For nearly 20 years, the World Bank and western countries that finance the NRM government have ignored the excesses of president Museveni and his cabal and funnelled billions of dollars into Uganda.  Baganda analysts tend to cite corruption and racism within the donor community as the primary reasons why president Museveni and his NRM have had such a successful run. Since 1992 Uganda’s NRM government has depended on foreign aid for 50-60% of its budget (donors usually understate it to avoid embarrassment).  During the same period, Uganda’s rulers and their families have taken advantage of the donor support to invade Congo, steal billions of dollars from the national treasury and murder citizens using illegal militia like Black Mambas.  Using traditional “Mbulira gwoyita naye” logic, many Baganda opinion leaders argue that the corruption in the NRM government is undisputable evidence that their benefactors, the donors, are also corrupt.

Many  Baganda intellectuals also believe that, Uganda’s western foreign donors  think that black Africans do not deserve the same human rights as others. For example, most  European countries do not tolerate use of selective laws to steal property and deny self-determination rights from a distinct European nation like Bosnians or Slovaks or Danes or Latvians.  However, in Uganda, countries like Norway and Denmark aggressively  fund projects like Decentralization and the 1998 Land Act, which are specifically designed to deny Baganda their human rights. This irrationality is leading many Baganda intellectuals to conclude that racism is a major factor in the Uganda donor community’s approach to Museveni.  The theory is also supported by the radically different reaction seen from the western countries when Robert Mugabe applies similarly inhuman policies to whites in Zimbabwe.

In what some Banda observers believe might be a USA led shift in tolerance towards Mr. Museveni in 2010, however, the Western countries appear to be taking some steps to distance themselves from Museveni’s policies.  President Obama sent a strong signal when he refused to grant Mr. Museveni private meeting at the UN Annual Meeting late last year. Last month, the US Congress passed a resolution instructing the State Department to monitor and report  on Uganda 2011 election campaign. Recently, the USA Ambassador to Uganda officially recognized the Kingdom of Buganda when he trekked to Kabaka Mutebi’s Banda palace for an official visit (see “United States Ambassador Listens To Kabaka Mutebi”).

In the latest move by Museveni’s benefactors, a western diplomatic official has leaked a World Bank  statement that threatens the withdraw of funding. It was presented to the NRM government  in a closed door national budget workshop late last month.  The periodic national budget workshops are popularly known as the Uganda’s begging conferences in local circle.

The full text of the leaked World Bank statement is reproduced in full below:

DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS REMARKS
NATIONAL BUDGET WORKSHOP
25-26 February 2010
(As prepared for delivery)
Your Excellency, the President of the Republic of Uganda,
Right Honorable Prime Minister,
Honorable Minister of Finance, Planning and Economic Development,
Honorable Ministers,
Honorable Members of Parliament,
Representatives of civil society organizations and the private sector,
Members of the diplomatic community,
Distinguished participants, Ladies and Gentlemen,

On behalf of the development partners, I wish to thank the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development for organizing this budget workshop.

We recognize that the 2010/11 budget is being developed in tandem with the National Development Plan. This provides an opportunity to focus the budget on Uganda’s development priorities.

Let me take this opportunity to commend the Government of Uganda on its continued macroeconomic achievements.

Sustained economic growth has translated into a significant decline in poverty levels. Moreover, the economy is weathering the impact of the global financial crisis better than anticipated and headline inflation has returned to single digits.

We also welcome the introduction, by the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development, of performance based budgeting, quarterly release of funds to spending agencies, and allocation of more resources to monitoring of results.

The Office of the Prime Minister has improved reporting on government performance. This will help to improve accountability. And we congratulate the Government for its efforts to bring peace to Northern Uganda and championing reconstruction of that region.

Your Excellency, past accomplishments by the government of Uganda have been remarkable. However, the real test of prudent and effective government lies in how you will address the challenges of the future.

The vision for Uganda laid out by your Excellency is inspiring and clear: Uganda has to become a middle income country over the next 15 years. Consequently, this statement by development partners has only one theme: what will it take for Uganda to achieve this goal?

