Land Amendment Bill 2007: Populist Move by NRM to Win Votes?

By Solomon Akugizibwe

Buganda Kingdom has fervently opposed the bill saying the bill is intended to grab land in Buganda by giving tenants rights that a landlord can not overturn.

But the momentum with which the government is pushing for the enactment of the Land Amendment Bill 2007 despite the enormous opposition from traditional institutions, Banks, Christians, Lawyers and the opposition politicians among others is making many people ask what special interests the executive has in amending the land law.

The executive presented the Land Amendment Bill 2007 to parliament on February 10th, to among others provide legal security to tenants on registered land. President Yoweri Museveni, the chief architect of the bill says it is aimed at stopping the rampant evictions of tenants which is common these days. Museveni is currently traversing the country to among others ask Ugandans to support the land amendment bill. The President recently issued a warning to all NRM leaning MPs against opposing the land amendments.

A ministerial committee made up of five groups headed by the Minister of Lands, Housing and Urban development, Daniel Omar Atubo was recently dispatched to traverse the country to convince Ugandans to support the land amendment bill.

What really could explain the insistence by the government and Museveni in particular to this land bill that is obviously unpopular in many circles? Some people are arguing that with the declining popularity as shown by the last two presidential elections and as the 2011 presidential elections nears, President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni and his ruling National Resistance Movement Party (NRM) are desperately looking for ways to boost their popularity and consolidate their support base, especially among the rural people.

During the 2006 elections NRM was humiliated by the opposition in Teso region which it had won with over 80% during the 2001 elections. The ruling party therefore can't take anything for granted now because; the Teso lesson shows that the opposition can even win traditional NRM strongholds.

It has now come to light that increasingly scared of the opposition which gaining ground everyday, the government has now resorted to using populist policies to gain popular support of ordinary Ugandans. What other better way to gain popular support than through giving extra assurance to the majority of people on land, the leading factor of production (especially in Uganda's agriculture based economy).

The Land Amendment bill 2007, is intended to amend the Land Act 1998 (as amended in 1998) to enhance the security of occupancy of lawful and bona fide occupants on registered land in accordance with Article 237 of the Constitution.

In other words the bill will ensure that tenants (these are poor peasants in the rural areas who have been Museveni's core supporters) are assured of land tenure security. However, other than look at the political undertones of the arguments, Museveni argues that the people opposing the bill are the landlords who got land courtesy of British colonialists at the expense of the majority during the 1900 land allocation agreement.

Museveni has been telling whoever cares to listen that his government wants to correct the historical wrongs committed by colonialists who gave land to a few nobles and royals by distributing to them large chunks of land while turning the majority of the people into squatters on their own land. Museveni says the local people who were cheated of their land are now being evicted, and this bill is aimed at protecting their land rights.

But the Buganda kingdom argues that most of these people the bill wants to give protection are not Baganda and therefore not descendants of the land they occupy.

The bill has been widely opposed by the opposition politicians, bankers, Christian bodies, lawyers, landlords and cultural leaders among others because of their different interests.

For instance, Buganda Kingdom has fervently opposed the bill saying the bill is intended to grab land in Buganda by giving tenants rights that a landlord can not overturn. The Kabaka of Buganda is the biggest landlord in Buganda, apart from being the chief landlord "Sabataka" of all land in Buganda. The kingdom claims some of its land (the disputed 9,000 square miles) have been given out to individuals and the government wants to use this bill to legalize the occupancy on the land the kingdom wants back.

In fact, some members of the opposition and Buganda Kingdom loyalists, say the land bill is an attempt by the government to weaken Buganda Kingdom financially because of the long standing feuds between the central government and officials at Mengo, many of whom belong to opposition political parties.

The President of the Forum for Democratic Change, Dr. Kizza Besigye told journalists recently that the Bill aims at weakening and undermining the Buganda kingdom and its economy. "The real aim of the Land Bill cannot be to protect lawful or bona fide occupants of land as claimed but to weaken Buganda Kingdom and its economy," Besigye said.

