East Africa: Drug Trafficking "THE NARCO STYLE"

Many of these products, sometimes imported without authorization, are sold by hawkers in street-markets.

  There are two important international airports in the region, servicing the capitals' of Ethiopia and Kenya, which are used as transit points for illegal drugs.

 In the period 1995-2006, reported seizures of heroin, cannabis and cocaine in the region covered by UNODC Eastern Africaare comparatively few and do not reflect the extent of trafficking, availability and growing abuse in the region. The region is attractive to international drug trafficking syndicates as they are quick to exploit non-existent or ineffective border (land, sea and air) controls, limited cross border and regional cooperation as well as serious deficiencies in the criminal justice systems. Hence, the low seizure figures are more an indication that few resources are allocated to drug control and that international border controls are weak than a sign that no drugs are being trafficked through the region.

 FIGURE (1) MAJOR DRUG TRANSIT ROUTES IN THE East REGION

The region covered by UNODC Eastern Africa is accessible by sea to heroin and cannabis resin producer countries in South West and South East Asia through the ports in Djibouti, Eritrea, Kenya and Tanzania. Anecdotal evidence suggests that Somalia, currently in the process of establishing a central authority, is host to widespread illegal transactions, including drug and arms trafficking. There are two important international airports in the region, servicing the capitals' of Ethiopia and Kenya, which are used as transit points for drugs. Both airports have connections between West Africa and the heroin‑producing countries in South West and South East Asia. There is also an increasing use of postal and courier services for cocaine, heroin and hashish.

" A review of drug seizures from 1998 to date indicates an increase in the trafficking of heroin to eastern African countries from Pakistan, Thailand and India. Increased seizures of heroin with Nigerian connections bound for Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya through Ethiopia have been noted as well. Seizures and arrest statistics show that more Tanzanians and Mozambicans are becoming involved in the trafficking of heroin from Pakistan and Iran."

 
West African syndicates, with their experience in cannabis and heroin smuggling, are actively networking in Latin America, and are responsible for the emergence of cocaine trafficking and abuse in eastern Africa. As shown in graph (3), although the volume of cocaine seized in Africa is still relatively small, the situation is changing as trafficking groups extend their highly-organised networks. In most countries in the ROEA region it is possible to purchase pharmaceutical products on demand without presenting a valid prescription. Many of these products, sometimes imported without authorization, are sold by hawkers in street-markets.

Unfortunately, the situation has been worsening in the last 10‑15 years. In the majority of the countries in the UNODC Eastern Africa region, control and monitoring of the national drug supply and distribution channels, including precursors, are inefficient. This results not only in the ineffective control of pharmaceutical products, but also in the circulation of counterfeit medicines. Together these pose serious health and socio‑economic problems, they undermine law enforcement activities and confidence in public health services.

The emergence of Mandrax in the region has gone hand in hand with the diversion of licit drugs and essential chemical precursors into the illicit market. The control of essential chemical precursors that are either being trafficked through the UNODC Eastern Africaregion to countries producing cocaine and heroin or used in the illegal production of Mandrax, is an important part of the battle against drugs in the region. It is feared that illegal trafficking, importation and use will continue as long as there are no effective control mechanisms in the countries of the region.

Zimbabwe: WHO cancels Robert Mugabe ambassador role

The World Health Organization has revoked the appointment of Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe as a goodwill ambassador following a widespread outcry.

  Zimbabwe's healthcare system had collapsed under Mr Mugabe's 30-year rule.

"I have listened carefully to all who have expressed their concerns," WHO head Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said in a statement.
He had previously praised Zimbabwe for its commitment to public health.
But critics pointed out that Zimbabwe's healthcare system had collapsed under Mr Mugabe's 30-year rule.

Staff often go without pay, medicines are in short supply, and Mr Mugabe, who has outlived the average life expectancy in his country by three decades, travels abroad for medical treatment.

• Africa's 'medical tourist' presidents
• Profile: Robert Mugabe

Mr Tedros said he had consulted with the Zimbabwean government and decided that rescinding Mr Mugabe's position was "in the best interests of" the WHO.
He said he remained "firmly committed to working with all countries and their leaders" to build universal health care.

