Category archives for: Uganda

Mbale Market Chokes On Uncollected Garbage Stench

By Mudangha Kolyangha & Salume Akello

Mbale — The continued non collection of garbage in Mbale Main Market has seen a stench engulf the facility, making it undesirable.

The Shs27 billion market, which was built under government’s Markets and Agricultural Trade Improvement Programme, hosts about 8,338 vendors.

“The market is stinking. Heaps of garbage are littered everywhere. We operate in a very filthy environment yet we pay money to the municipal leaders to keep the market clean,” says Mr James Wandulu, a watermelon seller.

Mr Wandulu says as traders, they have got used to the odour but he pities his customers, who are often seen covering their noses to avoid the stench.

“When you enter the market, it’s the smell of garbage that welcomes you, that is the reason why most of our customers cover their noses. The stench is too much to bear,” he says.

Each vendor pays to Municipal council Shs300 every month for garbage collection and the farmers who bring their produce to the market pay Shs5,000.

“I have developed a running stomach which I believe is as a result of inhaling bad air,” says Ms Annet Gidudu, a tomato seller.

Ms Gidudu says poor hygiene in the market has tremendously affected their business.

“We are making losses because customers have been chased away by the smell. Those that come always order us to serve them very first and they leave,” she says.

They accused the municipal council leaders of demanding money from them and yet they fail to collect garbage.

Mr Ayub Madoyi, the chairman of the market, says the trouble started after the municipal council terminated their contract last year.

“The leaders terminated our contract and awarded it to HomeTake Investments (U) Ltd and all responsibilities were shifted to the contractor. That was the beginning of the problem,” he says.

Mr Madoi says when they were in charge of garbage collection, the market was clean.

He says municipal council leaders should consider giving back the contract to market management.

Mr James Kutosi, the municipality spokesperson, acknowledges the vendors grievances, saying they are looking for a permanent solution to the garbage.

“We know what they are going through that is why the council has resolved to repair two trucks and one truck will be stationed at the market on a daily basis,” he says.

He adds that this will help solve the problem of garbage piling up in the market.

He adds that they have also decided to terminate the contract awarded to Hometake Investments (U) Ltd.

“The company has failed to perform well its duties as garbage could stay on the road for several days without collecting it yet the vendors pay the revenue for tax collection,” he says.

Mr Kutosi adds they have already got a team to manage garbage until they find a lasting solution.

KCCA Chance to Seize Full Benefits

By Andrew Mwanguhya

Kampala — Police coach Abdallah Mubiru was quick to play down his side’s title prospects after Saturday’s 2-1 victory over contenders Vipers.

“Our target,” said Mubiru, “Is clear. We want to be competitive. Whatever teams we play against, we try to compete. We are not thinking about winning the league at the moment but winning games which we can.”

Competitive – with three wins, albeit one coming from a boardroom decision, in five games – they have been.

The intent was more laid out at the weekend, Police confronting Vipers and beating them to reclaim table leadership, on goal difference.

It is the kind of competition Vipers have agonizingly experienced first-hand, and one KCCA – fourth on nine points – feel at every glance upwards the log.

But with the top three on 10 points apiece – Police, Onduparaka and Vipers – not in action today, it is manager Mike Mutebi’s KCCA with the earliest chance to get out of their stop-start season by beating Bright Stars to go top.

The Azam Uganda Premier League (AUPL) champions will hope their first away positive result, a comprehensive 3-1 victory at Bul at the weekend, is a sign of good things to come.

Paul Mucureezi, Tito Okello and Patrick Kaddu were on target for that after KCCA had fallen to a Richard Wandyaka 18th minute strike.

Today, they have a boost in the return from injury of midfield player Sadam Juma, who will be making his league debut for KCCA this season since moving from Express at the end of the last campaign.

“That’s why we brought him to solve that problem of what you call a destroyer, that midfielder who sits in front of the back three,” said Mutebi.

“We’ve been suffering from that… not only at KCCA but Uganda at large. We believe he (Sadam) will remedy that problem by holding the ball intelligently and distributing it.”

Against Bright Stars, KCCA, however, come up against a side that are wounded after a 1-0 home defeat to Maroons.

Fred Kajoba, the Bright Stars coach, is asking for more from his team, and hopes his captain Nelson Senkatuka has his scoring boots on.

“Three goals in five matches is not bad for Senkatuka but he needs to convert more,” he said, “And we are working on it.” Kajoba will hope that starts against the team Senkatuka played for, on loan, today.

At Namboole, two beaten sides on their last outing, URA and Bul, fight it out all looking to get back on their feet.

