Civil Intelligence and later Director of Military Intelligence (DMI) – a position he held even during and after capturing power. As a DMI Muntu is re-known for living a very simple life while his colleagues rushed for the spoils of war that went with victory. His Aides would face difficulty in explaining the source of expensive house items that they would get for him from the army headquarters. His official car was an old blue Land Rover that he would use to carry any junior staff member that he would find on the war to and from work. This vehicle remained a property of DMI/CMI until recently when it was stolen by Charles Tumusiime Rutarago. In one of the interviews this is what Muntu had to say about grabs “….as the war progressed, we were sure we could take over power people started talking about what they were planning, where they wanted to live,or saying I will be this, I will live in this neighborhood. It became intense when we took overpower. After taking over our intentions were to all go into the barracks but that was heavily resisted as soon as we arrived here. People started running to live in Kololo, Nakasero and I think that is where we lost it. This started creating the sense of acquisition and that went into business of and the feeling of everyone getting in to get something for himself. It has now gone into what we see today.”

As a senior officer at the timeof taking over government, Muntu was made a Lt. Col when formal ranks were introduced. He was moved from DMI and appointed as the the army’s Chief Political Commissar (CPC) before appointing him as the Division Commander of one of the NRA Divisions. Within less than a year Muntu was elevated to the rank of Maj. Gen and assigned to take charge of of the NRA as the Army Commander. Museveni’s choice of Muntu at the time was not in good faith but was meant to promote his usual divide and rule policy. While Muntu was capable of being the Army Commander, there were other more senior officers at the time who would have been elevated to the same position. The likes of Joram Mugume, Cheif Ali, Tinyefuza, Kyaligonza a.k.a Kumanyoko, Ivan Koreta, Okecho, Maruru, Nanyumba and a few others would have as well served in that capacity.As a result, there are some senior officers who vowed never to salute Mugisha Muntu as a sign of disapproval.

Through Mugisha Muntu, Museveni embarked and implemented his designs of purging certain army officers. It was during Muntu’s time that the practice of Katebe (rendering redundant) started. As a result, some unsuspecting senior officers petitioned Museveni through Gen. Saleh but to no avail. The cool headed Mugisha Muntu sailed though the rough storm. The army laid a foundation for professionalism, estalishment of terms and conditions of service, accounting systems, procurement of equipments etc. Its during Muntus time that the army faced seven internal rebel groups and three cross border conflicts (Rwanda, Sudan and Kenya) but by the time he left office only one (LRA) was thriving with total victory in Rwanda while diplomatic means took care of Sudan and Kenya.

Muntu’s tenure of office failed to get a partner in Museveni his Commander in Chief to fight abuse of office by senior officers who were all out to grab for personal resources that were meant to improve the welfare of ordinary soldiers. Creation of ghost soldiers and outright theft and diversion of army supplies intensified during Muntu’s tenure. In the early 90s, Muntu took the initiative to stamp it out by instituting a team headed by Serwanga Lwanga, Ivan Koreta and Fred Bogere. The team started from the eastern region to physically identify, photograph and document every member of the NRA and auxiliary forces. From the eastern region, the team proceeded to the northern region but half way into the exercise, Museveni called it off. Even in the units that had already been covered, Museveni blocked arrests and prosecution of the suspects arguing that it is the same commanders that were fighting the insurgency that were about to be punished. Since then vice took root and has become a traditional measure of personal loyalty and allegiance to Museveni. Unknown to Muntu at the time was the fact that thieving by army officers was Museveni’s weapon of ensuring loyalty. In aninterview this is what Muntu had to stay “….a kind of warlord mentality emerged – that you fight to take over power ; you must be recognised for it. As we moved on President Museveni’s long term plans and the warlord mentality found a meeting point. He found it difficult to deal with or punish those that participated. Eventually he became a key representative of that very mentality. He says he killed his animal…….” Muntu is one of the many people who followed Museveni to Luwero without realising that his intention was gain and hold the presidency till death.