Mr Tedros, elected in May under the slogan "let's prove the impossible is possible" had said he hoped Mr Mugabe would use his goodwill ambassador role to "influence his peers in the region".
But the appointment was met by a wave of surprise and condemnation. The UK government, the Canadian prime minister, the Wellcome Trust, the NCD Alliance, UN Watch, the World Heart Federation, Action Against Smoking and Zimbabwean lawyers and social media users were among those who criticised the decision.

The BBC's Andrew Harding in Johannesburg reports that Mr Mugabe's supporters are likely to see this episode as Western meddling in Africa.

Questions follow PR disaster

 Following the storm of criticism from human rights groups and expressions of dismay from many member states, the WHO had little choice but to cancel its plan to make Robert Mugabe a goodwill ambassador.

 The about-face will raise questions over the leadership of the WHO's new director general Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.

The decision to honour Mr Mugabe is likely to have been taken several weeks ago, and at no point did Mr Tedros seem aware that appointing as goodwill ambassador a man who has been accused of human rights abuses, and of neglecting to the point of collapse his own country's health service, might be controversial.

The WHO was supposed to be embarking on a new era of reform. Instead, it is mired in a public relations disaster.

UGANDA:The 'orphan' I adopted already had a family

The child we had struggled for years to adopt was not an orphan at all.

  The corrupt practices of international adoption agencies that allowed this must end.

 I've always hoped to make a difference in this world. To bring goodness, peace or healing to a world that often seems inundated with loss, hardship and a vast array of obstacles that make life difficult for so many. When it came to the decision to adopt, it seemed like a no-brainer.

I thought this was one way to make a difference, at least for one child. My husband, Adam, and I would open our home and our hearts to a child in need.

 

 What I didn't realize when I began this journey was that adoption was so much more than just these things. I didn't expect it to be all sunshine and rainbows, but neither did I realize the depth of heartache and loss adoption can entail, not only for adoptive parents, but even more so for the adopted children, like the one we were about to meet and welcome into our lives.

 

 Jessica Davis with her husband and Mata

 

 RELATED: Kids for sale: 'My mom was tricked'

 

 

Adam and I thoroughly researched at each step of the process in the hopes of ensuring a proper and ethical adoption. You see, we were already parents to four biological children, so this was not about "having another child" or simply "growing our family." For us, adopting was about sharing our abundance -- our family, love and home with a child who lacked these basic necessities.

Not one part of this process was easy -- even the decision to adopt internationally. We knew that there were American children, as well as children all over the world, in need of what we could offer. We eventually concluded (based on what we now see as a form of propaganda) that the greatest need was in many of the poorest countries.

 

 

I remember reading that there are almost 3 million orphans in Uganda, and with that statistic in mind (and a bit more research), in October of 2013 we began the journey to adopt from there. We did piles of paperwork, got countless sets of fingerprints and spent tens of thousands of dollars. It took a little over a year to get through all the formalities, but I was driven to get to the best part of this process, meeting the needs of a child.

 

Eventually we got to that point. In 2015, we welcomed a beautiful, strong and brave 6-year-old girl named Namata into our home. There is no one blueprint when it comes to adoption, but I attempted to do my homework as thoroughly as any adoptive parent could -- still, nothing could've prepared me for what happened next.

It took a little over a year and a half to realize the things "our" child was telling us were not adding up to the stories told within the paperwork and provided to us by our adoption agency, European Adoption Consultants, Inc.

 

(In December, the US State Department debarred the agency for three years, meaning it could no longer place children in homes. The State Department said it found "evidence of a pattern of serious, willful or grossly negligent failure to comply with the standards and of aggravating circumstances indicating that continued accreditation of EAC would not be in the best interests of the children and families concerned.")

 

 

At first I wondered if the conflicting information Namata was sharing with us reflected her efforts to cope with the trauma of being relinquished and abused. But I came to realize that she was telling me something vastly different -- and vastly more important.

At many points during that year and half, I had to suppress the compulsion to view the things she was telling me through my own lens, as all too often that lens is clouded by one's own privilege and experiences. It was when I began to listen with this openness that I realized what she was so desperately trying to get me to understand.

