On June 27, 2009, Katikkiro JB Walusimbi appeared visibly confused and angry when the London Baganda he was trying to address confidently heckled him. The place was East London University, thousands of miles away from his more familiar Kampala. The Katikkiro, together with his two predecessors, Mulwaanyamuli Ssemwogerere and Emmanuel Ssendaula were the guests of honors at a function organized by a Baganda group called Saagala Agalamidde – led by Enock Kiyaga and Nkata Masembe. The current and former Katikkiros were accompanied by Mmengo deputy minister for youth, Mathias Mpuuga who, until a few months ago, was a key player in the Nkoba za Mbogo movement.  Only two weeks ago, however, the Uganda government Bukedde newspaper reported that Mr. Mpuuga publically appealed to President Museveni to start funding Nkoba za Mbogo.

Also present in the audience was ISO operative Aisha Kabanda who, according to our sources in Mr. Museveni’s state house, travelled on assignment to monitor and (if necessary) assist the Mmengo officials. Indeed, she is supposed to have filed the reports that the New Vision and Bukedde used to compose propaganda stories that left out the negative elements of the Katikkiro’s visit.

Despite frequent heckles from a few members of the audience, Katikkiro JB Walusimbi and his team made presentations on their development plans for Buganda. Owek. Walusimbi spoke glowingly about his Omumuli project, through which he intends to return Baganda homes to the “good times” when he was a young boy – with each homestead having a few chicken, 2 or 3 cows for milk, a bicycle and a “katandaalo”. He also lashed out at those who criticized him for accepting money gifts from president Museveni, claiming that the funds would develop Buganda but also boasting that he is a self-made man, not impressed by any money.

Owek. Ssendaula used a substantial amount of his allotted time to talk about his extensive international experience as a diplomat, in Australia and France and other assignments. Some members of the audience were visibly bored and uneasy that their former Katikkiro, the highest office in Buganda below Kabaka, apparently put exceptional importance on serving the anti-Buganda and corrupt regimes of Amin, Obote and Museveni.

When his turn came, former Katikkiro and architect of the aborted regional tier arrangement for Buganda, Owek. Mulwaanyamuli Ssemwogerere spoke about his successes as Katikkiro and his new responsibilities to run a Buganda unit trust investment fund in cooperation with what we have reliably learnt to be a Kenyan bank.  Curiously, the Uganda arm of that Kenya bank is ran Basaamya who happen to be former UPC wingers.  Mr. Mulwaanyamuli also declared his ambition to run the Katwe tower arcade “once its construction is completed” but it appeared that hardly anyone in the audience knew what he was proudly talking about. The three Katikkiro’s, all of whom have worked for or with president Museveni in different capacities, brushed off the efforts by some members of the audience to engage them on controversial subjects like Federo, land grabbing, selling Buruli county  for Shs 350 million (US$155,000), Katikkiro worshiping Museveni and corruption in Mmengo.

The three Katikkiros and their hosts seem to have underestimated the anger and energy of those Baganda who are tired of Mmengo’s failure to modernize and become transparent during their respective administrations. The angry Baganda kept murmuring and heckling the Buganda officials, at one time forcing Enock Mayanja Kiyaga, the master of ceremonies, to interrupt one of the speakers and promise that all questions and complaints would be fully addressed during a Questions and Answers period at the end.  The organizers and Kabaka’s representative in UK, Mr. Nsambu, were also not ready for the demonstrators, both inside and outside, who moved around with posters denouncing the current state of affairs at Mmengo and the dismal performance of the three Katikkiros. The organizers brought in police to chase those with posters away but they (the organizers) were disappointed when the police agreed with the protesters, who included a lawyer, that under the law no one could expelled.