Ibrahim Kirya, the URA coach, is under fire following a difficult start to the campaign. URA have won just one game in five attempts, with their last one a 1-0 defeat away to Express. The tax collectors and Bul are 11th and 10th respectively, with five points apiece.


Kirinya Jinja SSS Vs Proline

Bugembe Stadium, Jinja 4:00pm:(Live on Azam TV)

KCCA FC Vs Bright Stars FC

StarTimes Stadium, Lugogo 4:30pm


M. National Stadium, Namboole 4:30pm


Milton Karisa 3 Vipers SC

Caesar Okhuti 2 Onduparaka FC

Muzamir Mutyaba 2 KCCA FC

Norman Ogik 2 Police FC

Ezekiel Katende 2 UPDF FC

Nelson Senkatuka 2 Bright Stars FC

Dan Sserunkuma 2 Express FC

Fahad Bayo 2 Proline FC

Joseph Mandela 2 Proline FC

2017 Raid of Parliament Worse Than 1966 Edition

opinionBy Muniini K Mulera

Dear Tingasiga: The playwright or Hollywood scriptwriter has plenty of material to produce a great drama, even a thriller, out of the military invasion of the Ugandan Parliament on April 15, 1966 and on September 27 this year.

As usual, the movie goers, like newspaper readers, are bound to get the impression that the 2017 invasion was a replica of the one in 1966. The tendency to gloss over the details creates false impressions. The devil, as they say, is in the details. The two events, both of them extremely consequential, were in fact quite different.

First, the 2017 invasion. Too fresh in our minds to warrant detailed description.

Summary: Yoweri Museveni, the 73-year-old President who has ruled the place for nearly 32 years, appears to be in full control of the State. He wants to keep his gig until he dies or quits on his own terms. So, he wants Parliament to amend the Constitution to enable him to stand for election after he turns 75.

But first he must deal with a group of MPs, including members of his ruling party, who are opposing his scheme.

With Speaker Rebecca Kadaga’s cooperation, the President sends in military men and women, most of them in plain clothes, to invade the Chamber of Parliament, where they severely beat and arrest the opponents of the Bill, leaving several injured.

To those with sharp memories, it is obvious that the recent invasion is worse than the terrible event of 1966.

Apollo Milton Obote, the prime minister, has spent several months fending off an attempt by a coalition consisting of some of his Cabinet ministers, president Edward Luwangula Muteesa II (who is the Kabaka of Buganda), MP Daudi Ocheng, and Brig Shaban Opolot, the army commander, that wants to remove him from power.

The story is well known and well documented. Suffice to say that the plotters have tried both constitutional and military options to overthrow Obote. Thwarted attempts to arrest him on at least two occasions have tipped the contest toward inevitable confrontation.

The military coup is set for Tuesday, February 22, 1966. Obote gets wind of it.

On the fateful morning, the police arrest five of his ministers during a Cabinet meeting. The men – Grace Ibingira, Emmanuel Lumu, Balaki Kirya, George Magezi amd Matiya Ngobi – are part of the plotters of the coup.

Two days later, Obote suspends the 1962 Constitution. Claiming to be acting in the interest of “national stability and public security and tranquility,” he assumes all powers of the Government of Uganda and embarks on rule by decree.

To legalise his coup d’état, Obote needs a new Constitution. He orders Godfrey Lukongwa Binaisa, the Attorney General, to do the needful. Binaisa, together with Nkambo Mugerwa, the Solicitor General, and Kofi Crabbe, a Ghanaian draftsman, sets to work. They write it in one night. The draft of the new Constitution is to be tabled before Parliament the next day, April 15, 1966.

However, the MPs are not given copies of the draft document. To avoid any hiccups, a military invasion of Parliament is ordered.

One eyewitness who has written an excellent account for posterity is Omunyoro Baganchwera Barungi, Clerk to the National Assembly at the time. In his book, Parliamentary Democracy in Uganda: The Experiment that Failed, Omunyoro Barungi writes: “On the day the new Constitution of 1966 was introduced in the National Assembly, an outside observer standing at a distance from Parliament House, would have rightly mistaken the precincts of Parliament as part of a military post or garrison.

Bands of heavily armed soldiers were stationed in the beautiful and well-maintained parliamentary gardens that were used from time to time for cocktail parties and other government functions. Members of Parliament were searched not only at the main entrance of the building, but also in the Division Lobbies as they entered the Chamber. Typical of Ugandan politicians, none but one member (Shafiq Arain, a Ugandan Asian), protested against such high-handedness in dealing with Honourable Members of Parliament.”

Binaisa pilots the Constitution through Parliament.

