On Wednesday, September 23, 2009, about 100 Baganda from Boston, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Pennsylvania, together with one Acholi, loudly demonstrated against President Museveni at the United Nations headquarters in New York. They denounced Museveni’s NRM government for its repressive occupation of Buganda, massacres in Luwero during Obote 2 regime, corruption and incompetence. Notably, the Baganda were joined by one Acholi, a brother of UN official, Olara Otunnu. This is despite the big support which Baganda gave to Acholi’s during demonstrations against the genocide that Museveni permitted in Northern Uganda. Basoga, Banyoro, Iteso and other Ugandan populations who are huge victims of  the NRM government’s policies were nowhere to be seen.

The demonstrations were prompted by the NRM government’s recent restriction of Kabaka Mutebi’s freedom of movement within his kingdom and the massacre of over 20 Baganda which followed the Kabaka’s subjects resisted. Later Ggwangamujje NY/NJ issued a statement that declared Buganda to be under armed occupation by the NRM and its collaborators.

There was drama when Uganda’s ambassador to the UN, Ruhakana Rugunda, and Museveni’s secretary and lover, Amelia Kyambadde, unknowingly walked in the direction of the Baganda demonstrators. One demonstrator shouted, “Omubi Omukiga Rugunda wuyo!” and the whole group, energized, start shouting accusations at the two Museveni staff. Visibly surprised and seemingly scared Rugunda and Kyambadde veered away as they continued to walk past the crowd.

This is the first time that Baganda have demonstrated against a Ugandan government over the issue of Buganda political rights. The demonstrations were organized by members of Ggwangamujje Boston and Ggwangamujje NY/NJ. Another, larger, demonstration is planned for Saturday in Boston, where Museveni is scheduled to be chief guest at this years’ NRM Gala. At the Gala, Museveni is expected to, among other things, thank his USA based NRM cadres like Elizabeth Musaazi, Nakku Senkeeto, Edirisa Kironde, Moses Kalemba, Zabasaja and Senoga (see “Descendants of I. K. Musaazi, Kulubya and Yusuf Lule Risk To Promote NRM In America“) for taking over UNAA.

Boston and New York Baganda have announced that they will join to demonstrate against president Yoweri Museveni whose army and secret police are in an armed occupation of the kingdom of Buganda. According to the Baganda activists, their demonstration will take place at the same time that the Ugandan war load will be speaking at the UN General Assembly.

The statement announcing the demonstrations is reproduced below:

GGWANGAMUJJE NY/NJ AND GGWANGAMUJJE BOSTON calling you to attend Wednesday, September 23, 2009 demonstrations at UNITED NATIONS at 1^st Avenue and 47^th Street between 11:00 and 3:00PM. Demonstrations will take place at the same time when he is giving speech at the UNITED NATIONS.

Ggwangamujje Boston are pooling in buses so Ugandans in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Pennsylvania and Delaware plan in advance to take a day off.

We are demonstrating against Museveni ruthless killing of unarmed civilians by his Military armed forces. The Violation of Human Rights and Freedom of Speech. Museveni’s inciting of tribal crisis (Baganda against Banyala / Banyoro against Bafuruki). The world MUST be informed in advance that ethnic clashes in Africa end up in genocides.

MORE INFORMATION WILL BE SENT OVER THE WEEKEND.

Let Your Voice be Heard.

See Cruel killing on the link below:

http://sites.google.com/site/ugandasbloody999/home and or

http://sites.google.com/site/ugandasbloody999/home/evidence

http://sites.google.com/site/ugandasbloody999/home/evidence

Samwiri Mukasa
Buganda Nationalist
USA

I found the arrogance in Mr. Museveni’s “Guidance to Banyoro Bafuruki question” letter, posted in Buganda Post on August 1, 2009, unacceptable. Click on “Tired, Drowning Museveni Blames Baganda For Bunyoro Land Violence” to see the letter. I cannot understand how a man who became president on the backs of Baganda can go so far in abusing us and our Kabaka. I had to do something about it. My late father used to tell us that, if you want deal with a stone-throwing mad man, throw a few rocks at him too. So, I chose to throw my own 9 so called principles at Museveni, blow by blow, here on Buganda Post. Mr. Museveni’s “stones” (poor spelling is his) are shown in regular text and my “rocks” in bold.