When it came to the promised Questions and Answers time, it was most obvious that Enock Mayanja Kiyaga, the master of ceremonies, avoided picking on those thought to be unfriendly to the Mmengo team. This tactic did not work for long as complaints started to grow loud and Mayanja Kiyaga was forced to some people from the other side to say something. Soon enough the emotions were exploding and even the Kabaka’s representative was calling the protesters obscene names. The lightly attended meeting (compared to some previous Dan Muliika meetings) ended on an unpleasant note when the Katikkiro and his team were escorted out of the venue through a back door, without the customary final handshakes and mingling.

In a related story, we have reliably learnt that next day, on Sunday, the Mmengo team attended the Holloway Catholic Church, where the prayers were dedicated to the Baganda martyrs. According to our source who attended the meeting: “But the talk among the crowd was about what transpired the day before at East London University and no doubt this dictated the play ground of the Katikkiro’s activity on the day. When the Katikkiro was introduced people hardly clapped and his reception was so cold.”

When asked for comment, our New York based Buganda expert expressed concern that the three Katikkiros seem to be sincerely out of touch with the reality of today’s Buganda. He explained: “Messrs. Walusimbi, Ssemwogerere and Ssendaula mostly talk to old people, like themselves, whose livelihoods and health depends or has previously depended on Museveni. The problem is that very few Baganda alive today are over the age of 35 years and a huge majority of these youthful Baganda does not depend on Museveni. In fact they are suffering from Museveni and other foreigners. And none of these young Baganda understand or want to go own 3 cows and one “katanadaalo” in the village as in Owek. Walusimbi’s Omumuli plan. They are also too poor to buy trust units from the Basaamya former UPC youth wingers. Isn’t this what ‘being out of touch’ means? As Baganda say, ‘Akanaafa tekawulira ngombe’.”

A source in the Namirembe Diocese of the Church of Uganda (Church of Buganda) has confirmed to this writer that the new bishop of the diocese received a letter warning him of a conspiracy by foreigners to steal church property. The new bishop is Wilberforce Kityo Luwalira, who was consecrated on May 31, 2009. Our source, who spoke on condition anonymity for fear of reprisals, also confirmed that the letter is supposed to have come from one Asumani Balwaana Kaama of the Union of Councils for Ggwanga Mujje. However, the source could not verify if the letter received is identical to the one which Buganda Post had received around the same time.

The version which was sent to Buganda Post congratulates Luwalira on his advancement to become the head of the Anglican Church of Buganda. Then begs him resist all expected attempts by President Museveni to compromise him, starting with a personal car gift. Then it warns him of coming pressure from Archibishop Orombi of Uganda to use Buganda church land for “projects” and to place Banyankore and other foreigners into key positions within the Church of Buganda. Finally, the Union of Councils for Ggwanga Mujje pleads with the bishop to immediately stop allowing political speeches in Buganda Anglican churches, which demeans the institution and serves to divide and divert Baganda from their common national interests.

The Luganda letter which Buganda Post received is reporoduced below without translation.

 
Namirembe Diocese
P.O.Box 14297
Kampala, Uganda
 
June 11, 2009

Ssebo Omulabirizi Kityo Luwalira,

N’obuwombeefu tukwaniriza era tukukulisa okutuuka ku bukulembeze bwe Kanisa mu bwakabaka bwa Buganda. Obwesigwa e Kanisa, Ssaabasajja, n’Endiga za Katonda bwebakutaddemu kintu kikulu nnyo ekye’kitiibwa nga ate kya buvunanyizibwa.

Ebiro bino abalabe ba Lutikko beyongedde obungi. Era ssebo gy’otabadde e Kanisa yaffe kata bagitwaale, abantu bano ab’obulabe ekigendererwa kyabwe tebanakivaako. Twagadde okukozesa omukisa guno nga wakatandika obuvunanyizibwa bwo nga Omulabirizi we Namirembe tukusibire entanda:

1. Omukulembeze wa Yuganda Yoweri Museveni oba abaleebesibe bajja kugezaako okukugulirira – ekintu kino Museveni yakitandika na kusuubiza nga bwajja okukugulira emotoka. Ssebo gakuwebwa munno! Emotoka eyo togikkiriza nga ggwe omuntu – Bishop Wilberforce Kityo Luwalira. Olukukwasanga emotoka eyo, kaada yayo nga etekebwa mu mannya g’obulabirizi bwe Namirembe. Era tusaba nawe okirangirire lwattu mu Kanisa Lutikko nti Gavumenti ya Yuganda yatonedde obulabirizi bwe Namirembe emotoka; obanyonnyole nti emotoka si yiyo.
 