The child we had struggled for years to adopt was not an orphan at all, and almost everything that was written in her paperwork and told to us about her background was not an accurate description of her life in Uganda. 

 

 Mata's Life in the UNITED STATES 

 

More than that, we eventually uncovered that she had a very loving family from which she had been unlawfully taken, in order (we believe and are convinced) to provide an "orphan" to fulfill our application to adopt.

Devastated doesn't even begin to explain what we felt once we realized what had transpired to bring Namata into our family. Namata's mother was told only that Adam and I were going to care for her child while we provided her with an education, which is a central pathway to empowerment and opportunity in Uganda. 

 

So when this supposed chance to be sponsored by a "wealthy" American couple was presented to her, she felt as if she and her daughter had been blessed. She never knowingly relinquished her rights as Namata's mother, but once there was a verbal confirmation that we would adopt Namata, those on the ground in Uganda forged paperwork and placed Mata in an orphanage.

By the time Mata's mother realized what was happening, that she was never going to see her child again, she was powerless to stop the wheels that were turning. After many months of uncovering the details in our case, I have also come to realize Mata's mother's experience is not uncommon within international adoption.

 

There are villages in Uganda and across the world where mothers, fathers, siblings and grandparents are desperate to be reunited with the children who were unlawfully separated from them through international adoption. It has been heartbreaking for me to realize that so beautiful and pure an act can be tainted with such evil. But as with so many beautiful things in this world, corruption and greed are a reality -- one we can't simply ignore. 

 

 

International adoption must be reformed. Adopting parents and the governments involved in this process cannot plead ignorance anymore.

Throughout the journey to reunite Namata with her family, I have been met with so much resistance, saturated in entitlement and privilege. More than once I have been asked, why don't you just "keep her"? These are words I use when describing something I purchased at the grocery store! I never owned Namata; she is a human being who deserves better than that type of narrow-minded and selfish thinking.

 

Once, someone suggested that I just not tell anyone what she had told us. Other times, I was told that it was my Christian duty to keep her and "raise her in the proper faith."

Even in the end, with all the information establishing that Namata's mother had never relinquished her child, I was told by US government officials that I got to decide whether or not to reunite her. Her mother, whose rights were unlawfully stripped from her, appeared not to be a factor in the least.

The travesty in this injustice is beyond words. I must be clear in the following statement: My race, country of origin, wealth (though small, it's greater than that of the vast majority of people in the world), my access to "things," my religion -- none of these privileges entitles me to the children of the poor, voiceless and underprivileged.

 

If anything, I believe these privileges should come with a responsibility to do more, to stand up against such injustices. We can't let other families be ripped apart to grow our own families!

I'm sure that most families seeking international adoption have the best of intentions, but good intentions are not an excuse for ignorance. After unveiling Namata's true story and doing extensive research, I feel I have gained an awareness of the realities of corruption occurring across the board within international adoption. This complicated yet beautiful act of opening up a home and a heart to a child in need has become heavily corrupted by greed and saviorism.

My family's journey to adopt has become a journey to fight for families. Families that are being torn apart because of ignorance and a lack of empathy for those who have no voice to speak out against the injustices they face every day. I cannot look the other way. I must continue this fight until I see a change in the system.

 

 

I can also say that I have seen the beauty of a family restored and there is nothing quite like it. Adam and Namata took the long journey to her remote village in Uganda together, while I remained at our home with the biological children. We could not afford for both of us to go, and my husband was concerned for my safety after the corruption I had exposed. He was also just as concerned for Namata's safety and wanted to be at her side until the moment she was home in the protection of her mother's arms. So I reluctantly said my goodbyes to her here in America.

Though we were overwhelmed with heartache that morning, Adam, the kids and I all tried to smile through it, because for Namata it was a happy day. She could not wait to be reunited with her family and we were very careful not to steal her joy. I witnessed this part of the journey through video calls and pictures and it was beautiful. Painfully beautiful.

 

In September of 2016, Namata's mother embraced her child with joy and laughter abounding and they have not spent a day apart since. Namata has flourished since being home and I am thankful for that.