Guidance on Baganda vs Guidance on Banyoro

Having thought about all this for a long time, I am proposing the following principles to be part of the solutions.

After reading president Museveni’s letter and thinking about it for a short time, I am proposing the following principles to be part of the solutions.

1.     Ring-fencing the LC 5 positions in the whole of Bunyoro region for the indigenous people; and also ring-fencing the sub-county leadership in the whole of Bunyoro.

1. Ring-fencing all politics in the Kingdom of Buganda for native Baganda people (the Bataka and appropriate community leaders will sort out the details of how to put Baluuri, Banyala, Bakenyi and even certain Bajjwa on the path to full recognition as citizens of Buganda, and integrating some of their unique customary practices in Baganda culture)

2.    Ring-fencing the positions of Member of Parliament in the whole of Bunyoro region for the indeginous people except for the special constituencies created around Rutete (Lutete) and Kisita resettlement schemes. Number and two will in the spirit of article of 9 and article 10 of the 1995 Constitution of Uganda. They were also envisaged by article 32 of the constitution of Uganda which talked about affirmative action in favour of marginalized groups by reason of history or otherwise for the purpose of redressing imbalances that exist against them.

2. Abolishing the bogus 1995 Museveni Constitution since it is a “weapon of Buganda occupation”. Over 90% of Buganda’s people publically protested it because they preferred a federal form of government and Mr. Museveni responded with threats  to use force. The same happened in 1998 when Baganda demonstrated against the Land Act; Mr. Museveni threaten to start a new guerrilla war. Even more importantly, our Kabaka has publically stated, “Tuli mu buwambe” (”we under occupation”) – the Kabaka cannot lie!

3.    All the indigenous people that were on the Mailo land in 1964 should be granted ownership and the absentee landlords should leave the land. All the indeginous people that have been on public land should get titles ownership of that land. The Bafuuriki in the settlement schemes already have their land and should get titles if they do not have them. The Bafuuriki who bought land legally should have their rights recognized.

3. All Baganda who, in 1986, were on land that was later acquired irregularly by non-Baganda (using stolen government funds, drug money, laundered funds, land grabbing, etc.) shall be granted ownership and titles. Proof of income and tax records will be required to support claims of legal acquisition by the non-Baganda. Anyone who bought stolen property (abaagula ebibbe) will automatically lose it as required by ancient Buganda Laws.

4.    All the illegal encroachers in forest reserves should be evicted without compensation as the normadic cattle keepers of Buliisa are being settled in Buganda.

4. All the illegal encroachers in forest reserves, wetlands and cultural sites shall  be evicted without compensation and the nomadic cattle keepers will be repatriated to their home countries, using Tanzania’s successful experience as a model.

5.    The towns and trading centre should be exempted from these affirmative action measures. They should be free for all Ugandans. This is the healthy integration. The totally integrated Uganda should have its nucleus in the urban centers, factories, the hotels, the shops, the real estate etc. in oreder to promote healthy integration, industrialization should be promoted to pull redundant population from rural areas to the urban areas. Here there should be no regulation beyond ensuring that the workers are Ugandans.

5. Land ownership by genuine non-Baganda investors and residents will follow international norms, using countries like Japan, Korea and Israel as models. There will be a limit to the amount of land these non-Baganda investors and residents may own outside urban areas – to be set by the Great Lukiiko.

6.    The indigenous people who get land should be prohibited from selling the land for 20years and also leasing it.

6. The indigenous people who get land shall be free to sell their land to other Buganda or to non-Baganda through Buganda Land Board and according to the laws governing Buganda land.

7.    A program of sensitising the Banyoro and Bafuuriki should be promoted.

7. A program of sensitizing all Baganda and residents of Buganda about the historical and cultural importance we put on our land and environment shall be promoted.

8.    Government should have a special program for developing Bunyoro using money provided by the central government including the British funds.