However, the government insists that the Land (Amendment) Bill 2007 is designed to protect lawful and bonafide tenants from unlawful evictions by landlords, according to Minister of Lands, Housing and Urban Development Daniel Omara Atubo.

But the Uganda law Society has also declared that the bill is unconstitutional as it infringes on the rights to private property by limiting the rights of landlords on their land. The Uganda Bankers Association have also presented a memorandum criticizing the bill, saying the bill will reduce the value of land because landlords who own the titles that are used as security in accessing loans will not have superior powers over their land. This means land will no longer be used as security for loans.

An independent research that has reviewed the Land Amendment Bill has also supported this view, emphasizing that if the bill is passed in its current form, it will negatively affect economic growth.

The research concluded that the bill is not necessary because it does not provide any new solutions against evictions, while at the same time complicating the relationship between tenants and land lords.

The research done by Julia Schwartz, an international researcher found that the bill currently before Parliament does not offer any new protection to tenants on registered land against eviction. The bill is providing that the tenants can only be evicted with a court order, which court order can only be issued after the tenants fails or refuses to pay land/ ground rent or Busuulu to the landlord or titled land owner.

The bill also provides for the minister of lands to approve the ground rent set by the respective district land boards, and set ground rent for districts that fail to set the land rent within a given period of time. This particular provision of giving a minister power to determine ground has been decried by many as unconstitutional.

But other areas especially northern and eastern Uganda where land is owned mainly under customary tenure, the opposition to the land bill results from introducing a clause that requires land matters to be solved in courts of law. Schwartz says the bill wrongly reverts all powers on land to courts of law, yet under customary tenure; all land is managed and owned according to customs. The research is calling for the recognition of the cultural leaders in land matters concerning land owned under customer tenure.

According to the research, there are adequate provisions in the land laws giving protection to tenants, but the laws need to be adequately implemented. This is the same argument Mengo government led by their Attorney general, Apollo Makubuya have been advancing. But Museveni and his government are so determined to pass the bill into law. But past legal maneuvers on land issues have shown no one can easily claim a victory when it comes to determining land rights and ownership, other than compromise. Yet compromise seems largely lacking in this bill currently before Parliament.

First published: May 1, 2008 on ugpulse.com

photo: ekitibwakyabuganda.wordpress.com

Political Parties Funding Bill: Is it an attempt by NRM to win the 2011 elections?

By Solomon Akugizibwe

Political parties have been complaining of lack of funding for their activities while the ruling National Resistance Movement benefits from state funding.

The executive arm of government at the beginning of April 2008 presented to Parliament the Political Parties and Organisations Amendment Bill, which mainly provides for funding of political parties in Uganda. The bill was expected to bring happiness in political party circles, given that all political parties have been complaining of lack of funding for their activities while the ruling National Resistance Movement 'benefits' from state funding.

But the bill presented by the Attorney General and Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, Prof. Khiddu Makubuya has instead generated more criticism and scorn from the opposition political parties. One wonders how a bill supposed to give political parties the much needed funding should be opposed by the organizations it is intended to benefit.

Prof. Makubuya says the purpose of the Political Parties and Organisations Amendment Bill is to amend the Political Parties and Organizations Act, 2005 to provide for the use of government or public resources for political party or organization activities.

According to the bill, registered political parties or organizations shall be funded in respect of elections and their normal day-to-day activities, but the funding shall be based on the numerical strength of each political party or organization in Parliament.

The way how the money for political party funding will be distributed is the major point of contention by political parties. Many of the political parties have strongly criticized the NRM of using the bill to legalize the funding of activities of the ruling NRM.

The NRM has an astounding majority in Parliament. In this 8^th Parliament, the party has 210 MPs out of the 304 directly elected MPs. The majority of the 38 Independent MPs are also NRM-leaning MPs, while four of the five representatives of workers and four of the five representatives of people with disabilities in Parliament also belong to the NRM. This means the NRM will get about 78 percent of the total money that will be availed to fund political parties.