There are three challenges that Uganda needs to tackle.
The first challenge: Uganda needs higher economic growth and lower population growth. For Uganda to attain middle income status over the next 15 years, per capita income growth needs to be 6% per year, meaning the economy has to grow at close to 10% per year.

Is this possible? Yes, it is: Thailand had the same GDP per capita as Uganda in 1963; it became a middle income country 18 years later. Indonesia had the same GDP per capita as Uganda in 1978; it became a middle income country 17 years later.

And, Malaysia grew 135% in per capita terms over 20 years from 1960.
These three countries have one common factor: during the period of dramatically rising per capita incomes, fertility rates fell between 40 to 50%.

This is no coincidence. These countries were basically “harvesting the demographic dividend” – the period where falling fertility rates leads to a falling dependency ratio: that means a larger proportion of the population is in their working age, compared to children and the elderly.

At 3.2% growth per year, Uganda has one of the fastest rates of population growth in the world. Uganda’s population is projected to reach 38 million by 2015 and close to 100 million by 2050. This has serious implications for livelihoods, food security, maternal and child mortality, and the environment.

Providing social services such as education and healthcare to a rapidly growing population will put enormous strains on both households and the public purse.

Despite economic growth over the last 20 years, profound inequality in incomes, living standards and life expectancy persist within and across regions. Making economic growth more inclusive should therefore be a priority.

The second challenge: Uganda can only attain middle income status with a healthy and educated labor force.

Uganda needs to accelerate progress towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals for health and education. The NDP states unequivocally that the health and education MDG indicators will only “marginally improve”.

Only slightly more than half of the children that enter primary one, reach primary five. This is well short of the goal that all children, boys and girls alike, should complete a full course of primary education.

In addition, the targets for child and infant mortality and maternal health are also unlikely to be reached and Uganda still has one of the highest rates of maternal mortality in the world.

Building an effective and accountable state is the third crucial challenge Uganda is faced with. The fast growing countries of Asia mentioned earlier are not free of corruption.

But corruption in these countries has not affected the effectiveness of the state to the extent that it affects the Ugandan state. Development partners are particularly concerned about Government failure to take effective action against high level corruption.

A recent example is CHOGM, where there has been minimal follow-up on recommendations in the audit reports, which have been known since 2008.

The PAC hearings have publicized the issues surrounding the leakage and abuse of CHOGM funds. Yet, government administrative action to sanction offenders or recover funds has so far been inadequate.

Your Excellency, corruption in Uganda is endemic and we have seen no signs of improvement. The costs of corruption, stealing and leakages are staggering: $1.6 million lost in the global fund to fight aids, tuberculosis and malaria; $4.6 million lost in the GAVI immunization scam; at least $27 million lost in connection with CHOGM; billions of Shillings lost in the NAADS scam and the NSSF Temangalo scandal; and the loss in procurement corruption is estimated by the PPDA to be more than $100m per year.

However, government effectiveness is not only undermined by corruption. There remain fundamental gaps in public financial and public sector management. Basic rules are not adhered to. Lines of accountability are confused, mandates of central and local governments are not clear.

This has created a fundamental lack of accountability in Government. How else to explain high levels of absenteeism of teachers and health workers estimated at causing losses of up to $70 million per year?

Last but surely not least, only effective and accountable states are able to turn oil into a blessing for a country. Without an effective and accountable government, Uganda could easily become the next African country where oil has become a curse.

Your Excellency, let me now address the concrete steps that can be taken to ensure Uganda becomes a middle income country.

First: government needs to remove the binding constraints to growth and curb population growth. The dual challenge of increased economic growth and rapid job creation requires that the binding constraints on growth, such as poor transport infrastructure and insufficient supply of electricity are tackled.

The increased investments in the transport sector are therefore commendable. However, increased investments should be matched by an equal effort to improve governance and capacity of the sector to ensure that money is well spent.

We would like to urge the government to stick to the time-tested policy of trusting the private sector for implementing major works.

Only a vibrant private sector construction industry will provide Uganda with the roads that are so badly needed. The re-introduction of district force account operations was and still is a bad idea.

