On July 17, 2009 the Secretary General for the Democratic Party (DP) UK and Ireland Chapter issued a press release condemning the arrest of DP presidential aspirant, Samuel Lubega, by Mr. Museveni’s government. This writer have not been able to independently confirm the arrest of Mr. Lubega. However, the arrrest, tear gasing and general harrassment of Baganda DP candidates is as routine as voting itself during Uganda election seasons.

Below is the full text of the DP UK and Ireland chapter, without editing.

DP PRESS REALESE

Date: 17 July 2009.

The repeated unlawful Arrest of Democratic Party (DP) Presidential Candidate Samuel Lubega

DP Presidential aspirant, Samuel Lubega, has today Friday 17 July, been arrested for the second time this week, along with others, but it is not clear at the moment if and what charges have been preferred against them. Constitutionally, charges must be brought against them within 48 hours from the time of arrest. The current regime in Kampala is however known not to tolerate any form of dissent and oppositionists are regularly stopped from holding peaceful meetings, arrested and prosecuted on spurious charges, such as holding illegal rallies, obstructing police in the course of their duty and disrupting business and traffic. Indeed, earlier this week, Samuel Lubega and 19 others were arrested and charged with these very offences.

Mr. Lubega and the Democratic Party Activists were arrested by armed security personnel in the constituency office of the area DP Member of Parliament Mr. Muhammad Kawuma who had organised a meeting to sensitise his constituents on the Kampala Capital City Bill. If passed into law, this bill will deny millions of Kampala residents the right to elect their own representatives.

Members of DP UK & Ireland Chapter reiterate their condemnation in the strongest terms possible the repeated unlawful and arbitrary arrest of the DP Presidential Aspirant along with others, which amounts to political persecution.

Mr. Lubega is being held at Entebbe Police Station alongside the Activists of the Democratic Party. The activists were physically tortured and manhandled by the Security Personnel.

Members of the DP UK & Ireland Chapter expect and demand that there be unrestricted and unfettered access to Samuel Lubega and the activists by their families, legal representatives and friends in accordance with the laws of Uganda as well as international law.  We urge the government to ensure that any trial is conducted in accordance with the international standards of fair trial.

Members of the DP UK & Ireland Chapter will hold President Museveni personally responsible for the well-being, safety and lives of Mr Lubega and the DP Activists while they are in detention.

Additionally, the Security Minister Hon. Amama Mbabazi, Co-ordinator of Security Services in the President’s Office General David Tinyefuza, Minister of Internal Affairs Hon. Kirunda Kiveijinja, the Inspector General of Police General Kale Kaihura and the Officer in Charge of the arresting police Station, as people sharing personal responsibility with the President for the personal safety, health and life of Samuel Lubega as well as that of the DP Activists.

Members of the DP UK & Ireland Chapter are aware of acts of poisoning and death of political prisoners during or after detention by State Security agents in Uganda and they are deeply concerned about the continued unlawful arrest and detention, intimidation, harassment and torture of Ugandans seeking to exercise their constitutional rights.

Derek Mutema

Secretary General DP UK and Ireland Chapter.

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

The Uganda Human Rights Commission’s (UHRC) 10th Annual Report, dated July 22, 2008 exposes various human rights violations in Uganda and Government’s failure to honor UHRC rulings. The Report expresses concern with the continued practice of detaining suspects for more than 48 hours before being taken to court, restriction in access to some places of detention, persistence of torture, congestion in cells and long detentions without trial. The UHRC also is concerned about the poor general welfare of inmates, suspects continue to be detained with convicts, prisoners are hired out to private individuals and they work for long hours without food and remuneration and there are still challenges in access to medical care especially in former Local Administration Prisons and Police cells/posts. What is even more disturbing is the detention of children in adult prisons and police cells.

Over the years, the Commission has made several pertinent recommendations to government aimed at improving the situation of human rights in the country. The report tracks progress made on the implementation of these recommendations. Only a few have been fully complied with such as the passing of the Persons with Disabilities Act and the Equal Opportunities Act. Most recommendations have been partially complied with while others have not been complied with. UHRC urges compliance with all its recommendations.

Recommendations which have not been complied with include the following;
1. Enactment of various laws which have an impact on human rights:
•a law prohibiting torture,
•Domestic Relations Bill
•fixing a minumum wage
2. Establishment of a Victims Compensation Fund
3. Ratification of the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention Against Torture
4. Reporting to the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
5. Detention of suspects in ungazetted places of detention known as ‘safe houses’. Although, there is a significant reduction in the number of such complaints there are still a few complaints. ‘Safe houses’ must completely be eliminated.

BUGANDA EMERGENCY RESPONSE COMMITTEE
PRESS AND GENERAL BRIEF

23rd JULY 2008

This is an update on the unfolding situation of the detained Buganda Kingdom Officials.

The Current Situation:

As all are now aware, two Ministers of the Buganda Government and the Chairperson of Buganda’s Central Civic Education Committee were arrested by plain clothed security operatives on Friday July 18 th 2008. The arrested individuals are:

1. Owek. Charles Peter Mayiga (Minister of Information and Cabinet and Lukiiko Affairs, Buganda Government);
2. Owek. Medard Lubega (Minister of State for Information, Buganda Government); and
3. Omuk. Betty Nambooze Bakireke (CCEC, Buganda Government).