The Opposition MPs together with four government MPs, walkout in protest. A vote is held and 55 MPs vote in favour of a document they have not read. Only four oppose it. All are offered a chance to read the draft after the fact. Copies are available in their mail boxes.

Whether or not the Narendra Patel, the Speaker of Parliament, had sanctioned the military invasion is not clear.

What we know is that, unlike Kadaga, Patel was a fair-minded Speaker, who had allowed Opposition MPs great latitude to challenge Obote and his government. For example, it was Patel who allowed Daudi Ocheng to move a motion on February 4, 1966 urging the government to suspend Col Idi Amin of the Uganda Army. Patel would have been aware that Ocheng was part of the anti-Obote plotters.

There is a hierarchy even in the world of evil deeds and other crimes. Whereas the military invasions of Parliament in 1966 and 2017 were major violations of the sanctity of that institution, the 2017 one struck deep in the heart of a country that has been struggling to find its feet since the collapse of the experiment 51 years ago.

The 1966 invasion set the stage for military control of the Legislature and, five years later, a military coup that would destroy everything. The 2017 invasion has snuffed out the faint flicker of hope that Uganda might find its way out of the dark hole into which it was thrown by the events of 1966. Fifty years of history and experience have not changed the ruler’s attitude.

Tooro Elders Reject Removal of Age Limit

By Alex Ashaba & Felix Basiime

Kabarole — Tooro elders under their umbrella body Isaazi ly’Abaantu Bakuru Ba Tooro have expressed their objection to the Bill, seeking to amend Article 102 (b) of the Constitution to remove the presidential age limit and asked the movers to drop it.

In an October 10 statement, the elders say there are more burning issues in the country such as poverty, diseases and famine than the “luxurious” amendments on the age limit and land law which are being fronted by “selfish individuals”.

They say the amendment of the Article is likely to cause chaos in the country and warned that when violence erupts, it does not discriminate between the culpable and the innocent as they will be affected alike.

A Bill is already in Parliament seeking to remove Article 102(b) which bars a person aged below 35 or above 75 from standing for president.

Mr Museveni, now 73, will not be eligible to stand for president again in 2021 as he will be 77.

The Bill has been referred to the Parliamentary and Legal Affairs committee for scrutiny and MPs have been released to do public consultations about the proposed Constitution amendment.

The elders also noted more pressing issues for amendment and cited the provision on election of political leaders under the affirmative action.

They advised Cabinet and Parliament to listen to the voices of religious leaders, opinion leaders and other sections of the population who have rejected the amendment of the Constitution.

“We note with concern that there are some provisions in the Constitution which were to be reviewed within a specified time but have been delayed. The voices of those against amendment should also be tolerated,” the elders stated.

Some religious leaders have publicly expressed objections to the Constitution amendment to remove the age limit.

The elders also urged elected leaders from Tooro to represent the views of the electorate by focusing on improvement of healthcare, education services and spearhead development.

The elders join other people in the region who are against amending Article 102(b), including Fort Portal Municipality MP Alex Ruhunda, Sylvia Rwabwogo (Kabarole District Woman MP) and Bishop Reuben Kisembo of Rwenzori Diocese.


Byandala Has Case to Answer in Mukono-Katosi Road Saga

The head of the Anti-Corruption Court Justice Lawrence Gidudu has ordered former Works Minister Eng. Abraham Byandala… Read more »

Constitution Should Not Be Tampered With By Politicians

opinionBy Peter Mulira

The political mayhem surrounding the presidential age-limit debate forced many people to opt out of the debate and leave the fate of the country in the hands of Members of Parliament.

However, after listening to the wisdom of some senior citizens who spoke at a workshop organised by the Elders Forum last Friday, one was forced to reflect on the current political situation in the country in which constitutional matters are being confused with political issues. A national constitution should be above politics and that is why the Constitution itself makes a distinction between the political work of Parliament and its special powers to amend the Constitution.

Article 79 of the Constitution sets out the political functions of Parliament to include:

– The power to make laws on any matter for the peace, order, development and good governance of Uganda.

– The power to confer authority on any person or body to make provisions having the force of law.

– The duty to protect the constitution and promote the democratic governance of Uganda.

In furtherance of these functions, Parliament is given power under Article 94 to make rules to regulate its procedure and Article 94(4)(b) specifically gives a Member of Parliament the right to move a private member’s Bill subject to the following limitations

– The member moving the private member’s Bill must seek assistance of the department of government whose area of operation is affected by the Bill.

– The Attorney General’s office must be involved in drafting of the Bill.

Article 259 of Chapter Eighteen of the Constitution gives special powers to Parliament to amend the Constitution. These powers are separate from the political powers, which are bestowed on Parliament.