The 8^th Parliament has
215 constituency representatives
79 district woman representatives
10 representatives of the Uganda People's Defense Forces
5 representatives of the Youth
5 representatives of People with disabilities
5 representatives of workers
16 Ex-official members

Political party representation in 8^th parliament

NRM- 210
FDC- 39
UPC- 9
DP- 8
CP- 1
JEEMA- 1

The balance of elected MPs are independents (save for UPDF representatives).

There is no doubt therefore that the Bill, if passed in its current form will greatly benefit the NRM party. No wonder, the NRM caucus meeting on April 13th 2008 agreed to support the bill for political party funding.

"The NRM caucus agreed in principle to support the Bill but the Attorney General asked for more time for consultation with ministers on members' concerns," says David Bahati the MP for Ndorwa west and Treasurer of the NRM caucus.

He says the NRM caucus members however want the Attorney General to clarify the "sort of activities that would be funded by the government".

The small political parties, especially those not represented in Parliament, have already protested the Bill as "discriminatory".

The President of the Peoples Development Party Dr. Abed Bwanika told journalists recently that if the Bill is made law in its current form, his party will challenge it in courts of law since denying legally registered parties funding because they lack representation in parliament is discriminatory and unconstitutional.

Dr. Bwanika advised the government to allocate a minimum financial package that is satisfactory for a political party to operate up to grass root level.

Two politicians have also petitioned the Constitutional Court, seeking to block the enactment the Political Parties Organisation Amendment Bill.

Charles Lwanga-Bbaale of the National People's Organisation and Apollo Nyabongo of the Movement Volunteers Mobilisers Organisation said in their petition that the Bill, if passed, would violate their constitutional rights. They said the Bill discriminated against parties not represented in Parliament.

They instead advised the government to contribute funds or other public sources towards all duly registered political parties and organizations across the board. They however agree that the bill should maintain the idea of additional funding to parties or organizations with representation in Parliament, basing on their numerical strength.

However, the Attorney General who is a member of the NRM party dismisses the allegations that the Bill is aimed at funding the ruling party. He says funding political parties is meant to avoid political parties and organizations from soliciting for donor aid, which could compromise their (political parties' and organizations') national interests, integrity and independence.

While this clearly shows the NRM party will benefit more, there is no indication so far that the political parties will agree on how the money for political party funding should be shared amongst the registered political parties.

Some people had proposed that the bill be adjusted to consider funding political parties basing on their strength at the grass root level other than strength in Parliament. But even if funding was considered based on grassroots support, the ruling NRM party has a clear majority representation at most local council levels and the biggest membership (in terms of IDs), which means the NRM will still have a lion's share of the political party funds.

Some people like Dr. Lulume Bayiga, the Secretary General of the Democratic Party are even asking the rationale of using tax payers' money to fund activities of political parties. He says this will just increase the tax burden on Ugandans, many of whom are chocking in poverty and unfair taxes that make daily life difficult.

Undoubtedly, funding political parties will increase administration costs of the government, since the government will have to audit the finances of all political parties.

The 'big' six opposition parties have in the past resisted what they call being clamped together with the new small political parties, some of whom they say were created by the NRM to weaken the opposition parties and to show the world that there are many political parties, after the restoration of multiparty politics in 2005. Uganda currently has about 50 political parties registered. To say that all political parties should be funded not withstanding their size and or political activity is as tricky as saying parties should not be funded. It is agreed that political competition (only ensured through political parties) is important for development of democracy. But having weak or financially caput political parties which can hardly undertake any activity is as good as having no political party.

Unlike Uganda Peoples Congress which owns Uganda House, other political parties have no clear source of funding including the National Resistance Movement (NRM) party which has ruled the country for more than 20 years.

The opposition led by Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) President, Dr. Kizza Besigye has been has been calling for funding to their political party activities, while at the same time continuously blaming the ruling NRM party for using government resources to fund its political activities, while opposition parties have to find their own funding, mostly through membership fees. However, NRM Publicity Secretary, Mary Karooro-Okurut says the party is funded by member's contributions.

In the background of these arguments and counter arguments is the fact that the ruling party gains strength from using government resources to boost its structures, as well as financial muscle to out compete other political parties. From 1986 to 2005, the movement (one party) government consolidated its self to form the NRM in 2005 when pressure for multiparty democracy forced strongman Yoweri Museveni to form a political party. But some people argue that up to now, separating the NRM activities from government activities has been hard, with the two acting as one and the same.