During this journey, I have also come to a revelation of what it means to truly aid and love the orphan (a phrase often used when discussing adoption). That love goes far beyond anything I could've fathomed before. Now it seems so clear. Now those hundreds of adult adoptee's voices I have encountered since I began this journey ring clearly in my ears.

 

The vast majority of children in orphanages, and countless children adopted internationally, are not orphans at all (according to Catholic Relief Services). Most have a parent, or parents. Additionally, many have siblings, grandparents, aunts and uncles, who care about them.

My good intentions all along were misguided. If I truly wanted to help or aid an orphan, that act required that I make certain that every effort has been made to keep that child within her biological family! Had that been my focus from the start, I may not have missed so many red flags.

Too many of us see international adoption as way to "save" children. But what if we looked at it another way? What if we decided to do everything in our power to make sure those children could live their lives with the families God intended for them in the first place?

I'm not talking about children taken by necessity from abusive or neglectful homes, but those whose loving families were wrongly persuaded to give them up. Families who thought the decision was out of their control because of illness, poverty, lack of access to education, intimidation, coercion or a false idea about what the "American dream" means for their child.

So am I saying don't adopt? No!

 

 

I've heard plenty of adult adoptees say they are completely against adoption, and I will not demean their voices or take away their right to feel this way because it's a lifetime of experience that informs their opinions.

But because of their strong voices, I have also seen a new wave of opened eyes among parents who adopt children -- parents who understand the losses their adopted children have suffered, who listen to them, who rise to the huge obligations and high standards that adoption requires.

Only through listening and acknowledging hard truths can adoption lead to an ethical and positive outcome. This will mean something different with each family. For us, it meant reuniting a family torn apart by a corrupt process and exposing criminal activities within international adoption. For others, it may mean a lifetime of making sure a child holds on to his or her cultural or racial identity, or keeping alive his or her ties to their birth family, no matter how hard that may be. Adoption can be beautiful, but it is never easy. 

 

So I say yes to adoption, as long as families have a clear understanding of the weight they will bear. The weight of doing right by this child in ways you maybe never realized before: fighting for his or her best interests, without ill intentions, selfishness or greed. And realizing that sometimes that best interest might mean he or she does not become your adopted child at all.

I get updates on our once-adopted child, Namata, often with pictures and sometimes video. When I first see them, I tend to get teary-eyed because of how much I miss her. I would love to wrap my arms around her, but then I remind myself of all that she almost lost by being adopted.

Sometimes there are pictures of her at her grandmother's home, skipping about, smiling from ear to ear. Other times she's holding her baby sister, or walking home from school with her other sister.

One of my favorite pictures thus far is this one of Namata sitting on the ground, facing her mother. And her mother -- the woman who gave birth to her, looks like her, smiles like her and loves her more deeply than anyone else on the face of the earth -- is looking back at the daughter she nearly lost.

 

 

Zambia: Four political ongoing trends to be worried about

Many of Zambia’s structures and norms are being gradually undermined.

President Edgar Lungu of Zambia

" Politics has become more polarised and exclusionary, frustrations have grown, and violence has increased."

 

The release of Zambia’s main opposition leader in August was greeted by some observers as a sign that the country’s democratic spirit lives on. Zambia has long been considered a model of stability in a tumultuous region, and Hakainde Hichilema’s four-month detention could be seen as an anomaly that has now been dealt with.

[The real reasons Zambia’s opposition leader was released from jail]
But the reality is that it is too early to draw a sigh of relief.
Long before Hichilema’s arrest on charges of treason (and since), Zambia has seen many of the structures, mechanisms, and norms that serve to uphold peace gradually undermined. Politics has become more polarised and exclusionary, frustrations have grown, and violence has increased.
Here are four particularly worrying trends witnessed over the past three years.

1) Intolerance of opposition and criticism 

Since 2014, the ruling Patriotic Front (PF) has demonstrated a growing intolerance of opposition and criticism, and has increasingly turned to the security apparatus to suppress it. With loyalists appointed to key positions, there has an uptick of police brutality, including the killing of an unarmed protester this April. The government has used the Public Order Act to limit protests and rallies, or at least give it an excuse to use force if its restrictions are not obeyed.