2. Ssaabalabirizi w’eKanisa mu Yuganda Henry Luke Orombi oba abatume be bajja kujja bakusabe ettaka ly’eKanisa eryagiweebwa Ssabasajja; katugambe nga bagamba nti baagala bateekeko “projects” ate bave awo ettaka eryo baliteeke mu manya ga “project” – oba ebintu ebifananako bwebityo ebinaabasobozesa okubba ettaka lye Kanisa ya Buganda. Ssebo tukusaba ettaka ly’ekanisa mu Buganda olikuume butiribiri.
 
3. Tukimanyi nti Yoweri Museveni n’abatume be bajja kutuukilira nga baagala osooke okulonda oba okussa Abanyankole oba abantu abalala aba NRM mu bifo eby’obuvunanyizibwa munda mu Kanisa ye Namirembe. Tukusaba oleme kwesembereza nkola g’eno. Buli omu akimanyi nti tewali muganda ayinza kuweebwa mulimu mu makanisa g’eMbarara, Toro, Busoga, e.t.c. N’olwekyo olina okulaba nga Namirembe tasenserwa bannabyabufuzi oba abagwiira abagenda okugisekeeterera nga basinzidde munda mwayo. Bajjajjafe balwaana nyo okukuma Namirembe okuviira ddala mu 1890, nawe ky’ovude osobodde okugisangawo. Tukusaba ojjukirenga nti Namirembe Kanisa ya Buganda era n’ebyobugagga byonna (ttaka, bizimbe, masomero, mayumba, malwarilo, e.t.c) bya Namirembe so ssi Church of Uganda.
 
4. Tuli benyamivu lwa nsonga nti tutandise okulaba omuze gw’okufuula Lutikko akadaala k’ebyobufuzi. Namirembe atandise omuze gw’okuddira ba naby’obufuzi nemubakkiriza okwogerera ku kituuti mu Kanisa nga bwebagala. N’obuwombeefu, tukusaba gwe nga Omulabirizi omuze guno gukome. Teguweesa Kanisa kitiibwa, okujjako okwawulayawula mu ndiga za mukama. Tewali nsonga yonna lwaki ab’ebyobufuzi basinziira mu Kanisa yaffe okukuba pokopoko wabwe, aleeta enjawukana mu bantu ba Ssaabasajja. Tukusaba olabe nti omuze guno gukoma.

Ssebo omulabirizi tukwebaza emirimu gy’okoledde e Kanisa n’Obuganda. Naye wootaali, olutalo luno twalulwaana okulaba nti tebatusiba balabirizi betutamanyi nsibuko zaabwe. Ebbaluwa yaffe gyetwawandiikira Ssaabalabirizi Orombi ku saawa yakazzigizzigi nga n’omukulembeze Yoweri Museveni yafunako, yiiyo wansi gyesomere.

Tuli bamalirivu era twewaddeyo okutunula omuntu yenna mu munnye anagezaako okukyusa obwanannyini bw’ebintu bya Namirembe ne Buganda nga Ssaabasajja awamu n’Obuganda nga tebasiimye. Okwo kuba kulya lukwe mu Bwakabaka bwa Buganda. Ekibonerezo kyomusango ng’ogwo kimanyiddwa buli Muganda.