Accordingly, the rules governing the procedure to enact laws cannot be used for purposes of amending the Constitution. Indeed Article 259 provides that ‘Parliament may amend any provision of the Constitution according to procedure laid down in this chapter’, meaning Chapter Eighteen and not Chapter Five.

The only way the Constitution can be amended is by first and foremost enacting a law implementing the provision of Chapter Eighteen and making rules under that law providing for procedure for such amendment. The Bill before Parliament was introduced by a private member according to rules, which govern the political work of Parliament, which makes it unconstitutional.

Secondly, even if the current rules of parliamentary procedure were considered to be applicable, the preparation of the Bill would still render it unconstitutional because it was not done according to the requirements of the Constitution.

Article 94(c) and (d) require that the member moving the Bill should have sought the assistance of the Ministry of Constitutional Affairs as the department of government most affected by the Bill as well as the professional assistance of the office of the Attorney General should have been sought in its drafting.

These provisions are important and are in line with the idea that the Constitution should not be capriciously and indiscriminately tampered with by politicians.

Lastly a bill to amend the constitution can only be assented to by the President if it is accompanied by a certificate of the Speaker that the provisions of chapter eighteen have been complied with in relation to it.

This chapter does not confer on a private member the right to move a bill to amend the constitution. As such Hon.Raphel Magyezi’s bill is irregularly and unconstitutionally before august house.

The political and constitutional confusion caused by Hon. Magyezi’s bill can only be sorted out through sober dialogue and the willingness to accept wise counsel.

Mr Mulira is a lawyer.

Let’s Not Blind Ourselves, Museveni Wants to Stay in Power Forever

opinionBy Nicholas Sengoba

There are none so blind as those who will not see.’ Jonathan Swift used this in his Polite Conversation in 1738. This resembles the biblical verse (Jeremiah 5:21,) ‘hear this, you foolish and senseless people, who have eyes, but do not see, who have ears but do not hear.’

It was also used in 1713 in the ‘Works of Thomas Chalkley’.

Here the full saying goes ‘there are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know.’

When the NRM/A took over government in January 1986, there was a great sigh of relief.

Uganda had been through a lot of chaos and was ready for anything that would arrest the situation.

Uganda was hungry and like it is said in the Bible (Proverbs 27:7,) ‘one who is full loathes honey from the comb, but to the hungry, even what is bitter tastes sweet,’ so we took almost everything hook, line and sinker.

Time did not stand still. The four years became 10. Then the 10 years became 20 years.

In 2005, the Constitution was amended to lift the term limits, which will take us to 35 years by 2021. It is likely to go beyond that, should Article 102(b) be amended to lift the age limit capped at 75.

This will allow Museveni to contest at the age of 77 and as happened whenever he has been on the ballot paper, he will be announced winner. Throughout this period, Uganda changed tremendously in terms of security, infrastructural development, economic growth and order, among many other things.

But it has also had very many dark spots which should have opened our eyes wider to the danger of being lackadaisical to the extent of allowing Museveni to become so dominant and apparently insurmountable.

Political party activities and several freedoms were curtailed to purportedly heal the wounds that Uganda had suffered under the bad regimes of the past. Uganda ‘understood’ and accepted it after all we needed to sleep peacefully.

Whenever President Museveni’s hold onto power was challenged by things as mundane as public rallies by the opposition, he reacted very aggressively and with intolerance. Famously, for the DP Mobilisers group’s attempted rally at the City Square Museveni promised that there would be dead bodies if they dared.

In 2002, Jimmy Higenyi, a Journalism student covering a demonstration by UPC supporters, was shot dead by police, who accused UPC of holding an ‘illegal assembly.’ Still it was said ‘multipartyists’, who had been dumped on the garbage heap of history, were planning to disrupt the peace and tranquility ushered in by NRM.

We acknowledged that this would be putative way of guarding the peace. Media houses were at times closed and journalists locked up occasionally if they wrote stories that did not please the government. Self-censorship became an acceptable culture in the media.

The war in the north and north east documented numerous atrocities by the national army.

The burning alive of people in the Bukora pit and Mukura train wagon incidents were the highlights.

Here many in the south and south west silently acquiesced with these atrocities claiming people in those areas were receiving the comeuppance for what Amin and Obote did to them before NRM arrived as a saviour.

When public money was stolen or squandered, the official line was that those who stole this money invested it here and it did a lot to enhance economic growth and development.

Under NRM, we witnessed several violent and bribe-induced shambolic elections that maintained the status quo and we traded those in for ‘as long as we could do our business peacefully.’

