Rwanda’s election results already decided

 

Only President Paul Kagame has a chance of winning the 2017 presidential election. And he could stay in power until 2034.

  President Paul Kagame has been in power since 1994 

“More of a coronation than real contest.” That’s how the Kenyan daily The Standard characterised Rwanda’s presidential poll slated for 4 August. It sums up the reality well. In countries with competitive politics, elections are an important moment giving rise to debate and excitement. Not so in Rwanda.
Rwandans have become accustomed to polls where everything is settled in advance. This was the case before the genocide, when the country was officially a one-party state. And it has been the case since 1994, after which Rwanda became a de facto one-party state under the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF).
The current template for elections was set in 2003, when a constitutional referendum and the first post-genocide elections were held. In the run-up to these polls, the last genuine opposition party was banned, while the campaign was marred by arrests, disappearances and intimidation. An EU observer mission noted that, ironically, “political pluralism is more limited than during the transition period”.
The polls themselves were replete with allegations of fraud, manipulation of electoral lists, ballot-box stuffing, and flawed counting. Paul Kagame was declared the winner with 95% of the vote.
Similar dynamics were seen in the 2008 and 2013 parliamentary elections as well as the 2010 presidential poll. Opposition leaders were arrested and condemned to long prison sentences, while other critical voices were killed or went into exile.
In 2010, there were reports of local leaders going from door to door to collect voters’ cards and submitting their ballots for them. The Commonwealth observer mission at the time noted that “it was not possible to ascertain quite where, how and when the tabulation was completed”.

 

Kagame until 2034?

The presidential elections in 2010 were expected to be Kagame’s last. He was beginning his second constitutionally-mandated seven-year term and denied that he would seek re-election. He even claimed it would be a failure on his part not to find a replacement and warned that “those who seek a third term will seek a fourth and a fifth”.
Nevertheless, many remained sceptical that Kagame would step down, and in May 2013, his position became clearer when Justice Minister Tharcisse Karugarama was sacked shortly after insisting in an interview that Kagame would have to leave power in 2017 in accordance with the law.
By this time, a campaign had already started aimed at “convincing” the president to stay in office. In 2015, this culminated in 3.7 million Rwandans signing a petition – some under significant pressure – demanding that parliament enact constitutional changes that would allow Kagame to remain in power. It was claimed that this was a spontaneous action by the people, but it is unlikely such an operation could have been organised without the president’s knowledge and direction.
In subsequent “consultations” on the matter held throughout the country, MPs and senators claimed to have only found ten people – out of a population of 11 million – who opposed the initiative. Soon after, both houses unanimously approved a constitutional amendment to be put to a referendum.
The proposed revision called for maintaining the two-term limit and reducing term lengths from seven to five years. It also included a crucial provision allowing the incumbent to first run for an additional seven-year term, after which he would be eligible to bid for two more five-year terms. The changes effectively allow Kagame to stay in power until 2034, by which time he would have ruled Rwanda for 40 years.
While the issue of term limits has led to protests in many African countries, in Rwanda there was no debate or demonstrations around the December 2015 referendum. This was not surprising given that since the RPF took power, no demonstrations have taken place that were not organised by the regime itself. The amendment passed with 98.3% of the popular vote.
On 31 December 2015, President Kagame announced that he would run again, saying: “You requested me to lead this country again after 2017. Given the importance and consideration you attach to this, I can only accept”.

 

The candidates

Others also declared their intention to stand in 2017, including a handful of independents, but they have faced significant obstructions.
In May 2017, 35-year-old Diana Rwigara announced her candidacy, saying “people are tired, people are angry”. She had previously shown courage in criticising the government and human rights abuses. In the days following her announcement, doctored nude photographs of her circulated on social media.
Another aspirant, the Catholic prelate turned politician Thomas Nahimana, was denied access to Rwanda. Meanwhile, Gilbert Mwenedata, claimed that he was refused rooms by hotels in Kigali to hold a press conference to announce his plans.
The challenges facing independent candidates are dauntingly high to begin with. To be eligible, they must collect 600 signatures of support, including at least 12 from each of 30 districts. This may not seem much, but in an environment that does not tolerate criticism of the regime, it takes a lot of courage to reveal oneself to be an opposition supporter. Rwigara claimed that local leaders threatened her supporters as they tried to gather signatures.
Nevertheless, at least two hopefuls – Rwigara and Mwenedata – claimed to have met this requirement. But the National Electoral Commission (NEC) rejected their candidacies, claiming many of the signatures gathered were invalid. The NEC did not allow the candidates to see their lists to work out which names were disqualified, and several diplomats in Kigali expressed concern over the process.
In the end, only one independent hopeful – the little-known former journalist Philippe Mpayimana – made it onto the NEC’s final list.
The barriers for political parties are less onerous, and the Democratic Green Party’s (DGP) Frank Habineza was affirmed as the third and final presidential candidate. All other parties announced that they would not field nominees, but instead back Kagame.

 

No level playing field

As in previous elections in Rwanda, 2017’s opposition candidates have not faced an easy time or a level playing field in the run up to the polls.
While the RPF benefits from vast financial resources through its business ventures, other hopefuls were warned by the NEC against raising funds before being declared eligible. The electoral commission also announced in May that any social media messages by candidates or parties had to be submitted for vetting 48 hours prior to publication. Habineza called the decision “oppressive” and, after strong diplomatic protest, the measure was rescinded in early-June.
Opposition parties – in particular the non-registered FDU-Inkingi – have also seen their cadres arrested or disappeared. Amnesty International recently denounced the climate of fear surrounding the elections, saying: “Since the ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front took power 23 years ago, Rwandans have faced huge, and often deadly, obstacles to participating in public life and voicing criticism of government policy. The climate in which the upcoming elections take place is the culmination of years of repression.”
In these tense and oppressive circumstances, and given the widespread allegations of manipulation in Rwanda’s previous elections, it is not surprising that the head of the EU delegation in Kigali has said that “you would not lose any money if you bet on Mr Paul Kagame”.
Indeed, a 90% or higher victory for Kagame on 4 August seems inevitable in what will be coronation rather than election. All this is underscored by the latest Bertelsmann Stiftung’s Transformation Index (BTI) report in which Rwanda scored a mere two out of ten for “free and fair elections” and “effective power to govern”, and three for “association/assembly rights” and “freedom of expression”.

 

 

UGANDAN TROOPS HARM WOMEN,GIRLS. "CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC"

UGANDAN TROOPS HARM WOMEN,GIRLS. "CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC"

Repeated Sexual Exploitation and Abuse

 

 "Karin," a 15 year old girl in obo who was eight months pregnant at the time of the photo,She told the Human Rights Watch  that a ugandan soldier paid her up to 5,000 CFA (approximately $8.30 USD) to be his local "wife". LEWIS MUGDE/HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH 

 

 (Nairobi) – Ugandan soldiers in the Central African Republic have sexually exploited or abused at least 13 women and girls since 2015, including at least one rape, and threatened some victims to remain silent, Human Rights Watch said today. The Ugandan military has been deployed in the country since 2009 as a part of the African Union’s Regional Task Force to eliminate the Uganda rebel group, the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), but recently announced it is withdrawing its troops.