The current low level of absorption capacity in the private sector is a result of lack of investments in the past. The private sector will meet the challenges of road construction and maintenance only if investments by the Government are predictable.

Despite the huge increase in spending on road construction and maintenance, the government has yet to put in place a system for monitoring road conditions.

This leaves the sector open to fraud and undermines efforts to achieve value for money in the road sector. A big proportion of future oil revenues will surely be spent on the transport sector.

This makes it even more urgent to improve the governance framework for road construction and maintenance.
The NDP has identified a reduction in fertility as a major strategy.

According to surveys, Ugandan women would like to have fewer children than they currently have. However, 41% of demands for family planning services are currently unmet.

Without a rapid expansion of family planning programs, Uganda will not be able to replicate the impressive growth rates in the Asian countries mentioned earlier.

What is needed, therefore, is a commitment on the part of government to increase its share in procurement of contraceptives, which is currently less than 10% of national requirements.

Equally important is increased focus on girls’ education and improvement in reproductive health, to address the shortfalls against the MDG indicators mentioned earlier.

Lastly, Mr. President, as demonstrated over the last 23 years, a stable political environment is the single most important factor for a good business climate.

Political upheaval is very bad for investment and doing business, as we have recently witnessed in Kenya. In turn, respect for the rule of law and human rights is essential to guarantee political stability.

Second: government needs to prioritize public spending while ensuring that Uganda’s labor force is healthy and educated.

Addressing the challenge of providing quality services to the growing Ugandan population necessitates prudent and efficient use of Uganda’s limited financial resources. Achieving value for money is therefore essential.

In addition to curbing waste and inefficiencies the government should prioritize public spending. Development partners share the concern of Uganda’s civil society and media about the high and increasing levels of spending on government’s administrative structures.

These are resources that could otherwise be invested in infrastructure and on providing basic education, health care and clean drinking water to the poor.

The sharp increase in the number of districts in recent years (and continued plans for new ones), diverts both human and financial resources from existing districts and undermines the capacity of local governments to effectively deliver services.

Starting at 36 districts, 80 districts last year, and now 91 districts: who can make a serious case that this expansion of the number of districts is good for service delivery?

I now turn to concrete suggestions to strengthen the capacity of the Ugandan state.

An effective and accountable state is needed to guarantee value for money in service delivery by tackling corruption, waste and inefficiencies. Oil will provide much of the resources needed to increase public and private investment in future years.

However, if these investments are to yield lasting results, the management of public finances has to improve.

While we recognize the Government of Uganda’s commitment to the value for money agenda, much more needs to be done. The NDP identifies public sector management and administration as the number one binding constraint to achieving Uganda’s development objectives.

The remaining gaps in some of the fundamental aspects of public financial management need urgent attention in order to improve spending capacity and efficiency.

For example, zero tolerance towards non-adherence to the Commitment Control Systems, or the circumvention of IFMIS, is required to address the long standing abuse of Public Financial Management (PFM) systems.

Making sure basic PFM systems work requires in the first place fundamental behavioral change. This change can only be brought about by the Government and each one of you sitting here.

Weak public sector management and administration is one of the main causes of absenteeism of teachers and health workers. This waste of public resources should not be allowed to continue.

Action should be taken to address absenteeism. This should include not only positive incentives, but also strong disciplinary measures.
Lastly, Mr. President, the Government of Uganda has to start fighting corruption seriously.

The undeniable lack of government action to follow up on cases of grand corruption is a key area of development partner concern. Policies, laws and institutions are in place, but enforcement is limited, creating a culture of impunity.

Offenders should be sanctioned, money should be recovered and criminal investigations taken forward on key cases. We commend MoFPED on the recent initiative to develop an Action Plan for follow-up on CHOGM, which we hope will lead to concrete action being taken in the near future.

The Government’s failure to act on high level corruption will have implications, and donors under the Joint Budget Support Framework are currently considering a range of actions.

This may include withholding disbursements, reductions in aid, or re-programming away from direct budget support etc. These were all options discussed and agreed to with the Government in the 2007/08 budget appraisal.