At the same time, the government has clamped down on the free and critical media. This has included the closure of the main independent newspaper, The Post, last year and the harassment of other media outlets such as The Mast, which replaced The Post.

Hichilema’s arrest in April was another example of this reduced tolerance. Charged for high treason for not giving way to the president’s motorcade, the leader of the opposition United Party for National Development (UPND) was facing 15 years in prison or even the death penalty before he was released.

2) The tribalisation of politics

Over the past few years, political rhetoric has also begun to change. Following independence in 1964, Zambia’s motto quickly became “One Zambia, One Nation”. This was part of a strategy to bridge divides across the country’s 73 ethnic groups and foster national unity.

Recently, however, the main political parties have been using more divisive language, including a new emphasis on tribal-regional divisions. This is partly demonstrated by the strong ties today between the Tonga and UPND, and Bemba and PF respectively, as well as the appointment of tribal representatives to key positions.

This shift challenges the long-standing tradition of cross-ethnic parties and could transform Zambia into a more divided society in which political elites increasingly depend on tribal distinctions to harness support.

3) Breakdown of inter-party deliberation

Over the past few years, Zambia has seen very limited inter-party deliberation behind closed doors compared to previous eras. This mechanism is aimed at promoting inclusion of opposition parties, fostering compromise, and ensuring a degree of unity.

Such a meeting – between Hichilema and President Edgar Lungu – was part of the process that led to the former’s release, but it is worrying that it took almost a year from the August 2016 election before the two met for a formal discussion. This was in fact Lungu’s first official meeting with the opposition since he gained power at the start of 2015. This marks him out as unique in the history of Zambia since the re-introduction of multi-party politics in 1991.

Given that Hichilema and the UPND won nearly 48% of the vote in 2016, the lack of talks has contributed to the exclusion of large parts of Zambian society and threatened further polarisation of politics.

Added to this is the fact that the ability of civil society to serve as a broker in times of crises has also been reduced. The process of registering NGOs has been made more complex, and leaders of civil society organisations have been arrested and harassed. The churches in Zambia have long served as the backbone of civil society engagement, but the government has tried to discredit some, while recent reports suggest that others, predominantly Pentecostal ones, are being coopted and rewarded for speaking out in support of the ruling party.

4) Militarisation of politics

Since 2011, the main political parties have – to a larger extent than in previous elections – begun to recruit cadres. These young people are often paid in food or alcohol to rally support or intimidate supporters of rival parties. This trend has coincided with an increase in youth unemployment.

The use of party cadres, particularly during the elections in 2015 and 2016, contributed to tensions and violence. These groups are officially tasked with promoting the major parties, but evidence indicates that they also engage in violence, looting, voter intimidation, and other illegal acts.
Sanctioned by the government, the political mobs supporting the ruling party are untouchable by law, and therefore not confronted by the police when committing crimes. According to reports by the Carter Centre, this has reduced the support for opposition parties as well as political participation in general.

Political cadres have also affected the political economy by being granted control over community institutions such as markets or gas stations. This awarding of control based on connections rather than merit is not only eroding democracy, but affecting the efficiency of basic societal functions.

Uganda: Museveni's "whitewashed" regime

 Examples of firms that whitewash the human-rights violations of despotic regimes include Bell Pottinger, Qorvis Communications , Brown Lloyd James, and Hill & Knowlton, which has made a  fortune working for Yoweri Museveni and has offices in every major world capital.

 General Yoweri Museveni has ruled Uganda for more than 25 years. Since taking power in a 1986 military coup, he has stacked this Central African country’s voting commission with his henchmen and stolen its elections. Having abolished presidential term limits in 2005 in a sham referendum, he plans to rule for life.

 Museveni has used the state treasury to build a climate of fear through a security apparatus that persecutes dissidents and critics with imprisonment, torture, disappearances, and extrajudicial killings. He has reduced the country’s parliament to a rubber-stamp body, censored the nation’s media, and militarized its civil institutions.