It can even be said that UPC used its time when a ruling party to build its capacity to fund its own political party activities. Since politics is about manipulations and taking advantage, the current attempt to fund political parties is being largely viewed as an attempt by the ruling NRM to strengthen its self ahead of the 2011 elections.

Some political commentators say after having no "NRM House" (reference to UPC's Uganda House) after more than 20 years of state leadership, the NRM government is turning to a straight legal way of funding its activities by putting in place a law that will give the NRM massive resources to out compete other political parties in the race for who occupies state house and governs the affairs of the country.

In the past, the opposition has even criticized Museveni for putting up ministries like that of Security, which is occupied by the NRM Secretary General, Amama Mbabazi to indirectly provide funding for its party activities. Now the bill to provide open funding for political parties is in the house, no political party apart from the NRM seems to be ready to go for it. It remains to be seen how the NRM will react to opposition criticisms of the amendment bill and its intentions.

First published: April, 25th 2008 on ugpulse.com

photo: semuwemba.wordpress.com

Peace talks or peace jokes?

By Solomon Akugizibwe

The prospects of a peaceful end to the war in northern Uganda have hit a dramatic setback, after the LRA leader failed to sign the final peace agreement as expected on April 10. After two years of tricky negotiations, the two sides agreed on all the five items on the peace talks' agenda, and set a date for signing the final peace agreement.

Even the fact that the LRA postponed the signing ceremony twice kept hope alive among Ugandans, and all people interested in seeing a peaceful end to the war, that the LRA leader was finally going to put pen to paper to end the war that started in 1986. A war that has cost Uganda, especially the north, dearly in terms of lives lost, children and adults abducted, displacement of families and destruction of property and social life.

As the Uganda peace team, cultural, religious and political leaders from northern Uganda were joined by diplomats and mediators to wait for Kony's signature, the LRA leader said he did not understand some clauses and will not sign. There has since been no further word from the LRA leader who sacked the leader of his peace team, Dr. David Matsanga, who a few months replaced Martin Ojul whom Kony sacked in January.

The government of Uganda is yet to decide what to do Tuesday's expiry if the cessation of hostilities agreement following the failure of the LRA leader to sign the peace agreement. The two parties who have for the last almost two years been in the most promising peace talks had for the 3rd time postponed the cessation of hostilities agreement to Tuesday April 15th. If the cessation of hostilities agreement is not extended, it means the government and the LRA can re-engage in military battle as they had done for 20 years with no winner.

President Yoweri Museveni says he is waiting for a report from the Chief Mediator Dr. Riek Machar, the Vice President of Southern Sudan and the United Nations Secretary General's Special envoy on areas affected by the LRA, Mr. Joachim Chissano, before the Government of Uganda makes its decision. Dr. Machar is still in Garamba forest trying to make contact and convince the LRA leader to sign the peace talks that are greatly hoped to end the 21 year war in northern Uganda.

Kony declined to sign the agreement saying some of the clauses needed clarifying like the Acholi Traditional Justice System and the operation of the Special Division of the High Court in trying him and his commanders for war crimes , a move that has angered many people and dampened the hopes of a peaceful end to the war.

Salvar Kiir, the President of Southern Sudan which is mediating and hosting the talks in Juba says that they are still hopeful the two sides will sign a comprehensive peace agreement to end the war.

Museveni who on Monday returned from a one day working visit to Southern Sudan on the day the final peace agreement should have been signed says that the government is still committed to the peace process, but is ready to deal with the LRA militarily.

President Museveni yesterday paid glowing tribute to the government of Southern Sudan for having played the mediation role between the government of Uganda and the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) in an attempt to bring about everlasting peace.

He told journalists on Tuesday that that the persistence of the government of Southern Sudan and the main mediator Dr. Riek Machar, as well as the commitment of the Government of Uganda, has exposed the fact that the LRA leader, Joseph Kony and his leadership, has no interest in the peace talks.