 

 Human Rights Watch interviewed a total of 13 women and 3 girls in early 2017, who described exploitation or abuse since 2010 by Ugandan soldiers in the southeastern town of Obo, where Ugandan forces were based, and heard credible accounts of other cases. Two of the women were girls when the exploitation or abuse took place. Two women and one girl said that soldiers threatened reprisals if they told Ugandan and United Nations investigators about the abuse.

 

  “As counter-LRA operations wind down, Uganda’s military should not ignore allegations of sexual exploitation and rape by its soldiers in the Central African Republic,” said Lewis Mudge, Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Ugandan and African Union authorities should conduct proper investigations, punish those responsible, and make sure that the women and girls who were sexually abused or exploited get the services they need.”
Fifteen of the women and girls interviewed said they became pregnant, but in each case the soldier who fathered the child left the country and has not provided any support.
The 16 cases documented by Human Rights Watch clearly under-represent the full extent of sexual exploitation and abuse by the Ugandan forces, not only because sexual violence is generally underreported, but also because others, including the UN and local health workers, have documented other cases, Human Rights Watch said. In the Central African Republic, women and girls often do not report sexual violence or exploitation due to shame, stigma, or fear of retaliation.
In 2016, the UN Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights reported 14 cases of rape by Ugandan forces in the country, including cases involving victims who were children at the time. Four of these cases are among those Human Rights Watch documented.

 A 26 year old woman who gave birth to two children after being exploited by a ugandan soldier.He left obo in 2015 while she was pregnant with the second child."He proposed that i should be his "wife,'she said.he said he would give me money and i accepted because i needed the money.He would come and visit often and some times everyday.He would bring me 5,000 CFA.(Approximately $8.30 USD) a week.Its because i was in a difficult situation that i accepted. LEWIS MUGDE/HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

According to an internal UN report from 2016 obtained by Human Rights Watch, UN investigators in Obo registered 18 cases of sexual violence or harassment by Ugandan soldiers against women and girls who were afraid to give details out of fear of reprisals. The report states that investigators also obtained information about 44 women and girls with children fathered by Ugandan soldiers; the UN team interviewed 12 of them, all girls.
In January 2017, the BBC reported cases of rape by Ugandan soldiers in the Central African Republic, including of a 12-year-old girl who gave birth. The Ugandan military said at the time that it conducted an investigation in Obo and found no evidence of wrongdoing.
Human Rights Watch submitted a series of questions about the allegations to the Ugandan Ministry of Defence and Veterans Affairs on April 20, including about any investigations or disciplinary action, but the ministry has not replied.
Several women and girls told Human Rights Watch that Ugandan military investigators had interviewed them over the past year, but that there was no follow-up and they had no information about the investigation.
Two local organizations, one religious leader, and one journalist in Obo also told Human Rights Watch that Ugandan forces had warned them not to report cases of sexual exploitation and abuse.
The rape survivor interviewed by Human Rights Watch, 15-year-old “Marie,” said a Ugandan soldier assaulted her in January 2016, while she was working in the fields near the Ugandan base at the Obo airstrip. “The man was alone… I could not understand what he was saying,” she said. “He pushed me to the ground [and he raped me]. Afterward, there was real pain.”
“Marie” became pregnant from the rape and gave birth to a child in November 2016.
Fifteen of the women and girls interviewed said they had sex with Ugandan military personnel in exchange for food or money because the ongoing conflict and their displacement had left them desperate. Several said the Ugandan soldiers offered them food and money to be their “local wives,” which entailed having sex and doing domestic work. Fourteen of these women and girls had a child fathered by a Ugandan soldier. All of them said they received no support from the soldier and most said their social and economic situation worsened after the child was born.
Rape; sex in exchange for money, goods, or services; and sex with anyone under 18 by African Union (AU) military, police, or civilians qualify as sexual exploitation and abuse, and are prohibited by the AU. The AU states a zero-tolerance policy for sexual exploitation and abuse.
The women and girls, healthcare workers, and local officials Human Rights Watch interviewed in Obo said that Ugandan soldiers paying for sex was no secret in the community, and women and girls frequently visited the military base by the air strip. “I could spend the night in the base, there were no problems,” said “Karin,” a 15-year-old girl who became pregnant in 2016 by a Ugandan soldier.
On April 19, 2017, the Ugandan Defense Ministry announced its withdrawal from the Central African Republic, saying, “the mission to neutralize the LRA has now been successfully achieved.” Ugandan forces could join the UN peacekeeping mission in the country, MINUSCA, to continue operations against the LRA, the ministry added.
MINUSCA should not consider accepting any Ugandan troops for the UN mission until allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse have been credibly investigated and abusers held to account, Human Rights Watch said.
While in Obo, Ugandan forces received logistical and intelligence assistance from the United States. The US government should condition future support for the Ugandan military on Uganda promptly and thoroughly investigating the allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse in the Central African Republic and punishing the abusers, among other concerns, Human Rights Watch said.
The Ugandan and AU authorities should prioritize the security and well-being of survivors in its response to sexual exploitation and abuse, Human Rights Watch said. That should include assuring survivor’s safety, maintaining confidentiality to reduce the risk of stigmatization, minimizing repeated trauma due to multiple interviews, ensuring timely access to medical and mental health, or psychosocial, care, and providing socioeconomic support to survivors abandoned with children fathered by Ugandan military personnel.
AU forces in the Central African Republic have committed other serious crimes with impunity in recent years. In June 2016, Human Rights Watch published information on the murder of at least 18 people, including women and children, by peacekeepers from the Republic of Congo. At the time, the Congolese peacekeepers were under the command of the AU mission in the Central African Republic, known as MISCA. The AU prepared an internal report on the killings but has not released the findings.
“Both AU and troop-contributing countries should demonstrate full commitment to punish sexual exploitation and abuse in deployment areas,” Mudge said. “They need to enforce the zero-tolerance policy and prevent abuse of the people these missions are meant to protect.”
 


The Effort Against the LRA
In 2011, the African Union’s Peace and Security Council authorized the Regional Cooperation Initiative for the Elimination of the LRA (RCI-LRA), which included as the military component the Regional Task Force (RTF). The RTF drew its operational forces largely from the Ugandan army. Approximately 1,500 Ugandan military forces were deployed to the Central African Republic.
The US announced in October 2011 that it would send 100 US Special Forces personnel as military advisers to the Ugandan army and other armed forces in the region to assist in apprehending LRA leaders. In recent years, and as LRA groups have moved, nearly all of the US military advisers and Ugandan army soldiers involved have been based in the southeast, with a headquarters in Obo.
Both Ugandan and US forces have announced they will withdraw from the mission in the upcoming months.
 