 Reports from groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch confirm the country’s descent into authoritarianism. According to British journalist Peter Tatchell, today’s Uganda is, “in effect, a constitutional dictatorship,” and Museveni is “the new Robert Mugabe.”

 Most readers may have heard a very different story: one about how Museveni’s “strong leadership” has brought stability, economic growth, and a successful HIV/AIDS policy to war-torn Uganda. Indeed, Bill Clinton once lauded him as the head of a “new breed” of African leaders. As the Economist noted, Museveni has been “kindly treated” by the international media.

 In large part, Museveni’s transgressions have continued to be downplayed because he took power in the wake of Idi Amin’s butchery and disastrous civil war. But the main reason Museveni has escaped criticism is that he enjoys an excellent public relations service.

 As the Economist noted, Museveni has been “kindly treated” by the international media.

 Having ruled Uganda since 1986, Yoweri Museveni has been likened to Robert Mugabe

Dictators like Museveni often hire PR firms to whitewash their records. These companies, mostly based in the U.S. and Europe, specialize in distracting the public from evidence of human-rights violations with glowing rhetoric about stability, economic growth, and commitments to help the poor. Their propaganda finds its way into sources that are deemed reliable by many journalists, from articles in respectable news outlets to citizen media like Wikipedia.

 Examples of firms that whitewash the human-rights violations of despotic regimes include Bell Pottinger (was for Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak), Qorvis Communications (was for  Equatorial Guinea’s Teodoro Obiang), Brown Lloyd James (was for  Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi), and Hill & Knowlton, which has made a fortune working for Yoweri Museveni and has offices in every major world capital.

When companies are exposed or criticized for their activities, they respond that their associations with these regimes are “limited engagements” lasting only a few months or that their assignments have to do exclusively with “tourism” or “economic progress.” If the true nature and extent of their work is revealed, they say that they are consultants helping to create “economic opportunity,” providing a guiding hand to governments as they seek to improve the lives of their country’s poor.

 On its webpage, Hill & Knowlton claimed that “since becoming president in 1986, Yoweri Museveni has introduced democratic reforms and has been credited with substantially improving human rights.”

 This couldn’t be farther from the truth about Uganda, where political opponents disappear, where journalists are arrested for criticizing the government, and where any comprehensive human rights report contains appalling anecdotes and disturbing analysis about a country where the judiciary has very little independence and where the regime has very little respect for the rule of law.

 An example of effective media manipulation is how the Hill & Knowlton quote provided above from their webpage can be found word-for-word in the BBC country profile of Uganda. From there, this mendacious fantasy has spread like wildfire (Go ahead, Google the quotation).

 PR agents try to alter the public perception of reality, distracting us from human-rights violations so that deals and foreign aid can flow faster and in larger quantities (usually into Swiss bank accounts) — while the PR agents themselves are rewarded handsomely.

 25 years ago, upon the death of Bergen University professor Thorolf Rafto, a prize was created to honor his lifetime commitment to human rights. Professor Rafto began to pursue human-rights work after reading Vladimir V. Tchernavin’s I Speak for the Silent Prisoners of the Soviets. He organized student protests against the Gulag and devoted the rest of his life to individual rights. The 2011 Rafto Prize laureate is Ugandan individual-rights activist Frank Mugisha. He is recognized at a ceremony here in Bergen for standing up against Museveni’s scapegoating campaign against Uganda’s community of sexual minorities.

 Not being globally advertised, the Rafto Prize is not well known beyond a small but significant set of public intellectuals and policy institutions. But it has the distinction of having been awarded more than once to people who went on to win the Nobel Peace Prize. Aung San Suu Kyi, Shirin Ebadi, José Manuel Ramos-Horta, and Kim Dae-jung were all presented with the Rafto Prize years before they were recognized by the Nobel Institute.

 The Rafto Prize was first given in 1986 — a quarter century ago. That is how long Museveni has treated Uganda as his personal fiefdom and violated the human rights of millions. Perhaps Hill & Knowlton will recognize the 25th anniversary of the Rafto Prize by doing some pro bono work for human rights defenders like Frank Mugisha.