Awangaale Ssaabasajja Kabaka wa Buganda.
Asumani Balwaana Kaama
Union of Councils for Ggwanga Mujje

Louise Edwards
Programme Officer – Access to Justice (East Africa)
Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, New Delhi

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Professor Philip Alston, presented his detailed report on Kenya at the recent 11th Session of the UN Human Rights Council.  In an extraordinary week of political maneuvering, reinforcing the internal tension that plagues Kenya’s Grand Coalition Government, the Kenyan delegation responded with an oral statement to the Council that contradicted their earlier written response. Having initially denied Professor Alston’s accusations of the widespread and systematic use of extrajudicial killings by the Kenya Police Force, the delegation conceded that there is a problem, but stopped short of acknowledging Government complicity.

The proceedings and outcomes at the 11th Session have received much local and international press.  Now, two weeks later, the focus must shift to action taken by the Kenyan Government to address the issues raised by Professor Alston and the fall out from the publication of his report, which included the killing of two human rights defenders that had previously cooperated with his mandate.  Despite the eventually positive response from the Kenyan delegation in Geneva, early signs of action are not necessarily promising.

Professor Alston’s report articulated what concerned local and international organisations have been saying about the Kenya Police Force for many years and which the Government failed to acknowledge until their oral statement to the Council – that extrajudicial killings are part of the policing landscape in Kenya. The oral statement also contained a public acknowledgement of Kenya’s weak police oversight mechanisms, the need to establish a local independent police commission and assurances that no human rights defenders would be intimidated or harassed as a result of their cooperation with the UN Special Procedures mandate-holders.

Nevertheless, it remains to be seen whether the promising outcomes in Geneva will translate into credible action in Nairobi.  Successive promises of reform articulated in a number of strategies and processes over the past 10 years have not been completed or sustained by the Kenya Government.  Kenyans continue to be policed by an organisation that lacks sufficient accountability structures, fails to protect or uphold basic human rights and is continually subject to illegitimate political interference.  Millions of dollars have been invested in the development and publication of commission reports, task force findings and reform strategies without any genuine steps by the Government to implement systemic reform.

The concerning state of policing in Kenya has received significant national and international attention over the past 18 months.  The police response to the 2007 post-election violence brought the issue of political partisanship, impunity and brutality to the fore.  The Waki Commission report into the violence strongly recommended comprehensive reform of the Kenya Police Force and Administration Police and Professor Alston’s report reinforced the brutal and corrupt practices that have been permitted to flourish by the unreformed, colonial policing model. 

Police reform is a daunting and long term process.  It requires substantial law reform, a radical shift in policing culture from one of impunity to accountability and the restoration of trust between police and the community.  None of these urgent reforms will happen in Kenya without the political and financial commitment of the Government to undertake reforms of this scope.  The recent establishment by the President of a special Police Reform Task Force represents a positive step towards delivering credible advances.  However, the Government must translate the Task Force’s recommendations into actual reform that goes beyond improving operational capacity to address governance, accountability and legal structures.  Otherwise the Task Force, for all its good intention, will become another failed reform vehicle.

Drawing on the previous recommendations and those foreshadowed to appear in the current Task Force findings, the Government should implement the following minimum reforms:

• Constitutional and legislative amendments that clearly separate the operational control of the police from the direct control from the political Executive and provide for transparency in monitoring police performance and conduct,
• Strengthening internal and external oversight mechanisms, including the enactment of legislation and budgetary allocation to give full effect to the Police Oversight Board plus the establishment of an independent complaints mechanisms,
• Establish a clear demarcation between the role of the Kenya Police Force and the Administration Police,
• Improve police human rights training and resourcing to strengthen human rights compliance and operational effectiveness in the prevention, detection and investigation of crime, and
• Establish clear legislative guidelines on the use of force, torture and adherence to basic due process that accord with Kenya’s existing obligations under international law.

If the Government is serious about reforming the police, a commitment to implementing past and current recommendations is not enough.  It must also take immediate steps that both demonstrate its firm commitment to reform and restore public confidence in the reform process.  A positive first action should be the investigation, prosecution and punishment of those police officers who commit or acquiesce to illegal acts including, but not limited to, those responsible for the 2007 post-election violence and the perpetrators of extrajudicial killings.