Sexual Exploitation and Rape
Human Rights Watch documented one case of rape of a girl (15 years old), and 15 cases of sexual exploitation by Ugandan military forces, including of two girls (15 and 17 years old), and two who were girls at the time the exploitation took place.
Thirteen of the cases occurred after 2015, with the most recent in late 2016. Fifteen of the 16 subsequently gave birth, including two who were 17 when they became pregnant.
“Marie,” the 15-year-old rape survivor, told Human Rights Watch that her attacker was a soldier based in Obo. “He was a young man,” she said. “This soldier raped me and now it is difficult to think about what happened. It was not good and I think about it a lot.”
“Marie” received some medical care after the attack but no information about getting an abortion after she learned she was pregnant (see below). She gave birth to the child in November 2016.
Among the cases investigated by the UN, according to an internal report Human Rights Watch reviewed, one was of a 13-year-old girl who was “raped two times by UPDF [Ugandan military] soldiers in Obo, first in August 2015 and the second time on May 20, 2016.”
A 25-year-old woman, “Blandine,” said she felt she had no choice but to be a Ugandan “wife” because a soldier gave her between 3,000 CFA and 5,000 CFA per week (approximately US$5 to $8.30) in return. “I needed the money,” she said. “I am a farmer and I am poor. I only went to school for a few years… With that money I would buy food and I would do small business.”
A 28-year-old woman, “Margaret,” said she was also not able to refuse money from a Ugandan soldier. “He would give me 1,000 CFA (approximately US$1.60) or some small food after sex. It would be a sachet of corn meal or maybe cabbage or tomatoes,” she said. “I started this relationship with [him] because I needed this small amount of money he gave me, that is all.”
“Francine,” 23, said she had sex with a Ugandan soldier for two to three months in 2015 because he gave her food and money. “He was looking for a woman that he could have sex with but he did not want too many [women] for fear of contracting AIDS,” she said. “He said he would give me 10,000 CFA (approximately US$16.70) to be his wife.”
“Francine” stressed how common the exploitation was in town. “All the Ugandans do this,” she said. “They don’t need to hide it because it is completely normal.”
 

Exploited and Abandoned
Seven women and one girl said they knew the name of the Ugandan soldier who had paid them for sex, but the others did not. None of the 15 who had a child as a result of the exploitation knew how to contact the soldier who had abandoned them.
“Claire,” 25, said that when she was six months pregnant, the Ugandan soldier who had impregnated her told her he was leaving the following day. “He refused to give me his number in Uganda,” she said. “When I insisted he said, ‘What for? You are just going to call and bother me.’”
“Margaret” said that the Ugandan father of her child, born in early 2015, refused to give her his phone number in Uganda. “No, the child is my gift to you,” she said he told her. “It will be a souvenir to remember me by.”
Six women and girls said Ugandan military personnel had promised to take them to Uganda for a better life in exchange for acting as a soldier’s “wife.”
A 25-year-old mother of a child from a Ugandan soldier, “Claude,” said a Ugandan soldier convinced her to become his “wife” in 2014. “He said he would marry me and take me to Uganda if I accepted to be his ‘wife,’” she said. “He said he would give me what I wanted and needed as his ‘wife,’ so I accepted.”
“Rebecca,” 22, said she agreed to be a Ugandan soldier’s “wife” when she was 17. “He fooled me and he said he would take me to Uganda as his own wife – I believed him,” she said. “I was young and stupid. We were together for a year. Sometimes he would come to the house, sometimes I would go to the base.” “Rebecca” had a child with the soldier when she was still 17.
A 21-year-old woman, “Alphonsine,” said a Ugandan soldier promised her money, food, and a home in Uganda. Over the course of five years, they had two children together. He abandoned her and the children in November 2015, when he returned to Uganda. “I think about my situation and how I was fooled,” she said. “Now it is very difficult for me to find money for food and soap.”
30-year-old “Jeanette,” who had a child from a Ugandan soldier in 2015, said she had sex with him because she needed money and food. “Now I need more money and food because I have to feed and clothe this child, too,” she said.
 

Services for Survivors
Most of the women and girls interviewed had not been able to get medical or mental health care.
“Marie,” the rape survivor, was able to access some critical post-rape medical care in the days after she was attacked. She was tested for HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections, but no one provided her with information about access to abortion after it was established she was pregnant.
Eight women said the Ugandan soldier with whom they had sex gave them money, ranging from 1,000 CFA to 30,000 CFA (approximately US$1.60 to $50), for medical care during their pregnancy. But all of them said it was not sufficient for the multiple check-ups required, and they either had to find the money elsewhere or forgo appointments.
None had any psychosocial support to deal with the trauma, despite the presence of at least one international organization that offers this service. The women and girls interviewed by Human Rights Watch said they were not aware this service existed.
None had received social or economic support from the AU or other agencies. Several spoke of stigma in their communities associated with having a “Ugandan baby.” This stigma could lead to greater socioeconomic needs. “People in the neighborhood call my child ‘the Ugandan,’” said Rebecca. “The other kids make fun of her and tell her I am the abandoned wife of a Ugandan.”
Ugandan Investigations
Ugandan military investigators interviewed several survivors over the past year, but the survivors said they had not had any communication with the investigators after the interviews and were unaware of other follow up. The women and girls said they had no means to contact the investigators.
Human Rights Watch sent a letter to the Ugandan Defense Ministry on April 20, 2017, asking, among other questions, what steps the ministry had taken to investigate the allegations. The ministry has not replied.
A Ugandan military spokesman, Brig. Gen. Richard Karemire, told the BBC in January that military investigators had visited Obo but found no evidence of wrongdoing. “A team went on the ground and did a very good investigation and they never found anything really to implicate any UPDF [Ugandan military] individual for having perpetrated such crimes,” he said.
 

Threats to Stay Silent
Two women and one girl who were sexually exploited said that Ugandan soldiers had warned them not to speak to any investigators looking into sexual exploitation and abuse. “Claire” said that Ugandan soldiers approached her in 2016, before Ugandan investigators arrived in Obo. “The soldiers came to my house and told me to say the child was a Central African,” she said. “They told me, ‘Don’t say the boy is a Ugandan or it will make problems for you. It will be bad.’ I said, ‘How can it get worse? I have been abandoned with nothing anyway.’”
“Karin,” the 15-year-old girl who was sexually exploited and left pregnant, said Ugandan soldiers warned her not to speak with Ugandan investigators. She decided to speak to the investigators anyway because she had already been abandoned while pregnant and felt she had nothing to lose.
The internal UN report Human Rights Watch obtained says that UN investigators in Obo registered 18 cases of sexual violence or sexual harassment by Ugandan soldiers against women and girls who were too fearful of reprisals by Ugandan soldiers to give details about their cases. Two local organizations, a religious leader, and one journalist in Obo also said Ugandan forces had warned them not to report sexual exploitation and abuse. The religious leader said: “The Ugandans are here to protect us, but they can also threaten us. They know that they are not meant to [have sex with people in the community] and they do not want people talking to journalists about it.”
The Central African Republic is not the only country where Ugandan soldiers have raped and exploited women and girls while on an AU mission. In 2014, Human Rights Watch documented that Ugandan and Burundian military personnel from the AU mission in Somalia, known as AMISOM, had exploited and abused women, including raping women who were seeking water or medical assistance on AMISOM bases. Some women said they did not report the abuse because they feared reprisals from their attackers. Human Rights Watch has previously raised concerns with the Ugandan Defense Ministry regarding similar allegations against Ugandan troops in the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2011.
 