8. Ssabasajja Kabaka’s Government shall have a comprehensive strategy and several programs to develop the kingdom’s people at a rapid rate, relying on the resources of Kabaka’s people all over the world – Kabaka does not “beg”.

9.    Finally there should a sunset clause to terminate or cause a review of this policy after 20years.

9. Finally, there is no sunset clause to terminate or reduce the rights of Baganda to determine how their God given land in the 18 counties shall be administered.

All this is a consequence of the colonial policies also supported by the traditional chiefs like of Mengo in Uganda, of discouraging the use of Swahili as a national language. If the people of Bunyoro-the Banyoro or the Bafuuriki were using Swahili, their differences would be submerged. It is the use of vernacular that provokes, in part, these contradictions. I like the indeginous languages, in fact I am about to complete a dictionary in Runyakore-Rukiga. However, I see these vanaculars not as an end in themselves. I see them as a source of enriching Swahili. That is why NRM promotes Swahili. We included it in the constitution; we use it in the army etc.

The committee, should, therefore, look at the principles I have mentioned above and see them work. You should also identify any other problems that I have not identified and propose solutions. You should propose any solutions you feel are useful in the areas for which I have suggested solutions.

All this  is a consequence of failure on our part, the Baganda,  to recognize that Uganda has needed us way much more than we did. And, that the relationship is now irreparable, especially since Uganda is a certified failed state, run by common thieves. How would one otherwise explain why the president’s office cannot not use an English spell-checker on Mr. Museveni’s letter?

Awangaale Ssabasajja!

Samwiri Mukasa

In a letter which a New York based Muganda analysts has called “clear evidence that Museveni is a tired, drowning and anti-Ganda man who Baganda must avoid at all times”, the Uganda strongman called Baganda sub imperialists who grabbed Bunyoro land and turned it into mailo land. Mr. Museveni’s letter, seen by many Baganda as an unveiled anti-Ganda hate campaign, has been read more than once on government radio stations.

In the unsolicited public letter to his own minister of Presidency, Museveni says that the purpose of his memo is “to guide you [the minister] in the tasks you are [she is] to handle in the matter of the Banyoro-Bafuriki question in Bunyoro Region.” Bafuruki are Bakiga, Balaalo, Banyankore and other westerners who have migrated to Bunyoro over the last few decades. Over the last 10 years, the so-called Kibaale district has experienced sporadic land wars between Banyoro and Bafuruki, sometimes resulting in big losses of human life and property.

Mr. Museveni described the problem as, “the modus vivendus between the Banyoro and the Bafuruki in terms of land, and political rights.” (NOTE: Mr. Museveni probably meant to say modus vivendi). Elaborating further, the Uganda strongman claims that the problem has three major elements:

• The land grabbed by the British colonialists and their Mengo-sub imperialists and turned into Mailo land.
• Former public land currently occupied by the Bafuruki; and
• Threatened political marginalization of the indigenous groups of the area (Buyaga and Bugangaizi) – Banyoro, Bagungu, Bachope, Baruuli, Banyara, and, curiously, the Bahima/Balaalo.

Later in his letter, Mr. Museveni, prescribes what he calls nine principles to be part of the solution. Those principles include the following two:

• Reserving elected district and sub-county (LC 5 and LC 3) political leadership positions for indigenous people of Bunyoro.
• Evicting all illegal encroachers in forest reserves without compensation and re-settling the gun toting nomadic cattle keepers (Balaalo) of Buliisa in Buganda (being done already).

As he concludes his letter, Museveni asserts that: “All this [Bunyoro land violence] is a consequence of the colonial policies also supported by the traditional chiefs like of Mengo in Uganda, of discouraging the use of Swahili as a national language. If the people of Bunyoro-the Banyoro or the Bafuruki were using Swahili, their differences would be submerged. It is the use of vernacular that provokes, in part, these contradictions.”