But the some people had always expected the LRA not to sign until the International Criminal Court indictments on top LRA leaders are lifted, just as the lRA had always demanded. Along with his top commanders Kony is wanted by the ICC in The Hague for war crimes including rape, murder and the abductions of children forced to serve as fighters, porters and "wives". The warrants issued in 2005 against Kony and his top commanders, has been a major point of contention in the peace negotiations in Juba.

Kony had earlier indicated that he will sign the peace deal but disarmament will be done after the lifting of the ICC indictments.

Gulu RDC, Col. Walter Ochora, one of the people who have always been skeptical about Kony's commitment to peace talks says the LRA leader is a worried man and can not voluntarily given in to end the war. Ochora who has on several occasions met Kony as part of peace delegations from northern Uganda says that Kony is very guilty and thinks he will not be forgiven.
"He has a guilty conscience. It is difficult for him to give up armed rebellion because he thinks he will not be forgiven," Ochora says in an interview.

It is this lack of trust that many people think is preventing the LRA leader from signing the peace agreement. Kony wont easily surrender to put his destiny in the hands of president Museveni, his enemy for over 20 years and the International community when he is always suspicious and doesn't trust even the people closest to him.

Recent media reports say that Kony has killed his deputy Okot Odhiambo less than a year after killing his other deputy Vicent Otti. Earlier on Kony allegedly killed Otti Lagony, whom Otti succeeded and James Opoka.

This lack of trust can be reflected in the fact that Kony, in less than one year has sacked two of chief mediators Martin Ojul and recently David Nyeorach Matsanga whom, Kony accused of collaborating with the government.

Nobody seems able to assure Kony of his safety. Archbishop Bishop John Baptist Odama and the cultural leader of the Acholi, Rwot Achana have on several occasions met and assured Kony and other LRA leaders of safety if they give up armed rebellion. But the two leaders who are still holed up in Garamba forest with UN officials and other cultural leaders from northern Uganda must be struggling to keep hope in Kony's ability to sign the peace deal and freely return to and leave peacefully in Uganda.

Although he belives that Kony should still be given the benfit of doubt, Aswa County MP Reagan Okumu has appealed to government to protect lives and property of people in northern Uganda following the failed signing of the peace agreement. Okumu says that people are going back home from the IDP camps and there is no retreat to the camps.

Okumu says that if Kony refuses to sign, then let him be dealt with by the ICC or a regional war crimes tribunal instead of a Ugandan court.

He says that the Ugandan justice system would not favor Kony because it is already biased about the rebel leader. He called upon all stakeholders involved in the peace talks to continue pushing for the signing of the agreement so that peace is completely restored in Uganda, especially the Northern region.

What the future holds for the peace in Northern Uganda

While briefing MP's on April 15, the head of the government peace team Dr. Ruhakana Rugunda said that even though the peace talks fail, Kony will never destabilize Uganda again.
Garamba forest where Kony's rebel army is currently, is thousands of kilometers far away from Uganda and it might take LRA forces days to walk for an attack in Uganda, this makes it difficult for Kony to launch a meaningful attack on Northern Uganda.

He says whether the agreement is signed or not, the future for peace in Northern Uganda looks bright now that peace has returned to South Sudan where Kony is weakened because the SPLA forces can no longer allow him to roam freely in South Sudan where he used to reorganize his forces and attack his fellow kinsmen of Northern Uganda.

First published: April 19, 2008 on ugpulse.com

photo: geoconger.wordpress.com

Enigma's unusual music inspiration

A talented fan of Bob Marley who always strives to put meaning in his songs, Sydney Timothy Zziwa aka Enigma looks to be on the right path to being there – on top of Uganda's music industry.

Moses Rudede once said: 'He sounds like Maurice Kirya (one of the most poplar and talented Ugandan Musician),' it wasn't a mere compliment, but Enigmas voice looks quite attractive.

Unlike other Ugandan artists who get inspirations from popular Ugandan musicians like chameleon, bebe cool and bobi wine, Enigmas source of inspiration is quite unusual, 'my grandmother inspired me to start singing, he was a great musician who taught me how to sing and play a piano.' He adds, 'I have used the piano skills to learn guitar.'