Almost every facet that is supposed to enhance good governance was isolated and weakened while the rest of the country turned a blind eye minding their own business. That is how we ended up with the Judiciary, hapless Legislature, police and local administration that we have today.

Hospitals and schools degenerated. The economy failed to employ the armies of young people who flooded the cities and eventually resorted to crime that threatens the lives and property of everyone.

On the other hand, the sum total of the abuse of power by NRM was the disempowerment of the people of Uganda to the extent that almost no individual or collective group can stand up and speak truth to power without fear.

Meaningful power ostensibly became the preserve of the person of the President.

This mediocrity and acceptance of ominous situations, ‘as long as we can sleep,’ or because yesterday was worse than today, is the convenient blindness Jonathan Swift talked about in his Polite Conversation.

Now that Museveni has come out with bare knuckles to support the amendment of the Constitution, which allows him rule perpetually, we have to make amends and open our eyes to the gloomy reality that stares at us. History will not forgive us if we don’t.

Nicholas Sengoba is a commentator on political and social issues.

Cheeye’s Analysis On Uganda Economy Wrong, Misleading

opinionBy Bob A. Kasango

In his weekly column in the Sunday Monitor of October 15, 2017, Mr Teddy Ssezi Cheeye, in an opinion titled, “Museveni’s letter to Kyagulanyi: What are the real issues? Part I”, Cheeye raised a number of economic and political issues and answers them with his figures.

He quotes President Museveni at length and then goes on to challenge “President Museveni and his NRM intellectuals to mathematically show Ugandans how our Goss Domestic Product (GDP) has grown to over $25bn (Shs90 trillion) in the last 30 years and how they arrive at a GDP per capita income of more than $700”.

I am responding to the issues you raised not because I am an “NRM intellectual”. No. I have never been hired as one, but I am a Ugandan; so, I feel duty-bound to respond to your inaccurate mischaracterisation of facts and figures.

For ease of communication, I will not delve into the complex econometric calculus that you demand of President Museveni and “his NRM intellectuals”. It is clear to me from the onset though that even you, Mr Cheeye, while accusing President Museveni and his government of “lack of knowledge”, your article and conclusions are the offspring of little or no knowledge at all. And so I shall not get very granular on the subject.

I have over the years of reading and listening to critics of President Museveni and of African governments generally, come to the inescapable conclusion that most of these critics are just ignorant and blinded by anger.

In 1986, the GDP of Uganda as per the World Bank was $3.9bn (Shs14 trillion) based on the reigning exchange rate. Government then fixed the exchange rate artificially. The real exchange rate or what after the 1992 economic liberalisation is called the “market exchange rate” was then called the “black market or magendo” rate.

The magendo rate reflected the true value of the Uganda shilling against the US dollar – its actual purchasing power. Mr Cheeye ignores this in his “knowledgeable” exposé of NRM’s “lack of knowledge”!

In order to arrive at the accurate GDP figure, one would have to calculate Uganda’s rate of economic growth from 1986 until 1992 when the exchange rate was liberalised, which is a true reflection of the actual purchasing power of the shilling, and then establish the rate of growth in 1992 and deflate it backwards to 1986, to establish the actual GDP in US Dollars at the time.

We would then adjust the dollars to 30 years later and only then would one arrive at a correct statistical analysis of the GDP growth over the period 1986 -2016. It is simple arithmetic and basic econometrics.

Because Cheeye and his ilk do not possess this basic knowledge of econometrics, they do not understand the wider economic concepts of growth and development and it is difficult to engage in an informed debate with them in this forum.

Let us, for instance, take a quick look at Africa’s and the world’s economic trajectory since 1960 as a base year. There were 200 countries categorised by the World Bank as “poor” or “developing countries”, Uganda inclusive. Only two of those have transformed from poor to rich and industrialised over the period 1960-2016. They are South Korea and Taiwan. No other country has achieved that feat.

Of the 200 countries categorised as “developing” in 1960, 101 of them were categorised as “middle income”. Of these 101, Only 13 progressed from middle-income status to industrialised countries, with Botswana being the only Africa country to have made the grade.

Botswana was the only outlier in Africa largely because of its immense diamond wealth, a functioning democracy that found a way with inspired leadership and sound economic policies. The others were Brazil, China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Malta, Oman, Singapore, Taiwan and Thailand. These countries managed to grow for 25 years or more uninterrupted at the rate of 7 per cent per annum or higher.

The point is, therefore, that the process of development is difficult and quite often tedious. Economic growth and development are a marathon, not a sprint. But the likes of Mr Cheeye would want Museveni to have engaged in it as a sprint. Even where it has been a sprint, there have been, as will always be, only one or two Usain Bolts like Taiwan and South Korea!