In conclusion, Your Excellency, we would like to assure the government of Uganda that Development Cooperation will increasingly be a results-oriented partnership, where development partners can demonstrate to their own taxpayers that money is well spent.

We are committed to improving the predictability of aid and to working with Government to address the serious challenges Uganda faces to consolidate past gains and achieve lasting results for the people of Uganda.

Thank you for your attention.

Kundhavi Kadiresan
World Bank Country Manager
Chair, Local Development Partners’ Group
Co-Chair, Joint Budget Support Framework Policy Committee

The Buganda Kingdom attorney general, Owek.  Apollo Makubuya said in a press statement yesterday that the second Buganda conference would take place on Saturday December 17, 2009. Owek. Makubuya, who chairs the organizing committee explained that the  conference would clarify the differences between Federalism, Decentralization and Regional Tier.  The theme of the conference is to promote federalism as the best form of governance for Uganda.

Decentralization is an improvised form of government which Jaberi Bidandi Ssali and Uganda’s warlord president, Yoweri Museveni, implemented in 1995, with the help of Denmark, Norway and other western countries. It was brought in to derail Buganda’s demands for a federal system (Federo). Regional Tier is a highly unpopular (in Buganda) form government which was secretly negotiated between Museveni and Katikkiro Mulwaanyamuli Ssemwogerere, which would have allowed Museveni to take charge of the Buganda government and for non-Baganda to assume the cultural office of Katikkiro.

When announcing the 2009 Buganda Conference, Owek. Makubuya revealed that federalists from the USA, UK and Nigeria were expected to participate in the conference. Participants are also expected from Busoga, Bunyoro, Toro, the Diaspora and academia. Owek. Makubuya suggested that Buganda is politically isolated and promised to fix the problem by making it clear that Buganda is not demanding for Federo alone.”

Two weeks ago, a retired former Buganda Government official currently visiting in North America, told us that there are three camps at Mmengo on the issue of Buganda political situation. He said: “The situation is similar to administration of Katikkiro Michael Kintu in the early 1960’s. Kintu and his supporters pushed for Buganda independence, arguing that all our neighbors secretly hated or envied Buganda and could not be honest partners in the long run. They were accused of being ‘radicals’, not accommodating and even ‘uncivilized’. Today, it is Muzei Nsubuga Nsambu in the camp which is accused of the same because he insists that Buganda must not repeat past mistakes and the solution is secession.”

The elderly grandfather continued: “Opposite to Kintu’s camp, in 1960, was a larger camp which was ‘more educated’ and liberal camp, which promoted ‘Federo for all who want it’. Mayanja Nkangi, who now helps Museveni manipulate Buganda’s lands, was one of these young firebrands and ended up becoming Katikkiro. Even today the second camp are viewed as the more educated and modern and, like 45 year ago, they are  pushing hard for ‘Federo for all who want it’.  History is repeating itself 100% except that Museveni is more sinister and dishonest than the colonialists or Obote.

“The third camp, both in 1960 and now, are those who either do not have enough information or enough courage to push for one side or another. Thanks to Buganda’s democratic traditions, all camps are expected to have their say at the Buganda Conference in December. Also expected is heavy infiltration of occupation government agents, to intimidate people and influence events.”

Four loyal subjects of Kabaka Muwenda Mutebi of Buganda have taken the NRM Buganda occupation government to its own constitutional court, requesting the jurists to rule the blocking of the Kabaka’s visit to Bugerere county unconstitutional. The petitioners are Omutaka Edward Kamya Lugonvu who is the Katikkiro of Mamba clan, Omutaka Dr Adam Kimala, also an elder in the Mamba clan together with Charles Ssenkungu Walugendo and Ms Sayida Najjuka who are both residents of Bugerere county (Bagerere).

On behalf of the their clients Balikuddembe and Co Advocates and Godfrey Lule Legal Consultants, petitioned the Uganda constitutional court to rule that in barring the Kabaka and his Katikkiro Eng. John Baptist Walusimbi from visiting Kayunga in Bugerere County on September 12, the government contravened various provisions of the Constitution, including Article 21 which outlaws discriminatory acts.