Other immediate steps must include measures to implement the Government’s guarantee of protection to individuals who have been intimidated or subject to retribution for their cooperation with the UN Special Procedures mandate-holders.  Human rights defenders, including members of the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights have been subject to threats and some have been forced to flee Kenya.  The high profile execution of two prominent human rights defenders, who cooperated with Professor Alston, and the failure by the police and Government to identify those responsible, highlights the inadequacy of protection and security for human rights defenders.  While Kenya has a witness protection programme, reform is urgently required to ensure the integrity of its internal processes (including accountability, Executive control and information storage and sharing) before those who are most in need of protection will have confidence in the systems that are designed to deliver it. 

The 2007 post-election violence, followed by the findings in Professor Alston’s report, and the tragic consequences for human rights defenders who cooperated with his mandate, have kept the problems with Kenyan policing firmly in the international spotlight.  Whether the political will to commit to genuine reform is present in the Grand Coalition Government remains to be seen, but what is clear to the international community is that the need for police reform is more crucial than ever.

The Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) is an independent, non-partisan, international NGO working for the practical realisation of human rights in the countries of the Commonwealth.
www.humanrightsinitiative.org

Transparency International, a Berlin-based anti-corruption watchdog has published a report saying 53% of 73,000 respondents from 69 countries now saw the private sector as being corrupt, up from 45% in 2004. The report also stated that most people believed that private firms have to pay “sweeteners” to public officials to influence policy. In addition, the respondents said political parties were the most corrupt bodies.

Within governments law enforcement, specifically the police, appear to be netting the most illegal money. The most likely bribers tend to belong to low income households. Bribery of public officials is seen as a particularly serious problem in Georgia, Armenia, Cameroon, Liberia, Sierra Leone and Uganda. The respondents from these countries claimed to pay at least one bribe in the past year.

The entire report can be found here.

According a Bank of Uganda (BOU) source, the value of Uganda Shilling against the US Dollar is expected to continue a steady slide downward for a while. A banking officer in the Operations Division of BOU told this reporter on condition of anonymity that there are three major reasons for the misfortunes of the Shilling.

The bank officer said: “First is the global financial crisis which, unfortunately, both the BOU governor and ministry of finance (MOF) chose to joke about early this year. However, it has caused the funds remitted by Ugandans abroad, especially Baganda, doing kyeeyo to fall drastically as work becomes harder to get.  Similarly, local NGO’s and church pastors are experiencing a tough time fundraising in the USA and Europe. Many of them are collapsing or firing employees as the dollars dry up.

“The second major reason is that our exports are not seriously growing in dollar terms. Even the  recent increase in exports to Southern Sudan seem appears to have been a bubble because the Sudanese central government is now limiting the supply of dollars to the South due to political tensions.  The dollar shortage in Sudan has in turn reduced the dollars which corrupt Southern officials have been bringing into Uganda to bank or buy mansions and Buganda land.”

The third reason that the banking officer gave is Uganda official corruption and greed. He pointed out that: “Mr. Museveni’s  state house has squandered tens of millions of dollars on deals like the presidential jet, grants to fake investors like Basajjabalaba and numerous so called ‘classified’ withdraws.  When other government officials see how Mr. Museveni’s state house is stealing, they can only emulate. Over time, this unending corruption has scared the more serious investors from the local stock exchange and our government securities. In fact the weak securities markets are only surviving on laundered money which the owners are still afraid to send out of Uganda.”

The BOU employee warned that the value of the Shilling was likely to continue falling for sometime. He explained: “I think that the donors are likely to cut aid to Uganda before they  increase it, because the political situation is likely to get much worse as the 2011 elections approach.  Both the domestic and external debts are likely to get worse because Mr. Museveni is creating more districts even as we speak. He is also preparing to grow army, police and other imports before the elections.  And our FOREX reserves are not enough to allow Mutebire to support the Shilling by selling dollars.  Maybe for a few weeks.”