What it is about these countries that made them register these phenomenal and sustained high growth rates over a very long period of time? As you can notice, the list includes Japan, Brazil and the Asian Tigers – no surprise there!

In all of them as in the case of Botswana, it was very long periods of political stability and inspired leadership and, in the case of Japan, heavily financed post-war rebuilding played a major role.

Crucially, they benefitted from what in economics is known as the ‘Rule of 72’. Many people, like Mr Cheeye, cannot do logarithmic functions in their heads, but can do simple calculus like 72 divide by 8 and get almost the same result. Conveniently, 72 is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9 and 12, making the calculation even simpler.

In economics, the rule states thus: If a variable grows at the rate of 1 per cent per annum, it will double every one hundred years and if it grows at the rate of 3.5 per cent per annum, it will double every 20 years. But if any variable under measurement grows at the rate of 7 per cent per annum, it will double every 10 years.

A rate of growth of 7 per cent per annum is about the highest rate of growth any country has registered in history, with the notable exception of China (in the last 30 years) and South Korea (1960-1990) that registered unprecedented growth rates of 9.8 per cent and 9.2 per cent ,respectively.

To arrive at the net GPD growth rate, the population growth rate must be discounted. In the case of South Korea, the population growth rate in that period was about 2.1 per cent per annum, making its real GDP growth rate 7.1 per annum per annum.

What Korea achieved in 30 years was managed by Britain in 180 years and the United States of America in 175 years! And so for Cheeye to argue that President Museveni has failed to “Singaporise” Uganda in 30 years is the same thing as berating our businessmen and women for not being like Mark Zuckerberg or Bill Gates at the tender ages they did or at all.

Under Mr Museveni whom the Cheeye’s and Kyandondo East MP Rober Kyagulanyi’s, or Bobi Wine, love to attack and belittle, GDP growth between 1986 and 2016 has been a respectable sustained 6.7 per cent per annum.

That rate has made Uganda the 17th fastest-growing economy in the world. If one excluded mineral rich nations that hugely benefitted from especially the oil boom of the 2000s, Uganda climbs to 11th position in the world and number One in Africa over the last 30 years.

That is not an easy feat to achieve, and these facts are readily available from the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF) or the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or any other organisation of repute, because the likes of Mr Cheeye will be quick to say Uganda’s figures are cooked or that President Museveni bribed the authors!

The USA has the second highest per capita income (about $56,000 or Shs202m) of any country with a hinterland in the world, beaten only by Norway. To achieve this status, the USA sustained a per capita income growth rate of just 2 per cent per annum from 1900 to 2000.

What we learn from all this is that in order to be where the Cheeye’s would like Mr Museveni to have delivered us takes a very long and sustained period of uninterrupted high growth rates.

Under President Museveni, Uganda has registered an average per capita income growth rate of about 3.5 per cent per annum. By comparison, the only other country in the world that has registered the same rate for a sustained period of 30 years is Germany after World War II.

In the last 30 years, Uganda’s growth rate has been outdone by only Singapore.

So why is it that Uganda is still poor or do the critics think so? There are in my view four major reasons:

1. The process of development takes such a long time and 30 years, while seemingly long to the critics, is not as long as is requisite to achieve what the Mr Cheeye’s want Mr Museveni to have achieved.

2. Uganda transformed so rapidly that many forget or just do not know where the transformation began and where we are. So they do not appreciate the achievement.

3. Per capita income does not take into account investment in factors likely to impact positively upon development such as health, education or infrastructure and it is clear that Mr Cheeye ignores that too.

4. A rapidly high population growth rate that is, in the medium term, impacting negatively upon the GDP growth rate.

Going by the Rule of 72, Uganda’s income per capita stood at $150 (Shs540,000) in 1986. At the sustained per capita income growth rate of 3.5 per cent per annum, it can only double very 20 years. And that has about been the case. In fact, Uganda out-performed and defied the basic rule.

And so, Mr Museveni will never be the President that takes the credit for the foundation for a high income that he has laid. To achieve today’s Singapore per capita income as the Cheeye’s demand, will take at least another 40 years of the same sustained growth. It is a good ask, but very unrealistic to think that in just 30 years we should have Singaporised.

To the Cheeye’s and Kyagulanyis, I say: The criticism and demands are good as checks on government, and a lot may be wrong with our governance and management of public affairs, but it is not the doom and gloom you portray.