Commenting on Mr. Museveni’s letter, our New York based Muganda analysts said: “This is clear evidence that Museveni is a tired, drowning and anti-Ganda man who Baganda must avoid at all times. First, he tells you that Banyoro should have a monopoly on political leadership in their kingdom and controversial Balaalo must be resettled elsewhere. And when it comes to Buganda, he says that Kampala should be expanded to over 30% of Buganda so that non-Baganda can take and get a monopoly on political leadership in that part of Buganda. He also openly tells you that the problem gun toting Balaalo from Bunyoro are being resettled in Buganda – overtly courting genocide in Buganda.

“This man’s disease, whatever it is, has reached the brain. That is why Mengo must emulate Kabaka Mutebi and totally avoid this man. There is so much Buganda can do to advance, even under the current ‘occupied’ status, without talking to this genocide courting man. The challenge for Buganda is to get out of the ‘reactive’ (Museveni yagambye ki?) mode of operation and get into a ‘work according to our plan’ (Museveni yatomera) mode. Museveni is a tired, drowning man; if you stay too close to him, he might grab you and take you under with him.”

We have reproduced president Museveni’s unedited letter below (without effort to correct any spelling and grammar errors) below:

PO/16.34

15^TH July, 2008
Copy received Office of the minister of internal affairs

To the Minister in charge of the Presidency

Hon Beatrice Wabudeya, Minister of the Presidency

RE: Guidance on Banyoro Bafuuriki question.

This is to guide you in the tasks you are to handle in the matter of the Banyoro-Bafuriki question in Bunyroro Region. You should, first of all, define the problem. What is the problem? The problem, obviously, is the modus vivendus between the Banyoro and the Bafuriki in terms of land, and political rights.

This is on top of the old problem of the British Colonialists and Mengo sub-imperialists that grabbed land from Banyoro and engaged in a genocide in the region, resulting into the depopulation of the area. This means, essentially, three elements in the problem.

●The land grabbed by the British colonialists and their Mengo-sub imperialists and turned into Mailo land.

●The land currently being occupied by the Bafuruki that was part of the former public land including the forest reserve, beyond the original settlements of Luteete (Rutete) and Kisiita that were promoted by the government without foreseeing the consequences; and

●The resultant threatened political marginalization of the indigenous groups of the area-The Banyoro, the Bagungu, the Bachope, the Baruuli, Banyara, and the Bahiima.

We, the NRM members, being nationalists and panafricanists, cannot undermine our vision and program by associating ourselves with the vulgarized versions of “national integration.”

Genuine national integration must include scrupulous respect of everybody’s rights to the land of their heritage, politics, and culture. To do otherwise, is, actually, to undermine our vision and program. It is to make the threatened groups resent or even resist, legitimately, our invaluable vision. In any situation, we should always ask ourselves “where is justice in this case?” The NRM must always fight of justice -for just causes.  I am not, for instance, a monarchist. The area of Ankole, where I come from, is, obviously, thriving without a monarchy. Nevertheless, you remember that I spearheaded the restoration of monarchies in the parts of Uganda that wanted them. This was part of my nationalism and part of my panafricanism eventually.

Therefore, in the case of the Bunyoro Region, it is clear that the Banyoro are legitimately there because that is their origin. The Bafuuriki are also legitimately there because some were settled there by the central government, or, the Late Sir Tito Winyi while others have, subsequently, bought land from the original Bafuuriki, the Banyoro, or the absentee Mengo landlords. If the indigenous Banyoro had not been bled by colonialism and Mengo sub-imperialism, such an infusion of Bafuuriki would not have caused disequilibrium.

The Ankole-Mpororo area (Ankole, Rukungiri and Kanungu) is such an example. There, the Bafuuriki were settled in the amahamba (unoccupied wilderness) but the indigenous population remained in the core part of the area in large numbers. The Bafuuriki in such cases are, actually, an advantage for the areas. There can only be some minor problems like those affecting the Banyabutumbi a sub-group of the Banyakore Bahororo that used to live in Imaramagambo forest. The issues of such groups should also be addressed in a conscious way using administrative actions before they become radicalized.