However, the practice of Museveni purging officers whom he suspected of disloyalty flourished under Muntu’s tenure. Rendering officers redundant (Katebe) and arbitrary arrest and detention without trial took its toll. The affected officers unsuspectingly mistook Muntu to be the architect of their woes thus developing personal hatred. At one time during the funeral vigil of the late Col. Kyatuka in Old Kampala where Mugisha Muntu was among the mourners, a number of junior army officers led by Rwashande openly attacked Muntu accusing him of complicity in the death of senior officers by rendering them redundant and dying from deprivation. They openly and publicly insulted him by calling him names like ‘Omwiru’. The incident sent shook waves within the army but no disciplinary action was taken against the said junior officers who are now very Senior officersunder the Muhoozi project. Years after he had retired from the army, during a rally in Kamuli district Muntu broke down and cried mid sentence thus “When I recall the times I was forced to arrest my friends and relatives……..” Who was forcing him and who were those friends and relatives?

After serving for nine stormy years as army commander, Muntu got the rare opportunity to see tfrom the inside and grasp Museveni’s hidden intents. When Muntu decided to quit the army Museveni offered him the position of Minister of Defence which the former rejected. Museveni ordered the army to give him fifty million shillings to boost his(Muntu) stone quarry business – the only private economic means he had acquired from his earnings in army. Muntu is the only NRA officer who never stole or illegally acquired any personal wealth by virtue of his position. He is a poor man by all standards. However, it is said that his property on 10 Kyandondo Road houses the NRM headquarters.

When Muntu the former Army Commander joined the opposition, desperate Ugandans who have lost all hope of democratic change of government saw a messiah in him. They anticipated an army man who would employ militaristic approach to the sitting military government under Gen. Museveni. At worst they anticipated Gen. Mugisha Muntu to eat into Musevei’s power base – the military and run him down. Instead, Mugisha Muntu embarked on building and strengthening the leading opposition party. Some sections of Ugandans who don’t fully understand Muntu think that he is a Museveni sympathiser. Ugandans should not be fooled that Mugisha Muntu is not fully aware that Museveni can not accept to loose power through democratic means. In the current efforts to rescue the country, Muntu’s role and method of work should be compared with DP’s Paul Ssemogerere who led his party to form the opposition during the 2nd UPC government. Let us not underrate the role that was played by DP’s Ssemogere to check the excesses of the UPC government which role in turn afforded breathing space and survival of the NRA fighters. There were democratic institutions during the 2nd UPC government unlike the current military dictatorship under Museveni. The other difference is that Muntu has bullet wounds in his chest and leg. Does he fear to be shot again? For those who doubt Muntu’s capability, ask Museveni and you will be surprised. No amount of money, intimidation, blackmail or offer of top position can buy off Mugisha Muntu.

INFORMATION IS POWER

POSTED BY ROBUKUI VIA UAH FORUM

GEN. MUGISHA MUNTU – A GREAT LEADER AT THE WRONG TIME AND PLACE


By Robukui

At the tender age of 23 years, Muntu left Makerere University after doing his last paper for his political science course to join Museveni’s bush war. He was driven by the urge to restore rule of law and human rights to Uganda that had broken down at the time courtesy of Yoweri Museveni who had created a situation to justify his bush war. Being a son of a prominent UPC leader (Enock Muntuoyera) who was a personal friend of the then President Obote, Muntu would have been given A BETTER JOB in government but his resolute character and urge for the freedom of others took him to the bush. Initially, in the bush he was placed under close watch on suspicion that possibly the UPC government had sent him to spy on guerrillas.

In the bush Muntu belonged to the category of ‘intellectuals’ whom the senior Commanders majority of whom were non university graduates so much detested and harassed. Because of the greed mentality of these commanders at one time Muntu together with other NCOs and led by Enock Mondo at one time planned to escape from the Museveni’s NRA and form their own fighting group. In the bush he was shot in the leg and chest and was smuggled to Kampala for treatment. Upon recovery, he rejoined the bush war. During the same time the remains of his father who had died in exile during Iddi Amin’s regime were brought back and accorded a state funeral that was graced by the then President Milton Obote who used the occasion to call on the young Mugisha Muntu to abandon the bush and return home but to no avail.
image
In the bush Muntu rose through the ranks to become first the Director of Civil Intelligence and later Director of Military Intelligence (DMI) – a position he held even during and after capturing power. As a DMI Muntu is re-known for living a very simple life while his colleagues rushed for the spoils of war that went with victory. His Aides would face difficulty in explaining the source of expensive house items that they would get for him from the army headquarters. His official car was an old blue Land Rover that he would use to carry any junior staff member that he would find on the war to and from work. This vehicle remained a property of DMI/CMI until recently when it was stolen by Charles Tumusiime Rutarago.