Pastor Kakande Defies Bamugemereire Led Commission On Nema Permit

By Christopher Kisekka & Al-Mahdi Ssenkabirwa

Masaka — City Pastor Samuel Kakande has declined to submit the Environment Impart Assessment (EIA) permit to the National Environmental Management Authority (Nema) as directed by the Justice Catherine Bamugemereire’s – led commission of inquiry, Daily Monitor has established.

While closing the public hearing on land maters in Masaka on October 6, Justice Bamugemereire directed Pastor Kakande of Synagogue Church of All Nations, who personally appeared before the commission, to return his EIA permit to Nema for cancellation after violating certain laws.

Mr Kakande had been given an ultimatum of October 10, 2017 to fulfil this requirement which he failed to comply with.

According to records before the Commission, Mr Kakande under his Aqua World Uganda Ltd owns over 40 square miles of land along the shores of Lake Victoria in Masaka, part of which has wetlands and forests which have been greatly depleted.

Justice Bamugemereire had also directed Mr Kakande to immediately halt farming activities in the area, remove all his graders and excavators, surrender copies of his audited books of accounts, copies of his company annual tax returns to Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) among other vital documents to the commission to allow it investigate alleged fraud in acquisition of land in the area.

Mr Kakande was also directed to appear before Masaka District environment authorities in person since they complained that he was elusive and had earlier turned down their summons.

According to Ms Noami Karekaho, the Nema spokesperson, the Authority has not yet received the permit from ‘the man of God.’

“Pr Kakande has obstinately refused to return that permit even after writing to him, we thought that he would bring it as the commission directed, but he is still dilly-dallying, I think the law should now take its course, ” Ms Karekaho said during a telephone interview last weekend .

Ms Karekaho told Daily Monitor that Nema had warned Mr Kakande after discovering that he had failed to adhere to the set terms before he was granted the permit to grow palm oil ,but he kept a deaf ear.

“During our investigations we discovered that Pastor Kakande had violated the EIA when he carried out rice growing, instead of palm oil, we terminated his permit, but continued with his activities” Ms Karekaho added.

But Mr Mathias Kintu, the coordinator of Pastor Kakande’s projects in Masaka, said they had complied with everything Justice Bamugemereire’s commission asked for but insisted that it was pointless to return an EIA permit to Nema yet it had already been cancelled.

“Nema has the powers to cancel permits and once they do it then the document becomes as good as useless. Let them write to us informing us that our permit was cancelled,” Mr Kintu said.

However, Ms Karekaho noted that it is a requirement to return the permit to Nema as someone may wrongly continue to use it.

She further revealed to Daily Monitor that after asking Mr Kankande to return the said permit, he instead submitted new terms of reference applying to grow rice.

“We told him that we cannot grant him a new permit unless when he has returned the one that was cancelled,” she added.

The commission of inquiry into land maters is still investigating circumstances under which the pastor acquired over 40 square miles off the shores of Lake Victoria. Mr Kakande has since accepted to cooperate. Information before the commission indicates that Ms Noeline Ndagire , a secretary to Mr Kakande purchased 150 hectares of land from Masaka District land board at only Shs250,000 on September 30, 2014 , which she later sold to Mr Kakande at over Shs70 million which the commission found irregular.

Another questionable land deal was that of 235 hectares in Buwunga Sub -county in Masaka District which was allocated to the deputy Chief of Defense Forces, Lt. Gen Wilson Mbadi at Shs200,000 which the latter also reportedly sold to Pastor Kakande at Shs80million after a few days. This implies that Pr Kakande purchased each acre of land from Gen Mbadi at Shs851, which the commission found to be irregular.

He told the commission that though the land is registered in his names, it will soon be transferred in the names of Synagogue Church of Nations, which he heads, insisting that the property belongs to his followers.

Former Minister, Co-Accused Ordered to Defend Selves Over Road Scam

Photo: Michael Kakumirizi/Daily Monitor

Former transport and works minister Abraham Byandala, left, appearing with Ssebugga Kimeze, centre, and Joe Semugooma before the anti-corruption court in Kololo recently.

By Ephraim Kasozi

Court in Kampala has ordered former works minister, Abraham Byandala and his co-accused persons to defend themselves in a case in which government lost Shs24.7 billion in the botched Mukono-Katosi road project.

Justice Lawrence Gidudu of the Anti- Corruption Court in Kololo on Monday ruled that prosecution had established a prima facie case against Mr Byandala, businessman Apolo Senkeeto alias Mark Kalyesubula who was the country representative of Eutaw Construction Company, former UNRA acting executive director Eng Berunado Ssebbugga Kimeze, Mr Joe Ssemugooma (former director of finance and administration), Mr Wilberforce Senjako (former regional accountant) and Mr Isaac Mugote (former staff of Housing Finance Bank).

However, court explained that prosecution had not proved the case beyond reasonable doubt.

Eutaw Construction Company is accused of fleecing UNRA Shs24.7 billion in the collapsed Katosi road contract.

The suspects who deny any wrong doing have since asked the court to dismiss the charges arguing that prosecution evidence was marred by controversies and inconsistences that cannot warrant them to be put on defence.

Prosecution states that Mr Byandala abused his office while holding the Works ministry, when in a November 14, 2013 letter he directed the immediate signing of the contract between UNRA and Eutaw yet the company lacked capacity to carry out the road works.

The Inspector general of government, who is prosecuting the case, also states that Byandala in another August 27, 2014 letter further abused his office by ordering the continuation of the works on the Katosi road by Chongqing International Construction Company. The IGG contends that this act also amounted to disobeyed lawful orders by Byandala.

The IGG alleges that Mr Kimeze abused his office when he signed a contract with Eutaw without establishing that there was a valid performance guarantee and issued a payment guarantee which allowed the payment of over Shs24 billion to the detriment of UNRA’s interests.

Mr Kimeze is separately and jointly charged with Mr Semugooma over causing financial loss to the government by approving payment of the Shs24 billion to Eutaw despite glaring defects in the due-diligence report.

More on This

Discontent Over Chinese Contractors’ Domination Rocks Roads Sector

The management of the Uganda National Roads Authority (UNRA) is on the spot over allegations of opaque… Read more »

Monitor, Red Pepper Editors Appear At CID Over Age Limit Budget Story

By Andrew Bagala

Daily Monitor and Red Pepper editors have appeared at the Criminal Investigations Directorate (CID) for questioning over age limit budget story.

Mr Dan Kalinaki, the NMG Uganda general manager- Editorial and Mr Charles Bichachi, the executive editor appeared at the Kibuli based Media Crime department in the company of their lawyer, Mr James Nangwala and the Daily Monitor company secretary, Mr Timothy Ntale. Mr Richard Kintu of Red Pepper also reported with his lawyer.

This come after Police authorities last week summoned the editors after the story in question was published on October 12 in the Daily Monitor under the headline: Age limit budget for 23-man team leaks.

“You are therefore in pursuance of the provisions of Section 27A of the Police Act (as amended) required to report before the undersigned at CID headquarters Kibuli on 16 October 2017 at 10:00hrs in that regard,” a letter signed by Mr Isaac Oketcho on behalf of the Director Criminal Investigations reads in part.

The police summons come hot on the heels of the controversial ‘Age Limit Bill’, which seeks to amend Article 102 (b) to remove the age caps for presidency.

According to Daily Monitor’s story, at least 23 legislators, 15 Parliament staff, 15 police officers and five drivers are to draw Shs17.7m in allowances more than 10 days for upcountry consultations on the proposal to scrap presidential age limit.

Reacting to CID summonses last week, Mr Bichachi said: “We are curious to know what issues the police or any other party has with our story that is grounded in facts, balance and perspective. We shall report to CID as summoned and hear what police has to say.”

“The removal or retention of the age limit cap in the constitution is a matter that touches on every Ugandan. We shall cover it in its entirety for the benefit of our readers and the country in general,” he added.

The draft Bill to scrap the presidential age limit caps from the 1995 Constitution was recently tabled by Mr Magyezi amid stern protests from MPs across the political divide.

House Speaker Rebecca Kadaga forwarded the Bill to the Committee on Legal and Parliamentary Affairs after security operatives stormed the Chambers and evicted those opposed to the lifting of the presidential age limit.

Next month, the 23-man committee, led by Mr Jacob Oboth Oboth, the West Budama South legislator is expected to crisscross the country soliciting views of Ugandans on the controversial Bill.

Two weeks ago, Ms Kadaga adjourned the House (sine die) to allow members consult their voters.

The Daily Monitor last week broke the story of the Legal Committee draft budget for conducting the public hearings on the age limit bill. It is this leaked Shs715m budget, confirmed by the committee chairperson that police authorities are investigating.

However, it is not yet clear what exactly Mr Magyezi asked police to investigate.

The leaked age limit budget shows that a total of Shs88m has been budgeted for accommodation, transport refund, contingency and off-pocket allowance for members when the team will retreat to a hotel to draft a report on its findings before presentation to the whole House.

Police also summoned the editor of Pepper Publications, the publisher of Red Pepper, to also respond to queries on the age limit related story which they published last week.

Subscribe To Our Mailing List

* indicates required
/ ( mm / dd )

Featured Links

    Search Archive

    Search by Date
    Search by Category
    Search with Google
    Log in | Designed by Gabfire themes