The vulgarized version of integration goes like this: “We are Ugandans and we all have equal inherent rights in all parts of Uganda”-right to property, all political rights such as competing for political offices. That is correct as long as you ensure that in exercise of those inherent rights, you do not fundamentally damage the legitimate inherent rights of others- especially of those indigenous to the area. If that happens, the central government must come in to regulate the enjoyment of the inherent rights of the respective groups so that disequilibrium does not develop or become entrenched.

To throw more light on the incorrectness of the vulgarized version of integration, I would like to pose some few questions.

(i)           If the Bafuuriki dominate political space in the area to which they migrated, where do the indigenous people of the area find another political space?

(ii)          If the Bafuuriki were more nationalistic, why could they not find some person among the indigenous people and vote for them?

(iii)        Can some people from indigenous groups successfully compete, politically in the areas of origin of the Bafuuriki? If not, is this not unequal relationship?

(iv)         Suppose we were to infuse 100,000 Bafuuriki into Acholi or Karamoja, what would be the reaction? If the Acholis and Karamajongs were to react violently, would it mean that they are not Ugandan enough or would it be that the policy was wrong?

Horizontal rural migration by peasants after they have exhausted land in one area is not a progressive way of creating national integration. The more correct way is vertical migration, from the farm to the factory. That is why the factories should be detribalization centres through the use of Swahili on the work site.

Some people confuse normal individual migration with the mass insertion of big groups into an already enfeebled population on account of history. These are easy to distinguish from what we are talking about in Bunyoro. In 1955 the Banyankore (through their Ishengero) elected Hon. Kapa an immigrant from Rwanda as their first MP along with Hon. Katiti. This was positive and, besides, Kapa was a munyakorenised mufuuriki. He was, therefore, capable of defending the multidimentional interests of the Banyakore groups that is economic, political and cultural. Is this not different from a situation where two significant but different cultural groups are precipitately juxtaposed with each other? Is the situation in Bunyoro unique or otherwise?

Having thought about all this for a long time, I am proposing the following principles to be part of the solutions.

1.     Ring-fencing the LC 5 positions in the whole of Bunyoro region for the indigenous people; and also ring-fencing the sub-county leadership in the whole of Bunyoro.

2.    Ring-fencing the positions of Member of Parliament in the whole of Bunyoro region for the indeginous people except for the special constituencies created around Rutete (Lutete) and Kisita resettlement schemes. Number and two will in the spirit of article of 9 and article 10 of the 1995 Constitution of Uganda. They were also envisaged by article 32 of the constitution of Uganda which talked about affirmative action in favour of marginalized groups by reason of history or otherwise for the purpose of redressing imbalances that exist against them.

3.    All the indigenous people that were on the Mailo land in 1964 should be granted ownership and the absentee landlords should leave the land. All the indeginous people that have been on public land should get titles ownership of that land. The Bafuuriki in the settlement schemes already have their land and should get titles if they do not have them. The Bafuuriki who bought land legally should have their rights recognized.

4.    All the illegal encroachers in forest reserves should be evicted without compensation as the normadic cattle keepers of Buliisa are being settled in Buganda.

5.    The towns and trading centre should be exempted from these affirmative action measures. They should be free for all Ugandans. This is the healthy integration. The totally integrated Uganda should have its nucleus in the urban centers, factories, the hotels, the shops, the real estate etc. in oreder to promote healthy integration, industrialization should be promoted to pull redundant population from rural areas to the urban areas. Here there should be no regulation beyond ensuring that the workers are Ugandans.

6.    The indigenous people who get land should be prohibited from selling the land for 20years and also leasing it.

7.    A program of sensitising the Banyoro and Bafuuriki should be promoted.

8.    Government should have a special program for developing Bunyoro using money provided by the central government including the British funds.

9.    Finally there should a sunset clause to terminate or cause a review of this policy after 20years.

All this is a consequence of the colonial policies also supported by the traditional chiefs like of Mengo in Uganda, of discouraging the use of Swahili as a national language. If the people of Bunyoro-the Banyoro or the Bafuuriki were using Swahili, their differences would be submerged. It is the use of vernacular that provokes, in part, these contradictions. I like the indeginous languages, in fact I am about to complete a dictionary in Runyakore-Rukiga. However, I see these vanaculars not as an end in themselves. I see them as a source of enriching Swahili. That is why NRM promotes Swahili. We included it in the constitution; we use it in the army etc.