Bob Marley inspires him to write music because 'Marley's music had meaning.' He is however striving to have his own style mixed with raggae and rock

His latest hit Comma was influenced by his former girlfriend, 'I had a pretty girl at high school who broke my heart for a richman, the richman later broke her heart and coming back to me was too late.' Comma is a popular Uganda slung meaning to leave someone in suspense. Did Enigma, leave her former girlfriend in suspense?

His advice to up-coming musicians like him, 'learn to be creative and believe in yourself.'

What a threatening dream!

Recently, I had party at Makerere University with a friend. It was fun, we met old friends we hadnt met for years, danced, ate and had a couple of drinks.

It ended early when some of us were still in party mood, I floated an idea to a friend to relocate and continue with the partying somewhere else, finally we zeroed on Bativa Hotel – a short distance from Makerere University.

We promised to meet there in an hours time and each one of us took a diferent direction, along the way, in wandegeya, I was caught up in a gun battle between the police and a terrorist.

The terrorist, in a long tree was throwing missiles to city buildings and cars killing people. Soon police swung into action and started shoting randomly at everyone

My finger was hit and blood started oozing out like water from an opened water tap

In the ensuing confusion, had to run to a nearby hospital for my dear life but, unfortnately headed in the wrong direction. I was so weak and coudn't walk anymore when I realised heading to the wrong direction.

Tried to call bodaboda's but couldn't come because they were running for their dear lives.

I fell down and lay unconscious and the dream ended there

What's all this fuss about tribalism?

The recent Bafuuruki debate in Kibaale district between Bakiga and Banyoro tribes caused quite a big stirr, but at the end of the day many people found themselves Bafuuruki in their own country hence the slogan '31 million Bafuuruuki' meaning that all the 31 million people in Uganda are not living in their tribal areas.

Tribal/ethinic differences have claimed the lives of millions across the world from Rwanda – 1994 Genocide - to the middle east as a result of the Israel - Arab conflict.

They have also helped develop soceties through Cultural toursim, people from the western world have paid clossal sums of money to see how the Baganda people in Uganda dance, eat and marry. The money has been used to build roads, schools and hospitals.

I was brought up to believe that Bakonzo's are our traditional enemies, because they started a war in the 1960's demanding for independence from Toro kingdom. The war claimed the lives of many of our ancestors.

Surprisingly, a Mukonzo has been one of my best friends since my secondry school days, we have assisted each other during trying times and enjoyed together during happy moments. Now, why hate them when one of them does for me great things, after all who started the war? wasnt it the unfair policies imposed by Batoro on them, making the resistance inevitable for instance, adopting the names of their masters to be allowed join school.

Conflicts based on tribal/ethinic differences always come when unfair policies are imposed by dominant cultures on others leading to loss of lives, destruction of property, displacements and general suffering irrespective of the tribe/ethinicity.

Both Bakonzo and Batoro suffered during their tribal conflict in 1960's, Hutu and Tutsi's suffered during the 1994 genocide and Israel's and Palestine's are suffering as a result of their long ethinic conflict.

Polticians have gained a lot of selfish political capital for dividing people on tribal lines, but as modernisation takes precedence, so many tribes/ethinicities are increasingly becaming inteconnected more than ever through technology like mobile phones and other communication networks like roads making them more tolerant and dependant on each other.

But, who loses when such mayhem starts? Have the peaceful avenues of achieving tribal justice been exhausted before starting a tribal war?

Balancing black aspirations with white fears

I watched it, it was amazing, watch the Invictus and see how former South African president Nelson Mandela used Rugby, a white dominated sport to reconcile blacks and whites.

The blacks would rather support a foreign team playing their national team because, to them (springboks-the national rugby team) dominated by whites represented apartheid.

But Mandela, through well calculated moves managed to rally blacks behind the national rugby team and made whites more accepting of black South Africans.

The national rugby team went ahead to win the rugby world cup and everyone (white and black) celebrated together.

'The rainbow nation starts here, reconciliation starts here.' Nelson Mandela