AU Policy on Sexual Exploitation and Abuse
The UN defines exploitation as “any actual or attempted abuse of a position of vulnerability, differential power, or trust, for sexual purposes, including, but not limited to, profiting monetarily, socially or politically from the sexual exploitation of another.” The UN considers “sexual abuse” to mean the actual or threatened physical intrusion of a sexual nature, whether by force or under unequal or coercive conditions.
In September 2014, Human Rights Watch reported on 21 acts of rape or sexual exploitation by Ugandan and Burundian military personal with the AU mission in Somalia, AMISOM. Following this report, the AU sent an independent investigation team to Somalia. A recommendation in its final report called for the AU Commission to establish an Office of Internal Oversight Services with similar responsibilities to an independent UN office that investigates, submits reports, and recommends action on alleged abuses by UN peacekeepers. The UN policy on peacekeepers’ conduct prohibits engaging in any sexual relations with members of the local community. The AU should establish a permanent and adequately trained and resourced independent investigative body to investigate allegations of misconduct and abuses, including sexual exploitation and abuse, Human Rights Watch said.
Despite allegations made in the past, the AU does not have a comprehensive conduct and discipline policy for AU peacekeepers or soldiers who commit sexual exploitation and abuse. It is working on a policy framework that will include prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse, how to respond to reports of other types of offenses, and a whistleblower policy. It is unclear if the policy will result in establishing an independent investigative mechanism, along the lines of the UN agency as recommended in the report from Somalia.
The UN considers rape; sex in exchange for money, goods, or services; and sex with anyone under 18 by UN military, police, or civilians to be sexual exploitation and abuse, which are prohibited by the UN. The UN professes a zero-tolerance policy for sexual exploitation and abuse. There have been numerous allegations of such abuse against UN peacekeepers in the Central African Republic, including in cases documented by Human Rights Watch in February 2016.
The United Nations Secretary-General’s 2003 Bulletin on protection from sexual exploitation and abuse states that exploitation involves situations in which women and girls are vulnerable and a differential power relationship exists.
 

Other Abuses by AU Peacekeepers in the Central African Republic
Human Rights Watch has reported on other serious crimes by troops operating as AU peacekeepers in the Central African Republic. In June 2014, Human Rights Watch published information on the killing of at least 11 people, including women and children, in Boali in March 2014, and the death by torture of two others in Bossangoa in December 2013.
In June 2016, Human Rights Watch published another report on the killings in Boali, highlighting the discovery of a mass grave containing the remains of 12 people who were identified as having been detained by the peacekeepers in March 2014, as well as two prisoners executed in Mambéré in February 2014.
The killings in Boali, Bossangoa, and Mambéré were by peacekeepers from the Republic of Congo under command of the AU mission, known by its French acronym, MISCA.
Following the exhumation of the mass grave at Boali, Human Rights Watch wrote to President Denis Sassou Nguesso of the Republic of Congo and to the AU urging credible investigations to bring those responsible to justice. Human Rights Watch never received a reply.
In 2015, staff at the AU embassy in the Central African Republic told Human Rights Watch of an AU report into the murders at Boali. Despite official requests in 2015, 2016, and 2017, Human Rights Watch was never shown the report nor been told of its contents.

Uganda: Age Limit Bill lined up,why now?

Uganda: Age Limit Bill lined up,why now?

 

After months of speculation, the omnibus Constitution (Amendment) Bill, which contains a clause to remove the presidential age limit, has been lined up to be officially gazetted.

We have seen a copy of The Uganda Gazette dated June 8, 2017 where the Constitution (Amendment) Bill is listed as one of the bills that are due to be published.

Sources said the bill shall be published in the gazette in a few weeks' time. Interviewed for a confirmation on Friday, June 30, Maj Gen Kahinda Otafiire, the minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, said the Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2017 awaits to be published in The Uganda Gazette before it can come to parliament for debate.

The Uganda Gazette, according to the ministry of Justice's website, is the "official newspaper of government."

Otafiire said: "Once the bill has been gazetted, a Constitutional Review Commission shall be appointed and it will gather views from the people."

Otafiire added that all articles of the Constitution, including 102 that touches on the qualifications for one to be a president,will be up for possible amendment.

"What is so special about Article 102? Is it a commandment from God? If the public wants the age-limit amended, it will be amended. If they don't want, we shall leave it," Otafiire said.

Specifically, Article 102 (b) states that a person is not qualified for election as president of Uganda if he or she is "less than thirty-five years and or more than seventy-five years of age."

The fiery minister continued: "The Constitution is not my property. I am just a custodian. If people want some articles to be amended, it is their right."

Otafiire's remarks confirm earlier speculation that government plans to have the presidential age cap abolished despite public denial by senior government officials.

In a 2012 interview that is now commonly shared on social media, President Museveni told NTV: "I don't think someone can be an effective leader after 75 years."

However, since his re-election last year, the president has been more circumspect, simply telling journalists that he will follow the Constitution.

SEVERAL ATTEMPTS

 Museveni, who turns 73 later this year, will be 76 by 2021 and thus ineligible to stand for president under the constitution as it is today. Political analysts predict that just as he did in the run-up to the lifting of presidential term limits in 2005, President Museveni will distance himself from the move to remove the age-limit, leaving it to his outspoken supporters in and out of the NRM-dominated parliament.

Some politicians, seeking to catch his attention, have already stoked the potentially fiery debate. In August 2016, the Kyankwanzi district leadership drafted a resolution in support of an amendment to lift the age-limit.

Led by Woman MP Ann Maria Nankabirwa, the resolution was handed to a smiling President Museveni after a meeting of both parties. Later on, it was Robert Kafeero Ssekitooleko's turn to catch the president's attention. In September 

 2016, the Nakifuma MP tried in vain to table a private member's bill that was seen as a ruse to lift the presidential age limit in the Constitution.

On the face of it, the bill aimed to raise the retirement age of judges and give electoral 

 commissioners an extended tenure but, under 

the surface, it was believed to be targeting Article 102(b).

The Nakifuma MP's move collapsed on September 13, 2016 after Speaker of Parliament Rebecca Kadaga directed that the motion be shelved until government tables an omnibus bill with all constitutional amendments therein.

Ssekitooleko is now understood to be part of a group of MPs actively working to figure out how the age-limit clause can be set aside.