In one of the interviews this is what Muntu had to say about grabs “….as the war progressed, we were sure we could take over power people started talking about what they were planning, where they wanted to live,or saying I will be this, I will live in this neighborhood. It became intense when we took overpower. After taking over our intentions were to all go into the barracks but that was heavily resisted as soon as we arrived here. People started running to live in Kololo, Nakasero and I think that is where we lost it. This started creating the sense of acquisition and that went into business of and the feeling of everyone getting in to get something for himself. It has now gone into what we see today.”

As a senior officer at the timeof taking over government, Muntu was made a Lt. Col when formal ranks were introduced. He was moved from DMI and appointed as the the army’s Chief Political Commissar (CPC) before appointing him as the Division Commander of one of the NRA Divisions. Within less than a year Muntu was elevated to the rank of Maj. Gen and assigned to take charge of of the NRA as the Army Commander. Museveni’s choice of Muntu at the time was not in good faith but was meant to promote his usual divide and rule policy. While Muntu was capable of being the Army Commander, there were other more senior officers at the time who would have been elevated to the same position. The likes of Joram Mugume, Cheif Ali, Tinyefuza, Kyaligonza a.k.a Kumanyoko, Ivan Koreta, Okecho, Maruru, Nanyumba and a few others would have as well served in that capacity.As a result, there are some senior officers who vowed never to salute Mugisha Muntu as a sign of disapproval.

Through Mugisha Muntu, Museveni embarked and implemented his designs of purging certain army officers. It was during Muntu’s time that the practice of Katebe (rendering redundant) started. As a result, some unsuspecting senior officers petitioned Museveni through Gen. Saleh but to no avail. The cool headed Mugisha Muntu sailed though the rough storm. The army laid a foundation for professionalism, estalishment of terms and conditions of service, ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS, procurement of equipments etc. Its during Muntus time that the army faced seven internal rebel groups and three cross border conflicts (Rwanda, Sudan and Kenya) but by the time he left office only one (LRA) was thriving with total victory in Rwanda while diplomatic means took care of Sudan and Kenya.

Muntu’s tenure of office failed to get a partner in Museveni his Commander in Chief to fight abuse of office by senior officers who were all out to grab for personal resources that were meant to improve the welfare of ordinary soldiers.

Creation of ghost soldiers and outright theft and diversion of army supplies intensified during Muntu’s tenure. In the early 90s, Muntu took the initiative to stamp it out by instituting a team headed by Serwanga Lwanga, Ivan Koreta and Fred Bogere. The team started from the eastern region to physically identify, photograph and document every member of the NRA and auxiliary forces.

From the eastern region, the team proceeded to the northern region but half way into the exercise, Museveni called it off. Even in the units that had already been covered, Museveni blocked arrests and prosecution of the suspects arguing that it is the same commanders that were fighting the insurgency that were about to be punished. Since then vice took root and has become a traditional measure of personal loyalty and allegiance to Museveni. Unknown to Muntu at the time was the fact that thieving by army officers was Museveni’s weapon of ensuring loyalty. In aninterview this is what Muntu had to stay “….a kind of warlord mentality emerged – that you fight to take over power ; you must be recognised for it. As we moved on President Museveni’s long term plans and the warlord mentality found a meeting point. He found it difficult to deal with or punish those that participated. Eventually he became a key representative of that very mentality. He says he killed his animal…….” Muntu is one of the many people who followed Museveni to Luwero without realising that his intention was gain and hold the presidency till death.