Below are the US Dollar exchange rates for since January (on the 20th of each month): 

At the beginning of last week president Museveni instructed the Uganda parliament to create 14 new districts. After the president’s wish was communicated to the national assembly by his minister for local government, Adolf Mwesigye, speaker Edward Sekandi acted swiftly and directed the parliamentary committee on local government to give the matter the highest level of priority. Passage by parliament without major problems is highly likely.

A source close to Mr. Museveni’s state house confidentially told this reporter that Uganda’s president created the new districts to further dilute the power of individual members of parliament (MPs) in case  removing army MPs becomes inevitable. The source said: “His excellency has been under too much pressure from donors to take the army out of parliament. If you knew him, then you would know that he cannot let the opposition have that relative advantage, especially with 2011 so close. He cannot take any chances and the 14 districts are his insurance. The donors can say whatever they want. And, believe me, the 14 or more MPs plus numerous in the new districts are guaranteed to be NRM conc.”

Uganda’s constitution, which was written on Mr. Museveni’s watch, empowers the national parliament to evaluate proposals for new districts and reject them if they provide no clear value or are not financially viable. Virtually Uganda’s districts are not economically viable and rely on hand outs from European donors to pay their bills. For that reason, the donor community has for several years opposed the creation of new districts, arguing that they are expensive, unproductive and hugely corrupt. However, as Mr. Museveni has said on a few occasions: “The donor community is impotent [bifeera] when it comes to telling Uganda what to do.”

For each of Mr. Museveni’s 14 new 2 MPs will be added to the national parliament, along with a resident district commissioners (RDC) with 2 deputy RDCs, a district police commander, a district internal security officer (DISO) with a deputy and at least 50 other administrative and political positions. The richest districts in Uganda include Kampala, Mukono, Mbarara, Mpigi South and Luweero. But even they cannot pay their bills and offer basic social services consistently despite large grants from donors.

The new entities, listed below, will bring the total number of districts in Uganda to 97, from 39 in 1995.

On Tuesday, April 28, 2009, the oldest active Buganda nationalist organization, Abazzukulu ba Buganda, passed a resolution that Mmengo made a huge mistake when they accepted Shs 350 Million (US$162,790) from president Museveni. The organization members were at their weekly meeting along Kabaka Anjagala Road, near Mmengo Bulange. They warned the Katikkiro and his group that, as they spend Museveni’s money, they should be mindful that it has strings attached that could even land some of them into deep trouble. They criticized Katikkiro Walusimbi for taking the money without consulting Baganda and going to the Buganda Lukiiko only to block its discussion by throwing tantrums.

The organization’s secretary, Mr. Njuki Mubiru explained that Mr. Museveni’s govermnent had set a trap for Mr. Walusimbi and the others who will enjoy the money: “After they have misused the money the Uganda govermnent will surely ask for accountability; when they can’t provide it, they could well end up jailed as it happened with a Museveni confidant, Teddy Seezi Kyeeye.

Abazzukulu ba Buganda have been at the forefront of resisting Mr. Museveni’s attempts to undermine the Buganda’s national interests. They led the protests against attempts by princess Ndagire and her supporters to defame Kabaka Mutebi and take over Kasubi Tombs. They were also instrumental in exposing and fighting the infamous anti-Buganda Regional Tier agreement which Katikkiro Mulwaanyamuli Ssemwogerere, along with Charles Peter Mayiga, John Katende and Apollo Makubuya negotiated with Mr. Museveni. The organization was founded by Haji Jjunju Kamulali and others. They are also known for their persistent fight against attempts by retired Church of Uganda Archipishop and Katikkiro Walusimbi to lease the Lubiri to Ugandan businessmen, including those who have been implicated in war crimes in Congo, money laundering and illegal drug trafficking.