The committee, should, therefore, look at the principles I have mentioned above and see them work. You should also identify any other problems that I have not identified and propose solutions. You should propose any solutions you feel are useful in the areas for which I have suggested solutions.

Yoweri K. Museveni.

President

Copied to VP, PM, all Members of Cabinet Subcommittee of Bunyoro Issues, Head of public service, P.S/ Office of the President.

Below is a statement that was released by the Bunyoro Kingdom on May 24, 2009. A highly reliable source in Mmengo has told us that there have been no plans for Kabaka Mutebi to visit Ndaiga as the statement claims. She warned that this is may be a ploy by Ford Mirima, who is often carrying out state house directives, to distract Baganda onto yet another random topic. The official added: “I am not speaking for Kabaka’s government but, personally, I think Banyoro should start asking themselves what will happen when Baganda youths camp at Kakiri or Luweero to stop their Omukama from proceeding to Kampala. Togayanga kyeziinze! ”

The statement, which was sent to various news outlets and government officials is reproduced below:

Bunyoro kingdom to demonstrate against Kabaka visit to Ndaiga

Dear Editors;

Bunyoro-Kitara Kingdom May 22, 2009 issued a statement saying the kingdom is to join Mubende Banyoro Committee on June 5, 2009, to demonstrate against among others things, the planned June 25, 2009, Kabaka Mutebi’s visit to Ndaiga to cement Buganda Kingdom’s claim on the Mailo Akenda part of (3000 sq miles) which is in Buyaga and Bugangaizi counties of Bunyoro-Kitara.

The statement issued by the Katiikiro, Mr. Yabezi Kiiza, says if the Kabaka wants to assert Buganda’s ownership of land in Kibaale District which is the land the Uganda Constitution says the Kabaka must surrender under the Land Fund in the Uganda Constitution, the Kabaka will be breaching the Uganda Constitution. The katiikiro says these counties were connstitutionally transferred to Bunyoro-Kitara kingdom. So, Buganda has no say in them.

The Katiikiro’s statement follows a resolution adopted by Mubende Banyoro Committee on May 11, 2009 in which they wrote to the Inspector-General of Police seeking permision to demonstrate peacefully against Government failure to return Banyoro land as the referendum of 1964 decrees.

Octoebr 8, 2008 Kabaka Ronald Muwenda  was stopped by Police from visiting Buruuli county where he was going to celebrate Buganda’s independence Day. The Baruulli warned him not to go there before he got persmission from the Isaabaruuli, Mwogezi Butamanya. He defied the Baruuli. whereupon they deployed the youths to stop him. The Uganda Government through the Police stopped the Kabaka from going to Nakasongola.

Last week Buganda Government made arrangments for the Kabaka to visit Bunyala county (Bugerere) but the Banyala, through their Cultural Head, The Isaabanyala, Captain Kimeze, warned him not to step in Bunyala unless he has official permission from the Isaabanyala, the  Cultural head.

In in1961 the late Kabaka of Buganda, Sir Edward Muteesa used force to visit  Buyaga county,at Karutguuza, where the Banyoro had warned him not to go. there. The Banyoro erected roadblocks to stop him, but the Kabaka, using  Kawonawos, stormed the road blocks and went to Karuguuza Market where he found Banyoro buying and selling goods and he shot and killed nine Banyoro, including the Market Master, Ntogota.

Today Buganda Kingdom says the Kabaka is going to go, by force, to Bunyala county, and to Ndaiga. The Banyoro are already mobilising themselves to stop the Kabaka from going to Ndaiga.

Now get the official statement from Bunyoro-Kitara Kingdom issued by the Katiikiro.

Henry Ford Miirima
Press Secretary of the Omukama of Bunyoro-Kitara

On September 28, 2008 someone posted a  video titled “Museveni and Child Soldiers” on YouTube.com  in an apparent effort to alert the world community about President Museveni’s possible crimes relating to the use of child soldiers. At the time, a vote was about to be taken on whether to allow Uganda to become a member of the UN Security Council.