However, the practice of Museveni purging officers whom he suspected of disloyalty flourished under Muntu’s tenure. Rendering officers redundant (Katebe) and arbitrary arrest and detention without trial took its toll. The affected officers unsuspectingly mistook Muntu to be the architect of their woes thus developing personal hatred. At one time during the funeral vigil of the late Col. Kyatuka in Old Kampala where Mugisha Muntu was among the mourners, a number of junior army officers led by Rwashande openly attacked Muntu accusing him of complicity in the death of senior officers by rendering them redundant and dying from deprivation. They openly and publicly insulted him by calling him names like ‘Omwiru’. The incident sent shook waves within the army but no disciplinary action was taken against the said junior officers who are now very Senior officersunder the Muhoozi project. Years after he had retired from the army, during a rally in Kamuli district Muntu broke down and cried mid sentence thus “When I recall the times I was forced to arrest my friends and relatives……..” Who was forcing him and who were those friends and relatives?

After serving for nine stormy years as army commander, Muntu got the rare opportunity to see tfrom the inside and grasp Museveni’s hidden intents. When Muntu decided to quit the army Museveni offered him the position of Minister of Defence which the former rejected. Museveni ordered the army to give him fifty million shillings to boost his(Muntu) stone quarry business – the only private economic means he had acquired from his earnings in army. Muntu is the only NRA officer who never stole or illegally acquired any personal wealth by virtue of his position. He is a poor man by all standards. However, it is said that his property on 10 Kyandondo Road houses the NRM headquarters.

When Muntu the former Army Commander joined the opposition, desperate Ugandans who have lost all hope of democratic change of government saw a messiah in him. They anticipated an army man who would employ militaristic approach to the sitting military government under Gen. Museveni. At worst they anticipated Gen. Mugisha Muntu to eat into Musevei’s power base – the military and run him down. Instead, Mugisha Muntu embarked on building and strengthening the leading opposition party. Some sections of Ugandans who don’t fully understand Muntu think that he is a Museveni sympathiser. Ugandans should not be fooled that Mugisha Muntu is not fully aware that Museveni can not accept to loose power through democratic means. In the current efforts to rescue the country, Muntu’s role and method of work should be compared with DP’s Paul Ssemogerere who led his party to form the opposition during the 2nd UPC government. Let us not underrate the role that was played by DP’s Ssemogere to check the excesses of the UPC government which role in turn afforded breathing space and survival of the NRA fighters. There were democratic institutions during the 2nd UPC government unlike the current military dictatorship under Museveni. The other difference is that Muntu has bullet wounds in his chest and leg. Does he fear to be shot again? For those who doubt Muntu’s capability, ask Museveni and you will be surprised. No amount of money, intimidation, blackmail or offer of top position can buy off Mugisha Muntu.

Why can’t MPs change the Assembly Law? It Is Always Besigye Vs The Police Act Sec 33….Unfortunately!


Dr.Besigye in a room after being tear gassed by Robert Arinaitwe in 2011

Dr.Besigye in a room after being tear gassed by Robert Arinaitwe in 2011


”Any assembly or procession of three or more persons which neglects or refuses to obey any order for immediate dispersal given under section 33 shall be deemed to be an unlawful assembly within the meaning of section 65 of the Penal Code Act.”

”…………Where an assembly is convened or procession formed in contravention of a prohibition under section 32, the inspector general or officer in charge of police may require the assembly to cease to be held or the procession to be stopped and may order the immediate dispersal of that assembly or procession.”

Besigye & co are making a shoddy shot at taking charge of dishing out patronage. They want power. We all need to be honest with ourselves and face that fact and forget about the nonsense of walking to work etc. Over 90% of Ugandans have always walked to work. Where was he? The pseudo-opposition’s attempt to take power is borne out of opportunism and they are only lucky that they will actually not succeed! If they succeeded, they would as soon learn the bitter lesson that opportunism never pays.

Besigye wants power but he needs to help himself by cooling down, and making a proper calculation of how he hopes to achieve that end. That business of telling us that he wants to die for the country is childish. He is not supposed to die for the country. He is supposed to live for the country.

Anyhow, the fact is that the whole all the minuscule political class of Uganda are losing the debate collectively. And Dr Besigye should make no mistake: if there is going to be a regime change in Uganda, he will be one of those to be uprooted. He is part and parcel of the regime. So is Mao…etc.