During the April 20, 2009 Buganda Lukiiko meeting Katikkiro Walusimbi announced his unilateral decision to accept  Shs 350 Million (US$162,790), about the price of a half acre plot of land on Naguru hill, as a gift from Mr. Museveni to Buganda. According to Mr. Walusimbi, the Shs 350 Million is the first installment on a Shs 1 Billion (US$930,000) grant from President Museveni to Buganda to fund his (Mr. Walusimbi’s) personal plan for Buganda, called omumuli. Mr. Museveni’s government owes the Buganda Kingdom at least Shs 10 Billion (US$9,300,000) in real estate rent and other arrears. This is in addition to 9,000 square miles of Buganda native lands worth hundreds of millions of US dollars which were stolen in 1966. 

We can exclusively report that the March 2009 appointment of President Museveni’s wife, Janet Kataha, to the post of Minister of State for Karamoja was never about politics. And some of the attacks against the appointment have been done by state agents to confuse Ugandans and foreign donors alike. According a source close to Mr. Museveni’s state house and familiar with the Uganda Geological Surveys and Mines department, Uganda’s strongman appointed his wife for purely economic reasons; to secure direct family involvement in the exploitation of the huge Karamoja gold deposits. On March 9, 2009 Museveni explained his wife’s ministerial appointment to the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) with: “Since many of our elite ministers did not want to work in Karamoja, I asked Janet to help me develop one of the backward areas of our country.”

Our source, who requested anonymity to protect her family’s lives, wrote in an email that: “On January 17, 2009 Uganda’s first family was excited that the latest mineral survey report showed so much more gold potential in Karamoja than initially thought. The first step was to order Tuhumwire to remove Karamoja from the mineral report. [Writer’s note: Joshua Tuhumwire, who of the same ethnicity as Mr. and Mrs. Museveni, is the commissioner for geological surveys and mines].  After heated discussions, the family agreed that one of them had to be minister for Karamoja if they were to control that gold without much suspicion. Appointing the first lady minister for Karamoja was seen as the perfect solution because (1) it reduced the tension in the family and (2) as, MP her appointment would help keep Ugandans and donors focused on the political angle.”

Our source’s email further says that it was expected that, in the position of presidential advisor on defense matters, Mr. Museveni’s half-brother Salim Saleh will oversee implementation of secret arrangements to  put a security blanket over the Kaboong area, which the biggest prospects for gold deposits. Her email also points out that, “When the first lady visited Karamoja the place which received her highest attention was Kaboong, clear sign that she is 100% confident that Ugandan’s are not bright enough to see below the covers.”

The president’s family has been involved in Karamoja gold mining since the early 1990’s. According the Uganda parliament records (Ansard), in 1995 Mr. Museveni told Ugandan national assembly that:  “In Karamoja, six occurrences of gold have been identified and a Uganda registered company, Branch Energy Uganda Limited is going to spend US$7 million during the next two years on prospecting and development. Another company, Anglo-Sudan Corporation is prospecting for gold in the Mityana/Mubende area.” What Mr. Museveni did not mention, which became public information by 1996, is that Branch Energy Uganda Limited was owned by his half-brother Salim Saleh Akandwanaho, in partnership with infamous Branch Energy of South Africa.

Uganda’s subsequent invasion of Congo, a much bigger source of gold and other minerals, and negative publicity about  the Branch Energy companies seem to have convinced  the Museveni family and their  kinsmen to cut back their gold prospecting and mining in Karamoja. Today, the Uganda ruling class does not have access to Congo gold but the mineral trading and shipment network the developed remains intact.

According to a survey that was by commissioned by Uganda’s Inspector General of Government (IGG) and conducted by REEV Consult International, the Office of the President is neither among the most corrupt nor among the least corrupt in the country.  And the IGG’s office is one of the two least corrupt institutions. The survey report was released last week. The report, purports to reflect public perceptions of  institutional honesty in Uganda, says that the most corrupt institutions is Police (Traffic), followed by Police (General), UMEME, Lands Office, Kampala City Council, Other Municipal Councils and the Judiciary. And the least corrupt institutions are allegedly National Water Corporation, the IGG, NGOs, Agriculture, National Environmental Agency, Local Governments and Local Councils, in that order.