Others, according to our sources, are, John Bosco Lubyayi (Mawokota South), Simeo Nsubuga (Kassanda South), former FDC treasurer Anita Among (Bukedea Woman), Arinaitwe Rwakajara (Workers), Peter Ogwang (Usuk) and Jacob Oboth-Oboth (West Budama South).

Asked about the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, Rwakajara told The Observer on Saturday that he will support it when it comes to parliament.

"Let it come to parliament and we see the details. I will support it," Rwakajara said.

Yet any attempt to lift the age-limit will most likely set off protests from some sections of the public, opposition groups and civil society activists.

Godber Tumushabe, the executive director of the Great Lakes Institute for Strategic Studies (GLISS), told NYUMABANI on Saturday that government's insistence on pushing forward with the amendment shows they don't have the interests of citizens at heart.

"This government no longer works for the people. It works for itself and President Museveni. What Museveni wants is what becomes law," Tumushabe said.

Betty Nambooze, the Mukono municipality legislator, told NYUMBANI last week that the opposition would rise up against any attempt to lift the presidential age-limit.

"I call upon all well-meaning Ugandans to join us in the struggle against dictatorship. We shall not sit by and watch as Museveni tampers with the Constitution."

Uganda civil servants face strict dress code

Public servants in Uganda are facing a strict dress code after the government issued a circular warning them to "dress decently".

Female staff have been told not to show any cleavage, wear brightly coloured nails, braids or hair extensions, sleeveless or transparent blouses.
Men must wear long-sleeved shirts, jackets and ties, while trousers should not be tight-fitting.
Staff failing to comply will be disciplined.
The guidelines, issued by the Ministry of Public Service apply to all non-uniformed civil servants. But there is a feeling that female staff are the main focus on the new rules.
While women will be allowed to wear pant-suits, they have been warned not to wear any tight-fitting clothing. Dresses and skirts must at least be knee-length.
Uganda is a conservative society and women have previously complained of being harassed if they wear mini-skirts in public.

---

How to 'dress decently' in Uganda:

Female officers

• To dress in a skirt or dress that is not above the knees, with a smart long or short sleeved blouse. Officers should avoid wearing sleeveless, transparent blouses and dresses at the work place.
• To ensure that the clothing covers up cleavage, navel, knees and back.
• Not allowed to have bright coloured hair in form of natural hair, braids and hair extensions.
• Maintain well-groomed, neutral polished nails. Long nails with more than 3cms (1.5in), with bright nail polish or with multi-coloured nail polish are not allowed in public offices.
• Shall keep the facial make-up simple and not exaggerated.

Male officers

• Male officers are required to dress in neat trousers, long-sleeved shirts, jacket and a tie.
• Officers will not be allowed to put on open shoes during working hours, except on health grounds/recommendation.
• Hair should be well-groomed and generally kept short.
• Tight fitting trousers will not be permitted.

---

The Ministry of Public Service's director of Human Resources, Adah Muwanga, said they had to act after receiving complaints:
"We were approached with complaints that, specifically lady officers, were dressing in an unacceptable manner, with mini-skirts and showing body parts which otherwise generally should be covered in Ugandan society," she told the BBC.
She said the ministry has overall responsibility to guide on the administration and management of the public service and "this is how we want the public to view us".
The circular further states that accessories should be modest, while long fingernails of more than 3cms (1.5in) with bright or multi-coloured nail polish are also not permitted.
Flat, open shoes are ruled out, except in cases where one can prove that it is for medical reasons.
Men have been told they should keep their hair short and neat, and not wear brightly coloured clothes.
The circular is derived from Public Service Standing Orders on dress code, put in place in 2010.
However, the BBC's Patience Atuhaire in Kampala says the dress code does not seem to have been paid much attention to up to now.
Mrs Muwanga said that staff who failed to comply with the new enforcements would be cautioned at first, and repeat offenders would face disciplinary action.
However she added "there is always room for review".

 

 

 

 

 

White House Pushes Military Might Over Humanitarian Aid in Africa

 

 

MUA MISSION, Malawi — If ever there was an example of American and African military bonhomie, it was at a recent summit meeting here over glasses of South African Pinotage and expectations of Pentagon largess.

Gen. Daniel B. Allyn, vice chief of staff of the United States Army, gave the African generals advice from his days in Haiti after the 2010 earthquake. Maj. Gen. Joseph P. Harrington, the head of United States Army Africa, gave a shout-out to the West African military leaders who helped prod the former Gambian president, Yahya Jammeh, out of office after he lost his bid for re-election last year. Lt. Gen. Robert Kariuki Kibochi, the commander of the Kenyan Army, got understanding nods from the Americans when he made clear how much blood African peacekeepers put on the line.

But even here, among men who have been given every reason to expect that they will be receiving more money from the Trump administration, there is unease that the additional American heft may come at a steep price. Pentagon officials are themselves concerned that shifting to a military-heavy presence in Africa will hurt American interests in the long term by failing to stimulate development. An absence of schools and jobs, they say, creates more openings for militant groups.

“We have statements out of Washington about significant reductions in foreign aid,” Gen. Griffin Phiri, the commander of the Malawi Defense Forces, said in an interview during the African Land Forces Summit, a conference of 126 American Army officers and service members and their counterparts from 40 African nations. “What I can tell you is that experience has shown us that diplomacy and security must come together.” He bemoaned “mixed messages” coming out of Washington.

Actually, the message is not so mixed, foreign policy experts say. If Congress passes Mr. Trump’s proposed Pentagon budget for the 2018 fiscal year — it calls for an additional $52 billion on top of the current $575 billion base budget — the United States will spend more money on military affairs in Africa but reduce humanitarian and development assistance across the continent. The Trump budget proposes cutting aid to Africa to $5.2 billion in the 2018 fiscal year from $8 billion now, a stark drop. Even some of the money still in the Trump proposal would shift to security areas from humanitarian and development, foreign policy experts say.

“We are radically narrowing the definition of why and how Africa matters to U.S. national interests,” said J. Stephen Morrison, senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Gone are the days, he said, when human rights, development, economic growth and humanitarian relief dominated the American agenda on the continent.

The Pentagon has not yet specified how much money will go to African militaries, but officials say there will be more of it for training programs, joint exercises and counterterrorism efforts. There may also be more funding for Camp Lemonnier, the American base in Djibouti, where visitors are greeted with a video of American and East African troops parachuting out of planes and rolling on the dirt together, to the screaming howls of AC/DC’s “Thunderstruck.”

The Trump administration has proposed slashing programs that buy antiretroviral drugs for people who are infected with H.I.V., the virus that causes AIDS, by at least $1.1 billion — nearly a fifth of their current funding. Researchers say the cuts could lead to the deaths of at least one million people in sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere. Over all, Mr. Trump’s budget submission would reduce State Department funding by roughly a third and cut foreign assistance by about 29 percent.