Dr. Adam Kimala is a leading Muganda conservative intellectual. He and his lawyer, Godfrey Lule, were among the closest supporters and advisors to former Katikkiro Daniel Muliika as he (Muliika) taught Mmengo and Buganda how to “wake up” and resist the occupation.

Omulongo Kamya submitted an affidavit t stating that, among other things, while the Baganda, including those in the Diaspora are not compelled to pay allegiance to the Kabaka in any way, loyalty is rendered on their “own free will” and to prevent the kingdom’s people from associating in their diverse cultural norms “violates” their constitutional right to freedom of association.

The Attorney General of the NRM occupation government, Kiddu Makubuya, has up to 14 days within which to formally respond to the petition.

The current Uganda constitution was enacted in 1995 against the wishes of Baganda, the most influential and wealthiest of Uganda’s many ethnic groups. According to the Odoki Commission which surveyed Ugandans for input into the  new constitution, 90% of Buganda residents demanded federal form of government.  However, with support from Norway, Denmark and Sweden, Museveni’s NRM froced an arbitrary “decentralization form of government” into the constitution . Despite heavy promotion by Museveni co-conspirator at the time, Jaberi Bidandi Ssali, Baganda rejected Museveni’s decentralization and immediately started to agitate for the federal (federo) constitution. It is the 10 years of Buganda agitation for federo and Museveni’s brutal response that led to the huge demonstrations of September 10-11, 2009 and Museveni’s massacre of 30 Baganda. Over 65% of Uganda’s armed forces are now stationed in Buganda, 20% of the size, which puts the kingdom under armed occupation by the NRM government and its Banyankore, Bakiga, Banyarwanda and other collaborators.

A multi-million dollar custom Gulfstream jet purchased for Uganda’s president Museveni arrived in the country recently. Mr. Museveni acquired the US$48 million Gulfstream V to replace the less opulent Gulfstream IV he bought less than 10 years ago in 2000. The Ugandan leader, who President Bill Clinton used to refer to as one of a “new breed” of progressive Africa leaders has over the last 10 years turned into a fully fledged dictator who working hard to best the likes of Congo’s Mobutu. Mr. Museveni complements a US$54 million presidential palace which is only one year old.

For example in 2003 Mr. Museveni used the $30 million Gulf Stream IV to fly his daughter to a hospital in Germany so she could give birth, at a cost of over $35,000, excluding hospital fees. He unapologetically told the local press that he had to do for his family security because he did not trust Ugandan doctors. And it is true that Uganda’s medical services are by far the poorest in East Africa, largely because the starting salary of a Uganda doctor is less than US$300 per month compared to US$1,000 or more in Rwanda, Kenya and much of Tanzania.

According to Transparency International, Uganda is one of the most corrupt and politically unstable countries, described by diplomats as a “crooks’ heaven”. For example five members of the president’s immediate family hold senior government positions. Most notable are his wife Janet who is Minister for Karamoja Region, home of Uganda’s gold mineral reserves and his super corrupt half-brother Salim Saleh Akandwanaho is Presidential Advisor on security. After coming to power through a military coup, Mr. Museveni has ruled Uganda without interruption and all signs are that he intends to remain president until his son, Muhoozi Kainerugaba, can take over from him.

Available data supports the argument by Baganda analysts that European and American tax payers are directly and actively funding Mr. Museveni’s human rights abuses and excesses. Mr. Museveni’s local government system is all but fully funded by Sweden and the other Nordic countries. Germany’s GTZ and KfW have pumped millions into shoddy roads and the financial sector only to end up with a quasi-criminal business class in the country, dominated by Museveni relatives and cronies. USAID has not escaped, as millions of American tax payer money has been channeled into fake agricultural and social development programs used to report bogus economic growth and AIDS control statistics with no real improvements on the ground.  Today, at least 50% of Uganda’s national budget is funded by western donors, led by Denmark, Sweden, United Kingdom and USA. That is why European and American taxpayers are actively funding Mr. Museveni to spend US$102 million (3% of the US$3B 2007/2008 national budget) on a house and a plane within 12 months. That is, not counting operating and maintenance costs.

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.”