Uganda’s IGG is former judge Faith Mwondha. Mentioning highlights of the report to reporters, the IGG’s spokesman, Mr. Bageya Waiswa, said that corruption is taking a dangerous trend because it is involving the people who are supposed to fight it like the police and the judiciary.

The reaction from the judiciary was swift. Principle judge James Ogoola has discredited the report as unreliable and subjective. He admitted to Uganda reporters that there are instances of corruption in the judiciary but claimed that much progress has been made towards to reduce corruption and ensure free and fair delivery of justice to the population.

Other members of the legal profession agree with judge Ogoola that the report is not reliable, at best, and fake at worst. A former legal officer in the IGG’s office who spoke on condition of anonymity told us that this report is itself evidence that the IGG’s office is one of the most corrupt institutions in the country. According to the Makerere trained lawyer: “The first problem with this report is that the IGG paid REEV Consult to do the survey, but also demanded that her office be included in the institutions evaluated. The woman is so corrupt that she thinks her Number 2 position as the least corrupt institution is believable even with her highly publicized salary cheating scandal.

“The second problem is that, even Ugandan dogs know that President Museveni’s state house, his army and his national parliament are by far the most corrupt institutions in the country. Illegal land giveaways, daughters using the presidential jet to go for European medical care, the $3,000 third term sale to Museveni by parliament, Salim Saleh’s helicopter saga, the UCB loot, ghost soldiers, the CHOGOM loot, and the list goes on.  The only reason they don’t appear on the most corrupt institutions is because the corrupt IGG used a corrupt consulting firm, which obeyed her instructions to design the survey questions in such a way that state house, UPDF, Solicitor General’s Office and  Ministry of Works can never register as among the most corrupt.

“And the third problem is that REEV Consult International does not even have the technical capacity to conduct such a sensitive survey professionally. Its principal holds a controversial PhD in ‘Poverty Eradication’ from Makerere University.  The fact is that Mr. Nuwagaba grew up poor, has never lived in a rich country or even gone to school away from poverty. He was taught by poor part-time teachers, whose salaries are not paid on time but achieve PhD level knowledge on how to eradicate poverty?  Although Mr. Nuwagaba has aggressively used his tribe skills as smoothing government and even NGO decision makers to get consulting jobs, he is living example of the dumbing down Uganda has suffered under President Museveni.  It is fair to say that the IGG’s report is fake because it was rigged to make her office look good while protecting the state house, UPDF and other notoriously corrupt institutions. It is also fake because the doctor of ‘poverty eradication’ who conducted it is not qualified, otherwise he would have known that it including the IGG, who paid him, in a survey this nature is an obvious conflict of interest.”

In the 1960’s and early 70’s,  Makerere University was one of Africa’s top 10 best Universities.  During Mr.  Museveni’s more than 20 years in power,  the university’s standing has steadily fallen, as government has continuously cut the university budget.  To fend for itself, the university introduced private sponsorships and personalized post graduate programs such PhD in Poverty Eradication.  There have numerous press reports of forged transcripts and even degree sales at Makerere but, like in other white collar crimes in Uganda, prosecutions are extremely rare. The overall result is a large number of Makerere graduates who are ill-prepared to work professionally in or outside Uganda. And holders of  graduate degrees which are not worth the paper they are written on.

In August 2008, Makerere was ranked 59th out of the top 100 universities on the continent – its lowest ranking ever – after dropping 12 places from its 2007 ranking. For comparison, Dar es Salaam University is 24, University of Nairobi is 25, Strathmore University (Nairobi) is 29, University of Rwanda is 30 and Eggerton University (Kenya) is 32. Uganda has only Makerere in Africa’s top 100 but Rwanda has 2, Kenya has a total of 5 and Tanzania 2. The rankings are conducted by Webometrics.