Mr. Trump’s proposal would also move away from traditional development assistance programs in favor of so-called Economic Support Funds, short-term investments based on national security calculations.

The White House has yet to nominate someone for the post of assistant secretary of state for African affairs — the top administration envoy to the continent. Mr. Trump has made only a handful of calls to African leaders since taking office, and the National Security Council still doesn’t have a director for African affairs.

Mr. Trump’s secretary of state, Rex W. Tillerson, reinforced the view on the continent that the Trump administration puts a low priority on diplomacy when in April he backed out of a planned meeting with the chairman of the African Union, Moussa Faki Mahamat, at the last minute. The aborted meeting, first reported by Foreign Policy magazine, left the chairman fuming.

In addition, two big think tanks, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and the United States Institute of Peace, are facing the complete elimination of federal funding for their Africa programs under Mr. Trump’s proposed budget.

And yet over at the Pentagon, it is a different story. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis wasn’t on the job three months before he took his first trip to the continent, arriving in Djibouti on a bright Sunday in April for meetings with President Ismail Omar Guelleh. In Chad in March, American Special Forces were conducting training exercises with service members from 20 African countries.

Last month, Gen. Thomas Waldhauser, the head of the Pentagon’s Africa Command, was in Tripoli, Libya, in the first high-level visit by an American official since the 2012 attacks on the American Consulate in Benghazi. General Waldhauser huddled with Fayez Serraj, the leader of Libya’s new government of national accord, as the Defense Department — now the lead agency for diplomacy in Africa — wrestled with the idea of how to reach a political solution to the chaos in Libya.

And at the African Land Forces Summit in Malawi, held over two days in May, the American military spent $1.2 million flying in and housing African military leaders. The Americans hired buses to take the African commanders to their hotels and brought in National Guard and reserve officers from all over the United States to chat with their counterparts.

The American military leaders are among the first to sound alarms about the proposed cuts in humanitarian funding, worrying that the reductions could put in place conditions that lead to more conflict, which might then mean more military intervention.

In testimony submitted to the Senate Armed Services Committee this month, a long list of retired American military officers, including Gen. Stanley McChrystal, Gen. David H. Petraeus and Adm. Michael Mullen, said foreign aid cuts hurt the Pentagon. “We are part of a long history of U.S. military leaders who have noted how much more cost-effective it is to prevent a conflict than to end one,” the officers wrote.

Or as Mr. Mattis told Congress in 2013, when he was a general overseeing American military operations in the Middle East as head of United States Central Command, “If you don’t fully fund the State Department, then I need to buy more ammunition.’’

Military leaders today echo Mr. Mattis’s sentiment.

“We recognize the limits of military power, and how important it is to leverage all elements and capabilities that our interagency and nongovernmental organizations bring to bear in Africa and around the world,” General Harrington told the opening session of the conference in Malawi.

Gen. Carter Ham, a former commander of Africa Command, said in an interview that cuts in foreign aid would lead to the need for more increases in military spending. “Insecurity in Africa, which adversely affects the United States, stems in my view from loss of hope,” he said.

He offered an example: “If you’re a young Muslim man in northeastern Nigeria, and you look at your government and say, my prospects for a job are pretty slim, there’s no education or health care, and then suddenly some guy comes along and offers me money, prestige, a gun and a girl, a purpose, that becomes attractive,” he said, referring to the many young men who have been coaxed into joining the militant group Boko Haram.

On the closing day of the African Land Forces Summit, the assembled African generals listened intently as one American diplomat posed a central question.

“How do we operate in an environment when we are willing to send peacekeepers,” asked Alexander M. Laskaris, a State Department official with Africa Command, “but we’re not willing to take the steps necessary to make peace?”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/25/world/africa/white-house-pushes-military-might-over-humanitarian-aid 

       CONGO,A TICKING TIME BOMB 

Kabila is flexing. Kasai is unraveling. Angola is smouldering. 

There’s a great deal of uncertainty in Kinshasa. Credit:Issa Ahmed Khamis

The week before US President Donald Trump’s inauguration this January was an interesting time to be in the capital Kinshasa. The Democratic Republic of Congo‘s regime was in a peculiar mindset.
As they looked over to the US, officials recalled that Patrice Lumumba, DRC’s first freely-elected prime minister, was assassinated just a few days before the inauguration of John F. Kennedy in 1961. They also pointed out that President Laurent-Désiré Kabila was killed less than a week before George W. Bush first took office in 2001.
Some of those around the current president were convinced history would repeat − that there would be an attempt on Joseph Kabila’s life in the run-up to Trump’s inauguration. They claimed there was a conspiracy by the international community to atomise the Congo and neutralise Kabila like they had Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi.

What didn’t happen next

This assassination attempt never happened. And since that January, many more things have not happened.
Foremost among them is the implementation of the Saint Sylvester Agreement. This is the deal that was settled between the government and opposition on 31 December 2016. Made nearly two weeks after the official end of President Kabila’s second mandated term, the agreement ostensibly offers a roadmap out of the Congo’s political and constitutional crisis.
Facilitated by the Conference of Catholic Bishops, the agreement contains a commitment to respect the Constitution. It also includes several references to the fact that Kabila, who has been in office since 2001, will not stand for a third term. Instead, it says he will lead a transition government and hand over to a successor to be elected by the end of 2017.
On the one hand, the Saint Sylvester Agreement was an important achievement with consensus and concessions from all sides. There had been widespread protests through 2016, leading to dozens of deaths, and the deal allowed a period of fragile calm. It was also the result of a fully Congolese process, mediated by perhaps the last national institution to retain a degree of moral authority.
But on the other hand, it remains a vulnerable construct. The deal has several blind spots and gaps to be filled in through later negotiations. It was agreed between a divided ruling coalition and divided opposition. And it was made in a country with a long tradition of people signing deals without intending to respect them.

As a source within the regime said: “This agreement has the great merit of being unrealistic. It will be hard to implement. We will let the government led by the opposition govern and organise the elections. They will conclude soon enough that it is unfeasible to organise them before the end of the year, and when they pass their deadline, we will whistle at them as they whistled at us last December.”

Since the agreement, the government has consistently demonstrated its lack of will to organise elections. This was seen, amongst other occasions, as it exploited the predictable implosion of the opposition UDPS after the death of its leader Etienne Tshisekedi this February.

But the opposition has hardly impressed either. The only activity to see progress is voter registration, and many believe this is because the regime is preparing for a constitutional referendum to propose removing the two-term presidential limit.