In the video, Mr. Museveni explains his use of child soldiers with:  “In Africa here even by the age of four you learn to fight. This is our tradition; you fight with sticks, with spears and with arrows. “ And he dismisses children rights activists who oppose use of child soldiers with: “If you think that this [child soldiering] will disorient them psychologically, that is not the case.”

Click here to see the video.

The United Nations, Denmark, the European Union and the USA are all officially against the use of child soldiers.  There are credible reports, as recent as 2008, that President Museveni’s government has been using child soldiers, especially in the war against an Acholi rebel group led by Joseph Kony.  The Danish embassy is intimately knowledgeable about these and other gruesome human rights violations by Mr. Museveni’s government, yet they continue to aggressively support  his programs, including those that may lead to more conflicts in future.

Possibly the most controversial of these program supported by Denmark and the European Union in Uganda today s is Mr. Museveni’s efforts to illegally steal 9,000 of native lands from the Baganda people and to dismantle their cultural institutions and kingdom.  He has passed several target anti-Baganda political and property rights laws which are even illegal under the United Nations charter and protocols with tacit support from the Danish, Norwegian and British ambassadors.

The consensus among all the Baganda intellectuals we interviewed for this article is that Denmark’s support for Mr. Museveni on the question of Buganda self-determination is driven by deep subconscious racism, greed for business opportunities and corruption in their Kampala embassy.  Because Denmark is a kingdom that claims to support human rights and has done so in Europe, Asia and Latin America, they have no logical excuse for using DANIDA to fund programs to dismantle another kingdom, Buganda, about as big as their own.  The consensus is that the Danes have a subconscious racist belief that black people are all the same- they don’t need or deserve kingdoms of their choice ; they just need food and medicine.

A Muganda historian based in Kampala has assured this writer that  Mr. Museveni’s claims that child violence is an African tradition are untrue, especially in relation to the Buganda kingdom and  some other parts of Uganda. He explained: “ It is true that among Mr. Museveni’s the Bahima/Tutsi cattle keepers fighting with sticks to settle personal disagreements is usual, the practice is not a in many African communities. For example,  in Buganda courts to settle personal issues were in operation well before European came to the area in the 1880’s. Buganda had a standing army of thousands of adults only (around 15 years and up) and its role was to fight national enemies. A court system which extended down to village level (kitawuluzi) handled personal criminal and civil cases, including the crime of fighting with sticks. Similarly, Banyoro, Batoro and Basoga do not have a culture of training 9 year olds to kill.”

Banyoro peasants are fighting tooth and nail to stop President Yoweri Museveni from taking 8 square miles of land which State House claims to be a gift from the Hoima local council. Arguments and tempers flared when the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee discussed the matter on Thursday, August 14, 2008. Mr. Museveni’s legal advisor, Fox Odoi, told the Committee that the disputed land was “a donation to the presidency” and declared that State House was free to use the land as they choose. He, however, acknowledged that the matter was before court and that the Banyoro peasants who lived on the land had taken legal action against State House in 2003.

The Public Accounts Committee had heard evidence that residents of the disputed land were contesting Mr. Museveni’s claim of ownership, charging that it was a ploy to defraud them of their communal grazing land. And that they had already petitioned the district land tribunal which had given them a favorable ruling against President Museveni. The chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, Nandala Mafabi, said, “It is improper for State House to pursue this land, yet President Museveni is supposed to be fighting for the landless. This land should be left to the local people since the government’s job is to empower them to benefit so Bonna Bagagawale (prosperity for all) by using land as a means of production.”

The land dispute between State House and poor Banyoro peasants comes at a time when President Museveni appears determined to enact Land Act amendments which he claims will protect squatters from eviction by land lords. Political analysts in Kampala explain this contradiction by pointing out that the contested land is located in Buhanguzi County, close to the Albertine Valley where evidence of significant oil deposits were first discovered in geological surveys dated as early as the 1970s.