Uganda:Opposition might face Noble Mayombo's fate

the mysterious deaths, disappearances and unexplained car accidents that have taken place since the National Resistance Movement (NRM) shot its way to power nearly 30 years ago and claimed the lives of many Ugandans from all corners of the country.

 Grenade attacks have taken place at the homes of two Ugandan opposition MPs, including singer-turned-politician Robert Kyagulanyi.

The investigation will look beyond 1986, the year the NRM came to power and try to understand who was and continues to be behind the killing of prominent people that include heads of state, businessmen and women, politicians, ordinary citizens and most of all, high ranking officers and men of the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces (UPDF).

Our investigation will start with revealing what we have been told is the thinking of the UPDF. How long are they going to let their fellow officers be killed, subjected to unexplained arrests and sent to die in battles in foreign lands? Is the Uganda army surely still solidly behind Gen Yoweri Museveni? Who are “The Three Musketeers” now running Uganda with an iron fist?

Many people inside and outside Uganda have agreed to join us to take on this mammoth task. Many are still serving in the Museveni Government, something that clearly shows all is not well inside the Museveni camp. We will discuss why the bush general is now walking with his eyes fixed behind him, not sure whether to trust even his closest bodyguards.

Mr Kyagulanyi, popularly known as Bobi Wine, said he was targeted for opposing the ruling party's plan to scrap the presidential age limit.
Mr Kyagulanyi and MP Allan Ssewanyana said their homes shook and windows were shattered by the explosions.
A government spokesman denied the government was behind the blasts.
"Flash grenades at opposition MPs' homes could be own scare tactics to frame government," Ofwono Opondo was quoted by the state-allied New Vision newspaper. "There is no record or history of this NRM government killing political opposition," he added.


Mr Kyagulanyi said he had received death threats on a daily basis because of his opposition to the removal of the presidential age limit.
He would not be intimidated by the "cowardly" attacks, he said
"Thankfully no-one is hurt. But what kind of country are we now living in?" he added in a Facebook post.
Mr Ssewanyana said the attacks took place in the early hours of Tuesday.

Last week, an explosive device was thrown into the property of another opposition MP, Moses Kasibante.
The MPs have been at the forefront of a fierce campaign against a motion currently before parliament that seeks to scrap the presidential age limit of 75 - a move that could allow President Yoweri Museveni to stand for re-election in 2021.
Chaotic scenes broke out in parliament last week as MPs openly brawled during a debate over the motion.

Mr Museveni, 73, has been in power since 1986.
His critics accuse him of presiding over an authoritarian regime.

 Many have sent us comments that former Speaker of the Uganda Parliament James Wapakhabulo died from AIDS, Really? We have information to the contrary. The same has been spoken about Lt Col Serwanga Lwanga. We will look at what we have been told could have actually happened to him.

Do you remember Maj Gen Kazini – the tall general who was allegedly clobbered to death by his girlfriend who is now serving a prison term? Our sources will name “the giant” that Gen David Sejusa spoke about last year as being the one responsible for Kazini’s murder. On whose orders was this assassin operating? We will reveal the information we have been supplied by a UPDF ‘insider’. And what about Gen Dr John Garang de Mabior? Did he really die as a result of a helicopter crash? .

 For those of you who were mature and living in Kampala soon after Idi Amin was overthrown in 1979, you will perhaps recall the sudden rise of killings by unknown gunmen who traversed the capital’s streets in a bus and carried out killings involving strangers that had nothing to do with politics. The bodies of their victims were left lying on the streets of Kampala for several days. Ever wondered why no investigation has ever been carried out about these killings? Who was behind them and why? We will investigate.

 What happened behind the scenes on the day the then National Resistance Army entered Kampala? Was it indeed a ‘bloodless coup’ as we have been made to believe? Shock! Horror! . This investigation starts on Mothering Sunday. Many mothers will sit and remember their loved ones who were taken away and no attempt has ever been made to explain who was behind their deaths.

 we have come across ‘a pattern of things’ that will shock everyone. Why haven’t we ever looked at this pattern before? Who are the main players in this pattern? Are they still alive? In today’s world, those behind this pattern of killings would be described by psychiatrists as having the mind of a serial killer. Do we then have a serial killer on the loose in Uganda? If we do, who is it? We will investigate.