Let me be clear on this one: Dr Besigye is not an ordinary Ugandan. Let us call off that tired litany of so-called ordinary Ugandans having freedoms to walk to work. I will repeat this: more than 90% of Ugandans walk to work daily, and they have done so from time immemorial. Where has Dr Besigye been? Why now? Is he and others, changing his life style? Yes, he has the right, liberty, freedom etc. to locomote himself in anyway he wishes to the place where he works. Does he have to announce publicly that he is going to locomote himself on foot to work?

Do all those peasants in your Bulemezi, Kyaggwe and everywhere else announce that they are going to w2w? “Eeeeeeeh, Banaffe basebbo nabanyabo, abako na’bimikwano abe’Kifunfugu, Kikubanimba ne’Butuntumula; enkya kumakya ngenda kunoga fenne na’doodo, n’okuyunja kumayuuni ga bwayise. Eeeeh! Mulete kamela na vwidiyo. Obugalo.” Do they make such public announcements? Liberties, freedom? You people overdo those clichés into meaninglessness.twat

The point here is, that Dr Besigye is not your Mukasa, Kiwanuka or Musoke. If today, he announced that at 1400 Hrs tomorrow he will go to defaecate in the public toilets at the taxi park, oh yes, to defaecate; that will be a political event, especially if he invites the press and all that. Cameramen will be there, BBC will be there, NBC will be there etc. There will be a big crowd, and there will be concerns over crowd/looter control. Most likely the public authority will firmly and unwaveringly advise him to go and dump his night soil elsewhere, and preferably, in a more discrete manner. Like it or not. What more liberty is one entitled to than the liberty to heed nature’s call? But at the same time, don’t you see it being a political issue?

If Dr Besigye thinks that he has exhausted all avenues and thinks that he will confront the system while at the same time keeping himself within its domain of oversight then he has to be ready to contend with what that means, and to do so with dignity. There are several choices here, and a certain man summed them up in a book title: Exit, Voice or Loyalty….was it Albert Hirshman? All those choices go not only with rights, but also with duties and responsibilities. It is amazing also how some of you only emphasize rights.

Recall that YK Museveni opted for exit in the 1980s (and Besigye followed him!) and he faced up to all the demands of the choice he made, and I think he acquitted himself with dignity, without ever placing himself in situations where he had to squirm, scream or screech, like has become Dr Besigye’s deplorable hobby. Y.K. Museveni did not straddle the world of exit and voice, which is what Dr Besigye is doing now. Besigye needs to make up his mind, either to exit, and exit properly, or opt for voice and do so according to the rules; or be loyal and do so in whatever mode he chooses, sycophancy inclusive. Short of that, he will tire himself out, bore the public and de-spirit his admirers, for all the excuses they have for admiring him.

What is amazing are the assertions by many here that it is not a crime to go to work. The fact is that, so-called w2w is a (blind) shot by Dr Besigye at the country’s presidency. No amount of obfuscation will remove that fact. Blind shot: why? I am sure by now he may have realised that he will not easily get the numbers to make him achieve his ambitions. Just a band of police personnel were able to extract him from Kasangati with so much ease. No mobs (WBK keeps referring to “opposition mobs”) came to his rescue. For reasons we have already belaboured on this UAH forum, those mobs shall not be forthcoming….that is why Mao scattered himself to many miles away in the hamlets of his ethnic base.

Dr Besigye vowed that on failing to get to the presidency through electoral means he was going to use the Egypt approach. We have already ploughed that field of the non-viability of Egypt/Tunisia in Uganda and the quasi-opposition will only wait to learn that lesson in the course of time. As we stated here, those Egyptians that he is trying to emulate are 84 Million. They all live in 5% of the territory of that country. They are all there, physically available for mass action. Those conditions cannot be replicated in your Kampala of 1.2 million individuals during the day and 957,436 drunken souls during the night!