Local violence out of control

Away from Kinshasa, things are also increasingly uncertain as local conflicts have intensified in certain areas these past months.
The most dramatic developments have been in Kasai. Until recently, this region did not know the phenomenon of armed groups. But in August 2016, conflict was triggered by a succession dispute among customary authorities about 70 km from the city of Kananga.
The governor of Kasai Central tried to appoint someone against the will of the community. There were violent incidents in which the locally supported candidate was killed. And eventually a new armed movement called Kamwina Nsapu emerged.
Violence regularly flared up for the rest of 2016. It became permanent in January 2017. And it grew exponentially in February. The uprising, which started locally, spread across several provinces and was met with excessive violence.
Up to now, at least 42 mass graves have been discovered in the region. Meanwhile, two members of the UN Group of Experts − who were investigating human rights abuses and ties between the violence, national politics and the Congolese army − were found dead this March.
The case of Kasai shows how the Congolese state has lost its capacity to anticipate or even react to local conflicts. It exemplifies how areas get stuck between a formal administration that exists on paper but is not operational on the one hand, and customary authorities which often lack consensus and legitimacy and thus are vulnerable for manipulation on the other.
These tensions led to the massive violence in the Kasai and could happen in many other places in Congo where the same conditions apply.

International anxiety

At an international level, the Congo is also in flux. This can be seen in particular when it comes to Angola.
From the beginning of the Kabila family’s reign, its southern neighbour has been one of the regime’s most important partners. Both Laurent-Désiré and Joseph Kabila have been saved on various occasions by Angola.
The president considers this crucial support to be an expression of solidarity with his regime or even with him personally.  But the reality is that Angola’s absolute priority is, and always has been, to avoid instability along its 2,500 km border with the DRC.
In the last months of 2016, Angola sent clear messages to Kabila to respect the Constitution and organise a transition within a reasonable time-frame. This position seems to be supported by the southern Africa regional bloc SADC as a whole. The region does not believe Kabila is able to provide stability and does not want the vast country to implode.
As the situation has worsened in 2017, Angola has not been amused by the lack of progress in the political process and even less by the 1.3 million displaced people in Kasai, which it borders. Many in Congo, including inside the regime, fear that Angola might take action to maximise pressure on Kabila.

 

Predicting the unpredictable

The result of all these dynamics − from the national-level impasse, to spreading local level conflicts, to increasingly anxious neighbours − is that nobody knows what to expect. It is no longer possible to predict what will happen in the Congo.
On the one hand, the regime radiates self-confidence and believes it can impose a referendum. Kabila seemed to confirm this in his interview with Der Spiegel, in which he commented: “To change the constitution is constitutional…You can change the constitution by referendum.”
But on the other hand, the president and his entourage know they are unpopular and that they can only win the referendum with fraud and/or intimidation. In a survey last year, 81.4% of respondents said they were against changing the constitution. Kabila’s government is also aware that its ability to control local conflicts is weak.
One of the key questions at the moment is of what effect the Western sanctions imposed on various senior officials in the last couple of weeks will have. Will they further undermine the cohesion of the regime? Or will they allow the government to close ranks and even win back a part of public opinion through a militant nationalist discourse?
As is becoming increasingly the case when it comes to the Congo, this too is nigh on impossible to predict.
Kris Berwouts’ new book Congo’s Violent Peace: Conflict and Struggle Since the Great African War is out in July 2017. It will be published as part of the African Arguments book series by ZED Books. It will be launched on 3 July. This article is drew on research Kris conducted for DfID’s DRC Evidence, Analysis and Coordination Programme (EACP), on behalf of Integrity Research and Consultancy.

Montreal: the latest hotspot for Africa’s rulers to keep their wealth?

A new African Arguments investigation has found that politically-exposed African nationals hold Canadian real estate worth several millions of dollars.
The study, conducted in partnership with the Journal de Montréal and Le Monde Afrique, reveals over a dozen individuals who have invested nearly $26 million in Canadian real estate, often without a mortgage.
The source of the funds used to buy these properties could be legitimate. But the sales should have raised red flags because of the public positions of the individuals involved or because of their association with deals that have raised suspicion.
Buying bricks and mortar abroad has long been a strategy of the rich to diversify their assets.
Typically, the likes of France, US and UK have been the go-to places to buy up expensive property. Not all of it uses clean money. In 2016, a UK parliamentary committee estimated that a shocking $150 billion is laundered in London’s real estate market every year. But in recent years, luxurious flats owned by families of African leaders have been seized in each of these countries.
This seems to have led some to look further afield.
“They will diversify their investments according to only one criteria, which is the legal security offered by specific territories,” says William Bourdon, lawyer for Sherpa.
Sherpa is the NGO behind the “ill-gotten gains” case in France in which the rulers of Gabon, Congo-Brazzaville and Equatorial Guinea stand accused of laundering money in luxurious French properties.
According to Marc Guéniat, a researcher at the Swiss NGO Public Eye, France has historically been the favoured location for investment amongst the rulers of francophone Africa, but incidences such as the “ill-gotten gains” case have changed this.
“Logically, these rulers look for other destinations,” he says.  “As a francophone region, Québec is an interesting alternative.”
In Québec, the origins of funds invested in real estate don’t seem to raise too many questions. A recent Transparency International report highlighted the country’s weak anti-money laundering regulations in the real estate sector.
In theory, both real estate brokers and financial entities such as banks are responsible for detecting money laundering in Canada. They are meant to notify suspicious transactions to the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC) that can, in turn, inform the police.
But between 2003 and 2013, in which there were over 5 million real estate sales, FINTRAC received just 279 suspicious transactions warnings. This rate increased slightly following educational efforts by FINTRAC, although it remains relatively low.
Moreover, in the dozen administrative penalties that FINTRAC has levied against brokers who failed to properly identify clients since 2008, the fines have averaged under $6,900. This pales in comparison to sales sometimes worth millions of dollars.
Brokers that fail to meet their legal responsibilities also face criminal sanctions, but it is not clear how many such cases have been investigated and brought to justice. The Canadian royal police did not reply to our questions.

 

 

Congo-Brazzaville

Wilfrid Nguesso is the nephew of Denis Sassou-Nguesso, the president of Congo-Brazzaville who has held an often violent grip on power for a total of 32 years. Over the past decade, Wilfrid has been trying to migrate to Montreal, but the Canadian authorities have forbidden him entry on the grounds that he allegedly belongs to a “criminal organisation” that has embezzled Congo’s public funds.
Wilfrid and his wife bought a house in Montreal worth over $730,000 without a mortgage in 2007. He did not reply to our calls for comments.
Voltaire Brice Etou Obami is an accountant and businessman close to the Nguesso family. He is named in a note by the French anti-laundering agency, Tracfin, due to his business deals with Catherine Ignanga. Ignanga used to be President Sassou-Nguesso’s sister-in-law and is being investigated by Tracfin. Obami is not under investigation and told us that he does not know about Ignanga’s dealings that are being scrutinised.
In 2014, Obami invested over $410,000 in two Montreal hotel rooms. His children study in Canada and he says he has applied for an immigration visa. According to him, the funds for the rooms came from his wife, who he says made profits from the real estate industry in Africa.
Jean Jacques Bouya is a member of Congo’s presidential family. He is being investigated by Tracfin. In Congo, he oversees millions of dollars in public funds as the Minister of Spatial Planning and Major Projects. He was previously chief of the agency in charge of large public works, the DGGT (Délégation générale des grands travaux).
According to a document from the French financial fraud police that we procured, the DGGT under Bouya made several transfers to bank accounts in San Marino between 2007 and 2013. All these accounts were held by Philippe Chironi, a close associate of Congo’s ruling family. The transfers came to a total of close to $75 million “whose origin could be illicit”, according to the document. These funds were transferred to accounts held by several people, including Bouya and Catherine Ignanga.
In 2008 and 2009, Bouya bought two buildings in Québec for a total of close to $1.3 million without a mortgage. He did not return our calls for comment.
Tite Kaba is a Congolese civil servant. He was in charge of land titles until 2016 when he was accused of producing a false deed for the benefit of an individual close to the Nguesso family.
Kaba and his wife, Rachida Kaba, have invested over $4.2 million in Quebec’s real estate since 2008 (in several cases, with a mortgage). They refused to reply to our questions regarding the origin of the funds.