They were arrested on the day of the successful inaugural Buganda Conference. It is increasingly apparent that the Uganda Police Force, which is the arm of Government, lawfully vested with the powers of arrest and investigation had nothing to do with the clandestine and brutal operation of the 18th July 2008. The Police have only been brought in to provide cover for an operation being carried out by a more clandestine security organ. As we write, the officials have been detained for coming to 120 hours without being presented to any court of law. This is a blatant violation of Article 23(3) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, which directs that no person arrested upon reasonable suspicion of having committed a criminal offence under the laws of Uganda shall be detained for more than 48 hours from the time of his or her arrest.

The Detainees Physical Wellbeing and Welfare:

Instead of presenting the officials to a court of law, the Government has decided to take them around Western Uganda, moving them around Bundibugyo, Ibanda, Fort Portal, Kyenjojo, Ntoroko and Kagadi and other places unknown. The Uganda Human Rights Commission has come out and stated that these movements amount to physical and psychological torture which is contrary to Article 24 of the Constitution. It is also hindering the detained officials’ access to their next-of-kin, legal representatives and personal doctors in violation of Article 23(5) of the Constitution. The Uganda Human Rights Commission stated that two of the detained officials are in need of medical care. There is also a concern that the detained officials are suffering from the combined effects of dehydration, lack of nourishment (hunger) as well as sleep deprivation. Betty Nambooze is said to be suffering from mastitis (inflammation or infection of the breasts that causes swelling and fevers) owing to the fact that she has not breastfed her 1 year old child for over 5 days. She was allegedly detained in a car at Ntoroko for most of the day on the 21st July 2008 before being driven to Bundibugyo and dumped in the cells there. It has also been reported that Medard Lubega Ssegona collapsed during an “identification parade” in Kagadi, Kibaale District. The Kingdom of Buganda has despatched a team of Ministers to the places where the officials are being detained to investigate their wellbeing and to offer moral as well as physical support. But it must be reiterated that whilst Kingdom of Buganda and the families of the detainees will do their best to ensure that the detainees have access to food, clothing and medical care, it should not be in any doubt that responsibility for the physical wellbeing and welfare of the detainees rests squarely with the Government of Uganda and the individual actors responsible for the perpetration of these gross crimes.

Curious Justification of the Government’s Actions:

Senior Government officials have come out with a curious justification for the detention of the Kingdom’s officials well beyond the lawful time limit and subjecting them to physical and psychological torture, which should be of concern to all Ugandans. Appearing on the WBS TV programme “Issues At Hand” on the 22nd July 2005, the Minister of State for Internal Affairs, Hon. Matia Kasaijja, said that the provisions of Article 23 of the Constitution, requiring suspects to be produced before a court of law within 48 hours of arrest, are a “bad law” and do not bind Government. The Minister of Defence, Hon. Dr. Crispus Kiyonga, appearing before the Parliamentary Committee on Defence also said that even though 48 hours had elapsed, Government would only produce the detained officials before a court at its own convenience and give an explanation later. This statement echoes that of Hon. Kasaijja, insofar as it implies that the provisions of the Constitution do not bind Government. Worse still, the Co-ordinator of National Intelligence, General David Munungu Tinyefuza, was quoted in the Daily Monitor as saying that under some circumstances, which he did not specify, “some laws can even be suspended”. This can only have been a reference to the provisions of Article 23 of the Constitution. These statements, which come on the back of blatant violations of the provisions of the Constitution, are very alarming. It is also worth quoting Article 3(2) of the Constitution here, so as to highlight the grave implications of the statements of the those high ranking Government officials and the actions of Government:

“Any person who, singly or in concert with others, by any violent or other unlawful means, suspends, overthrows, abrogates, or amends this Constitution or any part of it or attempts to do any such act, commits the offence of treason and shall be punished according to law.”

[Emphasis ours] For ease of reference, the punishment for treason, under the laws of Uganda is death.

Difficult Negotiations:

As previously stated, the Katikiro has been engaged negotiations with high ranking Government officials, trying to secure the release of the detained Buganda officials. It must be made clear that this situation has been forced upon the Katikiro. He is not seeking special favours but is acting in good faith and out of concern for the physical wellbeing of the detained officials. The Katikiro is also thoroughly convinced of the innocence of all of the detained officials and is trying to ensure that they are swiftly restored to liberty and re-united with their families. However, with every passing day, the situation deteriorates and it increasingly appears as if the detained officials are being held as hostages in order to compel the Katikiro and the Kingdom of Buganda to make various concessions regarding the conduct of Buganda’s affairs. However, the Katikiro has the interests of the people and the Kingdom of Buganda at heart and will not make any concessions.

Call to Action:

We continue to call upon all Ugandans, Religious Bodies as well as human rights and civil society organisations to join the Kingdom of Buganda in denouncing this heavy-handed and illegal action and to engage the Government of Uganda to abide by the Constitution and to cease and desist from the needless persecution of people who are engaged in lawful and democratic debate. The Kingdom of Buganda would like to thank the Uganda Human Rights Commission, the Acholi Parliamentary Group, the Foundation For Human Rights Initiative and all others who have come out with timely statements of support and assistance.

BUGANDA EMERGENCY RESPONSE COMMITTEE