Besides, anyway, the Egyptian/Tunisian process was acephalous. It had no monarch in charge of it like our opposition is trying to be in charge here in Uganda. When El Barasomething tried to impose himself on the Egyptian uprising, he was soon to be stalemated into irrelevance….do you hear about him any more? He was trying to do a Besigye/Mao or whoever else. So, so, so: wrong-headed, wrong tactics, wrong era, wrong mentality….wrong alpha to zulu, Dr Besigye et al

And by the way, what would have been so wrong with asking for permission from police for those demonstrations? Why not humour them with just a bluff? Why couldn’t Besigye make a formal appeal against the results of the elections? Is that not what they call fighting a just war?….first exhausting, and being seen to first exhaust all other avenues before you reach for extraordinary avenues?

A fisherman walks to work

A fisherman walks to work

And look here: when someone comes to arrest you, why not have it done in a manner that leaves you with dignity? Why scream and kick like a spoilt brat, and let yourself be bundled on to a wheel barrow like a rabid canine? They teach them as officers that, when push comes to shove and military police comes for you, do not cause them to touch you. Dignity! For goodness’ sake, when you are an officer, you never allow the Lance corporal Ottos who have been sent to arrest you to touch you, or to get even within an inch of you. You dignify yourself by simply following the little orders they give you, especially when you know that, lazima, they have to take you along. Why scream? Even the internationals who are meant to be the consumers of the Doctor’s antics must be having their own doubts by now.

Screaming, screeching and squirming Besigye style is the worst form of self-humiliation. A future president makes no scene of himself like that. An officer, one who wants to be a Commander-in-Chief, one who wants to be a deploying officer of Generals, does not scream and kick like a toddler being forced to go to sleep without supper! Hi nimarufuku! It is sacrilege; abomination of all abominations! The way Besigye screams and kicks is a sordid manifestation of the extent to which he lost it long ago! If he cannot be in charge of himself in those little circuses, how will he be in charge of himself when the country is threatened with being overrun?

Lance Corporal (Rtd) Patrick Otto

Muhoozi’s appointments is the consequence of a Constitution that heaps all the appointing authority on the President


Friday 22 Feb 2013

While President Museveni and Dr Besigye’s face off with pen-on-paper instead of teargas and “ajjagenda (“he will go”), is appealing, I was disappointed that “Uganda’s leading politicians” spent so much space discussing the fast tracking of Brigadier Muhoozi. Has Uganda’s instability since 1964 been due to Presidents fast tracking their sons in the army? Weren’t Gen Muntu, Gen Aronda and Colonel Besigye fast tracked by the same Museveni who is fast tracking Muhoozi? Were they the most senior, eligible, competent, deserving and best choice for the positions of Army Commander, Chief of Defence Forces and Minister, respectively? Was it not the President’s arbitrary discretion? Was it ok to fast track them just because they are not his sons? Did NOT fast tracking their sons in the army make Amin and Obote good leaders? Surely the problem of Uganda is more complex than fast tracking of Muhoozi.

ALL top jobs in Uganda are nominated and appointed by the President through assignment of the constitution. These include the Vice President, Prime Minister, Ministers, Chief Justice, Justices, Judges, Ambassadors, Presidential Advisors, heads of the army, police and prisons, Permanent Secretaries, RDC’s, CAOs, Boards and Commissions of Govt Institutions and Statutory Bodies such as the Electoral Commission, Bank Of Uganda, Uganda Revenue Authority, Judicial Service Commission, Health Service Commission, Education Service Commission, Public Service Commission, Human Rights Commission, Law Reform Commission, Local Government Finance Commission, Uganda Wildlife Authority, Uganda Forestry Authority, Uganda Investment Authority, Uganda Coffee Development Authority, Uganda Cotton Authority, National Agricultural Research Organization, National Environmental Management Authority, National Planning Authority, National Water and Sewerage Corporation, Uganda Electricity Regulatory Authority, Auditor General, Inspector General of Government, Attorney General, Solicitor General, DPP, KCCA and now, the Oil Sector Regulatory Authority. Muhoozi is just one addition to this army of beneficiaries of Museveni’s indulgence.

These, and Muhoozi’s appointments are the consequence of a Constitution that heaps all the appointing authority on the President. The overall effect of this constitutional one-man show is that each of these State and Govt officials, who run Uganda with the President, has a personal stake in the Museveni Presidency and actively or passively contributes to its perpetuation, hence the inability to change Presidents, if we want to!

This is the core of Uganda’s problem which needs to be addressed.