Chad

Ibrahim Hissein Bourma is married to the sister of Hinda Déby. Hinda is the wife of Idriss Déby, Chad’s president since 1990. The main client of Bourma’s profitable import-export company, Oum-Alkheri General Trading, is the Chadian government.
In 2013, Bourma was stopped in Egypt with over $200,000 hidden in a secret compartment of his suitcase. He was later acquitted on a technicality after an intervention from the Chadian embassy. His lawyer told us he was acquitted in 2015 and that the affair was an unfortunate “imbroglio”.
In Canada, Bourma bought properties worth over $4.9 million without a mortgage between 2012 and 2016 through his company Investissement Siham Canada Inc. He told us: “I come from a family of businessmen, so I can only succeed.” On why he likes to invest in Québec, he said: “In Dubai, you can buy flats and the price drops very fast. In Montreal, it has been stable for years…If you see the number of apartments that I bought, it’s clearly for investment.”
Bourma’s brother, Mahamat Zene Isseine Bourma, is married to President Déby’s daughter. He bought a flat in Montreal for about $490,000 in 2013 without a mortgage. The previous year, he was appointed Chad’s paymaster general by Déby and tasked with overseeing all government spending. At this time, his company won large public contracts such as supplying ambulances to the Ministry of Health. In 2016, he was fired from the job after accusations of embezzlement. He told us these allegations were without basis. “The story was proven wrong…they’ve invented quite a few things,” he said.
The sister of the two Bourmas, Amina Hissein Bourma and her husband, Mahamat Kasser Younous, bought a flat worth $340,000 in Québec in 2012. The following year, they purchased a villa worth $840,000, both without a mortgage. At the time of the purchases, Younous was director of Chad’s national oil company. They did not return our calls.

Cameroon

Jacques Ndjamba Mbeleck is a consultant who founded the Cameroonian accounting company, CAC, which is very active in Chad’s oil sector. He also told us he is good friends with Mahamat Bourma.
In 2011, Mbeleck’s firm was advising Chad’s government. In this time, it received a $7.4 million bonus payment directly from the oil company Griffiths Energy International. An independent auditor looking into Chad’s extractive revenues described this transaction as “against best practice”. Griffiths had just won oil rights in Chad. A couple of years later, this deal raised controversy as Griffiths admitted to bribing Chad’s ambassador to Canada and his deputy to obtain the permits. No accusations of corruption have been levied against CAC. Ndjamba Mbeleck told us that the $7.4 million payment was above board.
In 2012, Mbeleck bought a flat in Montreal worth around $420,000, with a mortgage. He bought another property worth $580,000 the following year, without a mortgage.

Gabon

 

 

Zéphyrin Rayita is a senator who has held high-ranking positions in Gabon’s telecommunications sector. Lin Mombo is a civil servant who has worked in the same industry. Mombo is also the partner of Marie-Madeleine Mborantsuo (aka “3M”), the powerful president of Gabon’s constitutional court, which ruled in favour of President Ali Bongo after the controversial elections last year. In March, RFI and the Canard Enchainé revealed that Mborantsuo is under an investigation by French authorities for allegedly embezzling public funds and money laundering.
In 2003, Rayita and Mombo bought a two-story building in Montreal for $2.2 million with a mortgage covering half the amount. They sold it four years later. Reached over the phone, Mborantsuo said “you think that’s how you’ll be able to ask me questions? Do you think it’s really normal that you call to tell me you’ll ask me questions?” She then hung up and didn’t reply to our subsequent messages.
We did not manage to reach Rayita. Mombo told us that state officials in Gabon are well paid and that he decided to invest his salary in real estate.
Joël Bernard Ogouma is the Inspector General of Taxation in Gabon, a country whose ruling family is targeted by the ill-gotten gains case in France. Ogouma himself has not been accused of corruption as far as we know. In Québec, Ogouma bought a flat for over $510,000 in 2014, without a mortgage. He did not respond to our calls for comment.

Senegal

 

 

Mamadou Pouye is a close associate of Karim Wade. Karim is the son of Abdoulaye Wade, Senegal’s president from 2000 to 2012. Under his father’s government, Karim held a number of high-level positions and gained the nickname “Mr 15%” in reference to the personal cut he allegedly took from public tenders. During that period, Pouye set up companies abroad, including in Panama, as was revealed in the Panama Papers leak.
After his father lost power, Karim Wade was arrested together with Pouye. Karim was sentenced to six years in jail for embezzlement, but released by a presidential pardon in 2016 after serving just three.
In the case, the prosecution alleged that Pouye had “helped or assisted” Karim “in the preparation, facilitation or undertaking of illicit enrichment”. Pouye was convicted in 2015 and released on bail the following year. France and the United Nations criticised the trial’s fairness. Pouye’s lawyer claimed to us that his client is innocent.
In Montreal, Pouye bought a flat in 2012 for over $460,000 via a company registered in Canada named 9259-7087 QUÉBEC INC.
Madiké Niang was Karim Wade’s lawyer during his trial. Previously, he occupied key ministerial positions in Adboulaye Wade’s government. He was also reportedly targeted in the investigation into Wade and Pouye but was never formally accused.
In 2006, Niang bought a flat in Montréal for about $225,000 and another one in 2008 for about $270,000 with a mortgage. He did not return our calls.

Algeria

 

 

Réda Bedjaoui is the brother of Farid Bedjaoui. Farid has been accused of channelling millions of dollars in bribes for an Algerian oil deal and is on Interpol’s wanted list. Over the years, Farid has given Réda at least several hundreds of thousands of dollars. Réda is not under investigation as far as we know. Réda Bedjaoui has bought two properties worth a total of $4.7 million in Montreal and several others with his ex-wife. He did not respond to our requests for comment.
A third brother, Ryad Bedjaoui, has bought land worth $3.6 million in Montréal with a company whose majority shareholder was Farid Bedjaoui. He sold the land four years later. His lawyer told us that Ryad has “no financial relation with his brothers”.