 Throughout our investigation, we will encourage Ugandans to put aside the fear they have of the regime and embark on the road to liberation. The regime has used the fear of death to silence the majority. We will be appealing to you all to rise up and put fear aside and confront those that have put us under this spell. For it is only through being courageous that we will save Uganda. There will be many roadblocks on the way, but by now we surely have become used to going around them.

To Continue.........

Museveni "Elective Dictatorship",the new trick

The party which commands a majority in the in house should consequently be able to pass any bill 

they wish,that is elective dictatorship.

 

 the National Resistance Movement (NRM), has been involved in a contentious bill to revise the country's constitution.

“THIS is a generational cause,” says Bobi Wine, back in his studio after a long day in parliament. In June the singer and self-styled “Ghetto President” (real name: Robert Kyagulanyi) won a sensational victory in a parliamentary by-election. Now he is the spokesman for Uganda’s frustrated youth in a struggle to stop Yoweri Museveni, the actual president, from extending his rule. “All the power has been packed into the presidency,” he says. “We want to take it back to the people.”

Mr Museveni used to say similar things himself, blaming Africa’s problems on “leaders who want to overstay in power”. But after 31 years at the top he has changed his mind. Politicians in his ruling party are trying to scrap a clause in the constitution which says candidates must be no older than 75 to run for president. The goal is to let Mr Museveni, 73, stand again in 2021—and probably rule for life.

 There were fist-fights and flying chairs on September 26th as Mr Museveni’s supporters tried to start the process in parliament. The opposition stalled things by incessant singing of the national anthem. The next day MPs such as Mr Wine were dragged out of the chamber by security forces and the proceedings began. The amendment needs a two-thirds majority to pass, and almost certainly will. The ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) has a thumping majority and most MPs are pliable. The legislature has helped Mr Museveni out once before, voting in 2005 to remove term limits. On that occasion MPs were each given 5m shillings (then about $2,500), officially to “facilitate” discussions with constituents.

 Still, the state is taking no chances. Three-quarters of Ugandans want the age limit to stay, according to a survey in January by Afrobarometer, a pan-African research network. Demonstrations have been banned. Police have tear-gassed protesting students and raided the offices of two civil-society groups. The mayor of Kampala, the capital, who opposes the bill, was arrested in the middle of a television interview and bundled into a police van.

 This is not the “fundamental change” that Mr Museveni promised when he took power in 1986 at the head of a rebel army. He restored stability to most of the country, which had been torn apart by dictatorship and war. Simeo Nsubuga, an NRM MP, says Ugandans should be grateful to Mr Museveni for ending “20 years of turmoil, suffering and killings”. Many are. But four out of five Ugandans are too young to remember those days.

 Instead, the young complain about crumbling services and too few jobs. For the first quarter-century under Mr Museveni growth in income per person averaged 3% a year; in the past five years it has been just 1%. Yet few dare take their grievances to the streets. Even the young “live under the canopy of history”, notes Angelo Izama, a local pundit. Uganda has never had a peaceful transition of power, and few citizens think Mr Museveni would ever leave office without a fight. The old warrior sometimes dons his uniform, a reminder that this is still, in some respects, a military regime. Last November over 150 people were killed during army operations in the restless Rwenzori mountains.

  Meanwhile Mr Museveni is the pivot on which power turns, intervening in everything from land disputes to the regulation of motorbike taxis. When a minister showed up recently to address local leaders, they hurled water and chased him away; only the president would do, they said. “There are no institutions,” sighs Anna Adeke, a 25-year-old MP. “Everything can be changed by a phone call.”

 So “the old man with a hat” will carry on, at once the guarantor of stability and the greatest threat to it. The age-limit clause is “the last remaining check to ensure an orderly succession”, says Frederick Ssempebwa, a lawyer who helped draft the constitution. Without it, he adds, the president is “almost invincible”. Yet one day Mr Museveni will die and Uganda, its politics warped by the whims of one man, will face uncertainty once again.