If anybody, including Beti Kamya, became President under this constitution, s(he) would generally fill the above positions with people s(he) trusts or those recommended by people s(he) trusts. They, in turn, would be indebted to the appointing authority and the vicious circle of patronage would continue.

Most of the political issues in Uganda are traceable to the Constitution-created-one-man show.

Can the desired autonomy of the executive, judiciary and legislature work when the Executive appoints the judiciary and 20% of parliament, as provided for in the constitution? What is the effect of fusing a supposedly non-partisan State infrastructure with a legally partisan Govt? Is it pragmatic that parliament, of which 20% are appointed by the executive and 60% constantly hoping to be appointed during a cabinet reshuffle, or to be bailed out in time of need, oversee the performance of the executive?

Shouldn’t Uganda’s constitution be reshaped for its rightful role of steering Uganda to democratic order?

I invite President Museveni and Dr Besigye to raise the level of debate above Museveni and his family, (who will be part of Uganda’s past some day), to the infinite future of Uganda, by evaluating Uganda’s Constitution’s ability to provide a conducive environment to promote democratic order, of which separation of powers is a key feature.

Beti Olive Kamya-Turwomwe

President – Uganda Federal Alliance

why did opposition field candidates in Butaleja?I actually believe that it was the mother and not the president who swayed voters.


Folks:

I have been paying too much attention to the real contested election in Kenya but woke up to the news that the late Nebanda’s sister had won Butaleja women’s seat with a landslide.

So the big question: why did not the opposition FDC read the times and stay away? I mean it was clear to those with strategic savvy that a Nebanda would replace their late sister. Then out of sheer political stupidity, yes political stupidity, FDC got in the race. Dumb decision. Poor judgment. Strategic ineptitude. Name it.

The smart thing would have been to pass and let Ms. Florence Nebanda Andiru succeed the late Hon Nebanda . How on earth did FDC expect to reverse the emotional tide in Butaleja especially to go against the late Nebanda’s political savvy mother? I wonder why the mother never went for the seat herself given her political savvy. It is paper or what? She could have won with a bigger margin.

Can FDC tell us how it expected to win? And what was that about that Hon Salamu Musumba who was caught with soap and sugar was going to visit her grandmother. Really? Excuse me.

Folks, Uganda’s opposition lack political savvy to advance their cause. Butaleja is one of those cases where the opposition would have won by not fielding any candidate. That is by empathizing with the Nebanda family. FDC was the biggest loser. That is right. I mean FDC wanted to have it both ways. Criticizing NRM and sort of empathizing with the late Nebanda family. Then it jumped into the race.

It was clear from the word go that no one would go against the late Hon Nebanda’s mother in Butaleja. FDC did and got burnt big time.Politics in Uganda is a contradiction.

No way was Butaleja going to vote for FDC with a Nebanda on the ballot. Nebanda won on sheer emotion or empathy. Who in FDC could match the late Nebanda’s mother on the trail? Again even if FDC deluded itself that it could win, it should have stayed out of Butaleja.

Honestly, I do no buy the story that Ms Salamu Musumba was going to visit her grandmother. The truth of the matter is that she was going to campaign for FDC. Visiting the grandmother was secondary.

What I am saying is that given the emotions following Nebanda’s death and then having her sister nominated, it would have been better to let her sister win it without spending any political capital.

FDC does not need to be publicized in Butaleja. If I recall correctly, the FDC candidate was not even the runner up. That is why I still believe that FDC would have been better served in the long term had it gone to Butaleja to declare support for Ms Florence Nebanda Andiru. Yes to endorse and campaign for Nebanda against the two independents. FDC would have earned a lot of good will in Bunyole.

Sure there was anger towards NRM, but to their credit and to the contradiction of the family, NRM picked Ms Florence Nebanda to be their candidate. On many levels Butaleja was a contradiction of Uganda’s politics. Once NRM picked Nebanda the anger towards NRM was mitigated and Nebanda was going to win hands down. That is when FDC should have made the smart decision to stay out.

Actually what FDC did in Butaleja is similar to what NRM does during bye elections it lost or loses. NRM does not need those seats but it goes and the voters burn them. Luwero is soon coming up and NRM will be beat hands down again, but the so called mobilizers who eat the money will want to contest.

I actually believe that it was the mother and not the president who swayed voters. The agony of the mother was too much for the people of Bunyole to ignore.

For NRM, Butaleja with Nebanda is one seat they did not need to use violence. So NRM shot itself in the foot too but for them they won.

Bottom line, the opposition should mature and desist from contesting for the sake of it. I would urge FDC to stay out of Luwero women seat too, but knowing how FDC thinks, they will go there and lose again!

My reasoning is supposed to help the opposition in Uganda. I am their honest critic, plus I am an equal opportunity critic, to both NRM and the opposition. I know you see it differently but think again.

FDC made a big mistaken to contest in Bunyole, ok, Butaleja where it came in distant third or fourth.

WBK

MAFABI TEAM ARGUMENT WOULD PRODUCE A CHILUBA


The Observer’s Pius Muteekani Katunzi puts it mildly when he says that Mafabi should run a clean campaign. The reality of the Mafabi Campaign approach to the FDC leadership is nothing but a blind anti-M7( if not anti-‘westerner’) craze. Ssemujju is on record that the only ‘fault’ he finds in Muntu is the General being born where he was born. Ruranga and Sabiiti are driven by the anti-M7 factor.

What will emerge out of these unprincipled, blind drives is that we may end with a Zambia scenario, where, ‘tired’ of Kaunda, Zambians were hankering for change, ending with the curse that Chiluba was to the country and humanity. Mafabi is a good leader, but let him focus on his strengths, what he can do for Uganda, not merely trashing Muntu simply because the latter was born where he was born!! It even portends worse, because it may end up causing internal rifts in the party, to the detriment of true change in the country.

FDC leaders know their history and themselves better than we ordinary mortals do. You therefore must retreat somewhere, and rethink…you are doing this, not for your party or personal egos, but for Ugandans and humanity, unless we are hoodwinked or you are simply seeking to replace one eating class with another.

Reflect: what prevented Richard Kaijuka, Miria Matembe et al, from coming into mainstream opposition politics? You know the the truth!! Please, if you are genuinely seeking to work for Uganda and Ugandans, then your current approach must change. One strange truth FDC may need to know is that there is a whole generation out there, disillusioned with NRM, but finding no better alternative in FDC et al. This generation needs to be given hope and it’s not tool late.

God Save Uganda

Sandra Birungi
sandexbit@yahoo.com.au

————————————————————-
Sometime ago that is about a year or so,I peddled on this forum something to the effect that there are political organizations/parties whose leadership can come from the greater Eastern part of Uganda and still get elected to State house but many people appear not to remember.Unfortunately FDC is not that Organization I talked about.

Electing Mafabi Nandala as FDC leader will see the demise of FDC faster than it was formed. Many of us are taken up by Mr Mafabi’s paper qualifications as being evidence of his leadership ability.
Unfortunately we do not want to go to the ground to unmask what Mafabi claims are his political achievements.

Like I stated in my rejoinder to Alhajji Semuwemba,apart from the Sironko conclave and Mbale Municipality,all the other constituencies in the Bugisu subregion are represented by NRM.What is even interesting is that much as Mafabi ensured mainly yea sayers are elected on the FDC ticket in Sironko,the presidential poll results speaks differently because Museveni rather Besigye carried the day at the last election.

So,instead of pouring praises on Mafabi,we should be critiquing what type of leadership he will provide and not just wowing his school paper achievements.By using such narrow paradigms to identify good leadership,we shall be taking Ugandans from the frying pan into the real fire itself.

Thus have exhaustive discussions with the residents of Sironko district before giving Mafabi a carte blanche to leadership. Incidentally Mbale Municipality has always voted against the Movement even during the days of the late Wapa(RIP) where he always had to wheel and deal inorder to go back to NRC then later parliament.

Besides,the majority of the so called FDC leaders within the Municipality were yesterdecades UPCs who are now disillusioned by UPC not taking a militaristic stance to NRM hence their finding easy refuge in FDC which outwardly portrays itself as being militant till crumbs are offered to them then they mellow down.
Dr. Owor Kipenji

%d bloggers like this: