Kamya must keep FDC secrets if she has got any

Dear Sir or Madam:

As I was watching sky sports news yesterday after work, my mind straightway went to the current saga going on between Beti Kamya and his party,FDC when I saw the news that Gallas William, has lost his Arsenal captaincy and. As a Chelsea supporter, I was so disturbed when Gallas crossed to Arsenal from Chelsea but I had heard of certain aspects of his bad behaviour with the boys in the dressing room that made me accept this loss. What William Gallas did two day ago: revealing secrets of the dressing room- can be compared to what Beti Kamya is doing to FDC at the moment. What I don’t understand is why FDC cannot strip Kamya of his position in FDC just like Arsernal Manager, Wenger, has stripped Gallas of the captaincy of the team. FDC need to send a message out loud and clear that those who reveal party secrets will not be awarded as “patriotic” whistleblowers as it seems to be the case with Beti Kamya at the moment. In fact, a person who has threatened to put the party secrets in the open may be more dangerous than the one who has revealed them and as such Beti should be divorced from FDC as soon as possible. What Wenger has done is to show Gallas and others that no player is bigger than the club.

As they say the person most likely to sell party secrets to the enemy is living in the ‘inner’ House of the party. I think FDC should nail anyone who sold them out, regardless of what they have done for the party in the past.This sets a good displinary foundation for the party in the long term.

People must train themselves to keep secrets at any level: personal, militarily, national, political party or anything else. For instance, when the USA was planning the invasion of France in 1944, their only hope of making it work was hiding the details of the operation. It was going to be a bloody operation at best. The Americans kept details of the technology used in the Apollo program secret because they wanted to make sure they had better rockets than the Soviet Union. Secrecy played a major role during this operation and that’s how it should be at any level.

What FDC is doing by handling Beti Kamya with Kids gloves is very dangerous. There are only doing it with a hope of maintaining future good relations with Beti Kamya but it always backfires. An example is when an investigation of nuclear secrets stolen by China from a U.S. laboratory was repeatedly slowed and played down by the federal government in favour of keeping good relations between the countries. Some of the newspapers in USA were quoted as saying that China’s espionage at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico in the mid-1980s helped it develop the technology to miniaturize nuclear bombs, a key step toward fielding a modern nuclear arsenal. Let us also remember that the Chinese got nuclear secrets in the 1980s when Clinton was governor and Reagan was President, an issue that brought questions to be raised during Reagan and Clinton’s presidency. I would expect FDC leaders to move swiftly to bring this issue to an end because it is damaging the party and Dr.Besigye more than necessary. The FDC needs to tell all the members of the ‘inner circle’ that party secrets will never be invoked to the public in case of any fallout with any party.

We must teach Ugandans the value of keeping secrets at any level. Diplomats or civil servants have to walk into their offices with this in their minds. We don’t want to end up like that case in 2004 when it was confirmed that a senior Israeli diplomat in Washington met   several times with a Pentagon analyst being investigated by the FBI on suspicion he passed classified information on Iran to Israel. Yes, countries share secrets among themselves but it should be sanctioned by a bigger authority not every tom and dick. That’s why this Pentagon analyst was being investigated in the first place despite the cooperation between Israel and USA.

Much as I would love more Buganda representation in FDC because I’m a Muganda, I would request Honourable Beti Kamya to stop slandering or libelling the party like she is doing now. As the Baganda say:’akiivamu yakiiyita ekyato’’ meaning when ‘people call boats ugly after using them’ which is not right. Beti should at least use words like:’ I think FDC did this and that’ because of course, when you say “I think” something is true, it’s not slander OR libel. We can all fight for Buganda interests using better methods than slandering or libelling a political organisation that is so young as FDC. It’s not fair.

Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba

UK

The idea of a Buganda think tank is good

I do back your idea of a Buganda ‘think tank’ porposed by Omutaka Kavuma in one of the Uganda leading newspapers but my gut feeling tells me that it won’t be implemented or it is difficult to be implemented considering the political climate in Uganda. It is amazing that Buganda which was the birth of political civilisation in the country has not managed to produce a president to lead that country for longer and to change that country for the better.

Political parties were born in Buganda out of political movements. It is widely believed that Katikilo Nsibirwa was assassinated by the Buganda political movements because he was looked at as a stooge for the colonialists. Buganda had a party which united both the tenants and landlords which was called the Bataka party. This party was founded by Baganda intellectuals and it was the first to oppose the East Africa federation. Probably, I would not have been a member because I support both the Federalism in Uganda and the East Africa Federation though the former needs to be sorted out first.

At the moment, I wonder who really officially advises the Kabaka of Buganda on important issues. It is also very interesting to note that most of the Baganda youths join politics just to ‘eat’ but not to help their kingdom in the true sense of the word. Why can’t some body form an organisation depicting the achievements of a man like I.K.Musazi. Nkoza Zambogo is not enough to push for the kingdom interests. Buganda needs an organisation that opens branches in different parts of the country including the North and East Uganda. Musazi is the prime example of how he turned his movements into a strong nationwide political party. In 1946,Musazi formed the Uganda Africa Farmers’ Union- which championed the interests of farmers. This organisation later changed its name to Federation of partnerships of Uganda African Farmers which also changed in 1952 to Uganda National Congress. It was the ‘kalimagezi’ of Musazi and a few Baganda that gave birth to Uganda’s 1st political party. Why can’t the youths in Buganda emulate the achievements of their ‘bajaja’ to form organisations that are useful to Buganda and Uganda as well?

Yes, there are people from other regions that naturally don’t like Baganda and Buganda but this is all out of jealousy and it is historical. The jealousy of other regions over Buganda is well documented and it is exemplified by a letter wrote to the British Governor on 10/07/1956 by the leaders of other kingdoms. So this jealousy should not stop Baganda from fighting for their interests and those of other Ugandans as a way forward. Try to get the ‘friendly’ non-baganda on board if Buganda is to see any fruits in its fights with the central government. Baganda can no longer fight political wars alone.

Under the present circumstances, I would be surprised if all kingdoms don’t join to fight the intentions of Museveni because whatever he is planning for Buganda will catch up with other kingdoms as well if Buganda fails. Kingdoms united during the time they looked at the introduction of political parties as a threat to their existence in Uganda. I don’t see why Bunyoro should take president Museveni seriously when he throws ‘enkonyogo’ to Buganda in most of his recent public speeches. It’s more like a man who divorces his wife because he snores a lot and then starts a relationship with another woman. This man then promise to marry this new woman before he has spent a night with her to be sure that she doesn’t snore like the ex-wife. It would be a mistake to enter into a marriage with this man because if he finds that the new lady is snoring, he will go ahead and marry her for selfish reasons or if he finds that she doesn’t snore, he will marry her and divorce her at some stage for another reason (probably because she is not clean enough). So if I were Bunyoro, I will be careful with Museveni’s new friendship.

The idea of a think tank is very good.

Abbey

‘OKULOGA’ or witchcraft in Uganda

Dear readers,

I’m happy that Ugandans like Henry Ford Mirima(bunyoro Spokes person) are searching for answers that may help us get rid of this problem that is as much destroying our society as our dictators. When AIDS/HIV surfaced in Uganda, people used to think it was witchcraft- which led to the death of several of our people. People used to attribute AIDS like they are still doing by attributing several diseases to ancestral influence, witchcraft, evil spirits and/or bad luck. Bunyoro and Tooro were the biggest culprits during the AIDS times. In the Tooro areas of Kyarusozi and Kijura, AIDS was treated as an epidemic of witches and cannibals eating up bodies of people. If Museveni  as our leader comes out and spreads the anti-witchcraft evangelism like he did with AIDS, this may also help reduce stuff like child sacrifice in the country. Why he and other public leaders are sitting back about this, I don’t know. However, it’s important that the ‘emiti emito’ or young kids are told through the school curriculum from day one that Satanism and witchcraft are ideals which only create enemity between relatives , friends and the general society. That’s why religious studies like Islam and CRE need to be strengthened in schools as much as possible.

Witchcraft did not start in Africa or Uganda. What we must know is that witchcraft was and still is part of the western community but because of the enlightenment and economic development of the population, it is not a strong influence as it is in developing regions like Uganda. Otherwise crimes such as using evil spirits in order to find the whereabouts of hidden treasure were fairly common in England. Haven’t you heard of Edmund Hunt case in 1590 who was prosecuted for witchcraft? There was also a lot of witchcraft among the Welsh communities. In other words, to reduce on the influence of witchcraft, you need to have a better economy and good educational background as it is in Europe. If Ugandans are still poor, then this problem will keep hanging over our heads. People will go into L.Victoria to look for money. I don’t think designing witchcraft laws can help a lot if Uganda is still in this state.

Witchcraft as words or slander cases is difficult to prosecute in courts of law and that’s I proposed that we don’t need any laws for them, while witchcraft as premeditated harming like child sacrifice can easily be prosecuted. In other words, punishment and execution for charges associated with witchcraft as words is not an as easy as we think. The ‘devil’ reference is difficult to contextualize, other than as a standard early modern legal phrase; there are no proper witness statements attached ;statement from the person accused are not taken seriously by the court and this puts the accused at the mercy of the court. Just look at Kajubi case right now and the way the public court has already influence the real court before he was formerly charged with anything.

Yes, it is true that some evangelical  religious leaders have turned to witchcraft to make themselves popular among their subordinates and it is the responsibility of every x-tian and Muslim to criticise these fake bawalimu, fake sheiks, fake pastors,….. who claim to have the powers individually to get rid of evils. The truth is that most witches use the media and witchcraft itself is managed by the institution of the market in a similar way to New Age religions. Here in the UK, some institutions not primarily driven by the profit motive are important to contemporary Witchcraft, such as the Pagan Federation in the UK and the web site witchvox.com in the US. However, in comparison to other new religious movements, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses or Scientology, the contemporary Witchcraft movement has relatively little organised control over the content and dissemination of information about the movement. With this in mind, a good foundation for the spread or promotion of evangelical religions can play a very big part in reducing Satanism and witchcraft in the society.

Abbey

Oryema Johnson is wrong on Buganda

Dr.Oryema Johnson wrote on the UAH forum :After 40 years of baby sitting Buganda politically, the time of reckoning has arrived to confront Buganda directly, and have them explain straight up what it will take for Buganda to understand that , one particular part of a country cannot be allowed to pull everyone down for life.’’

Ugandans

The  statement above is really so upsetting. I would like to know, hands on heart, what Oryema meant by baby sitting Buganda. Who has been or is baby-sitting Buganda politically? Yes, Baganda are very welcoming people and they have welcomed everybody starting with every name in the alphabets from A- Z. Oryema reportedly owns land in Luwero or Bulemezi and nobody has ever made any attempt to chase him away because Baganda are very welcoming people. Now that he has become too comfortable as a ‘settler’ or ‘omusenze’, he wants to pull down the original ‘abataka’ down with him. Does that make him a good ‘settler’ in Buganda or a ‘snake’ in Buganda waiting to bite any time he gets a chance? Now, I have got news for Oryema: most Baganda and Ugandans are now aware of all these snakes loitering around in the bushes and are ready for a political fight.

Politically, Obote was the first person to bear the same sentiments as  about Buganda and he tried to pull it down but he somehow lost the game. However much I admire the political acumen of Dr.Milton Obote, he made the gravest mistake of attempting to destroy Buganda by attacking the Lubili in Mengo. It later came back to haunt him and his party, and like I said some time back on the UAH forum, it will take a bull’s eye for UPC to ever lead Uganda again. Personally, I admire the political skills of Dr. Obote and he was probably most intelligent president Uganda has ever had but he kicked himself in the teeth by attacking the ‘sabataka’ yet he was ‘omusenze’.

I’m not gonna go into Amin’s regime because I try my best to forget about that period in Uganda. We did not deserve a president like him. His only contribution to Buganda was the return of ‘enjole ya sekabaka Mutesa’. The rest is history as we all know.

Nevertheless, President Museveni is not baby-sitting Buganda as some people would like to make us believe so. He is doing exactly what Obote was trying to do in the 1960s though in a different but clever way. His only obstacle is that Baganda have wizened up and are ready to deal with people like  him. By restoring the traditional leaders in the constitution, Museveni thought that he was going to keep them at that level for a long time but wapi. They started by demanding for ‘ebyaffe’ and now they are demanding for political power in terms of federal governance. They want to be able to control their land and that’s why they fought the 2007 Land bill Act till when he ‘forcefully’ paassed it using his rubber stump parliament. Even if Museveni succeeded  and passed the land bill, another future politician who wants to ‘babysit’ baganda as some people call it will come and retract this thing. This is what we call ‘eating some body else’s vomits’. Museveni can only sustain the present trend if he is succeeded by somebody who wants to strengthen what he has already achieved in regard to weakening Buganda and not the other way round.

His attempts to introduce the regional tier did not go through as he wanted though I’m pretty sure that he is going to use long routes to achieve exactly that. The  bill for the central government to take over Kampala is among the long routes taken to weaken both the opposition and Buganda indirectly because in the same bill the Mengo municipality will be created as a way of creating the new frontiers for the Buganda kingdom. The introduction of ‘sabaluli’ on the scene is another way to isolate and weaken the Kabaka and his kingdom. Presidential statements fuelling divisions between Banyoro and baganda is another stunt being pulled by the president. Actually, his ‘divide and rule’ policy will be extended to other parts of the country once he is finished with Buganda.

Buganda is not pulling any body down for life as some people put it. If I was a psychologist, I would say that such statements portray a mixture of envy, jealous and hatred for ‘buganda’. This is really a bad disease and if such people love this country, they should treat it immediately. It is statements like these that produce a lot of ‘ Buganda conservatives and sessecionist’ because they are made to believe that every body hates Buganda and that’s it- which I can summarise in the following words: ‘they will never like you even if you make them your friends’. They are so many moderate Baganda who want to keep Buganda as part of Uganda and such statements keep letting us down. Buganda is the heart of Uganda and we should keep this heart healthy for this relationship to work. Don’t attempt to pull the heart down.

 Byebyo Ebyange.

 

Abbey.K.S

Islam allows Muslim men to marry non muslim women

Assalam Alaikum 

Islam allows a Muslim male to marry a lady, either Christian or Jews – she should not be open polytheist. She is not obliged to convert to Islam for the sake of marriage. She will enjoy all the rights that a Muslim wife avails – proper willful contract, dower, right of nafaqa (sustenance) from husband, right of inheritance (if she gets widowed), and right of separation (khula’) if ever she so wants. And, the Qur’an ordains that wife – a Muslim or Christian – is equal partner to the marriage contract.

However, a Muslim lady can neither be married nor remain married to a non-Muslim, including one belonging to the “People of Book”. If some Muslim sister has indulged in this, she should approach the husband and try her best that he also converts to Islam. Meanwhile she will NOT act as his wife and stay divorced. If after lapse of some time, the husband embraces Islam, they can however, unite again without fresh marriage, as such instances are reported in the “Seerah” and the decisions given was by the Prophet (SWS) himself. In case he doesn’t embrace Islam, divorce is inevitable.

Yes, Qur’an gets precedence over all other opinions. Now you say that “these women do not even believe in or practice their own deen”. Does that mean they were not truly Christian or Jew, and were therefore, wrongly taken to be ahle-kitab? If so, one should not have married such a lady in the first place. One thing however, is clear. If a true Christian or Jewish lady (married to a Muslim man) sticks to her deen, she is not be compelled to convert to Islam. Preferably however, after the marriage the family should move to Dar al Islam. That will enhance her chances to become Muslim or at least stay closer to the True Faith. More important that the children of such couple will be raised Muslims.

Regards

Abbey.K.Semuwemba

Semei Kakungulu was a nationalist

Dear people,

Increasingly, I have heard of people calling Semei Kakungulu a traitor, hero or a nationalist but I want to take my discussion to mostly the ‘nationalist’ part, whatever that might be.  At the same time, I see confusion in people who have thought of themselves  being allied with one political or ideological outlook or another to base on this to call some one a nationalist or not.

Assuming we all  agree with the definition of a nationalist as one who places the nation above the individual, can we call Bunyoro’s Kabalega a nationalist and leave Kakungulu out? I don’t think so. Kabalega was defending the existence of Bunyoro Kingdom and Kakungulu was participating in the creation of a nation called Uganda by fighting with the British and Baganda. So which one of the two is a nationalist by that definition? I think Kakungulu qualifies to be used as a as fodder for national purposes compared to Kabalega.  

What about the nationalists or internationalists in the present day situation in Uganda. How would you categorise the following groups of people:

  • Those presidents of Uganda or leaders who give more leverage to foreign investors compared to local investors. They treat foreign investors like ‘brides’ compared to local ones.
  • Those who think that a government should be selected by its own citizens in fair and free elections but they turn around and rig the elections. When you think of rigging elections in Uganda, the following years come into our minds: 1980, 2001, 2006 and 2008 ‘Kyadondo’ elections.
  • Those who think that a government should be granted unlimited powers by its own citizens. For instance, I have heard some people on radios in Uganda questioning the powers of judges who did not fight in Luwero bushes.
  • Those who don’t believe that rights are inherent to being alive and not privileges to be dispensed by government.
  • Those who think that it is right for one country to overthrow the lawfully-elected governments of other countries and replace them with dictatorships or Generals from their own army.
  • Those who believe that it is okay for Uganda to break apart into separate countries, each with its own ethnic background, as did the former Soviet Union.

Kabalega and America’s George Washington may both be called nationalists because they both risked certain execution as traitors against Britain. But then again, they both just didn’t like British tyranny.  Many people both in USA and Uganda didn’t like it, that didn’t mean they were nationalists.  Indeed many of them would have fought against the “nation” having the amount of power over the individual states or regions or kingdoms that it now has.

The Serbian called Nikola Kavaja, who hijacked a U.S. passenger jet in 1979 with the intention of crashing it into Yugoslav Communist Party headquarters, was called a nationalist by some sections of people in Serbia. Many nationalist Serbs considered Kavaja a hero and a patriot, while others thought of him as a ruthless terrorist. Can we also say that people call Kakungulu or Kabalega a nationalist or traitor or hero depending on what they belief in.

In 1905, President Grover Cleveland pardoned Gavrilo Princip, the Polish nationalist who assassinated Austrian Empress Maria-Theresa in Stockholm in 1889, which set off World War I. Gavrilo Princip is considered a nationalist in Poland yet his actions led to the start of World War 1. What justifications do we have as Ugandans to start calling Kakungulu bad names or tittles when his actions just led to the creation of the nation called Uganda?

Therefore, the definition of “nationalism” in a political context is much more complex. But I guess anything beyond “We good, Them bad” is a little too deep for anyone to categorically state that Kakungulu or Kabalega was a nationalist. Can we really call Obote or Museveni nationalists if we are to put the whole definition of nationalism in context? My answer is a big ‘No’.

Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba

Luwero war was justified despite what Museveni has become today

Dear people,

 I still believe the Luwero Triangle war was justified and I support the initiative taken by Museveni and others to fight Obote’s government. To broaden this discussion a bit, I’m gonna mention the main principles of the justice of war which are: having just cause, being declared by a proper authority, possessing right intention, having a reasonable chance of success, and the end being proportional to the means used. Museveni and Group had a just cause: getting rid of a dictatorial government which had stolen the 1980 elections. The authority that declared war was a mixture of UPM and other registered parties in Uganda (forming something called NRM/NRA) and their intentions were good at the time and most Ugandans supported them particularly the Baganda. NRA/NRM fought a guerrilla war for only 5 years and that justifies the envisaged success. They knew that the population was behind them and that’s why they chose the Baganda spot who openly hated Obote and his regime.

What exactly happened during the course of fighting in Luwero like killing innocent civilians; using child soldiers; and so on, cannot make a war unjustifiable and we have got international bodies that deal with people who break rules of war fare. For instance international agreements such as the Geneva and Hague conventions are historical rules aimed at limiting certain kinds of warfare. The real Luwero war was justified and there is no question about this. If any morals were not considered by the Museveni soldiers while in Luwero, then some body should investigate this and hand it to over to the international bodies.

Mr.Otunnu, the UPC president is already asking for investigations in the Luwero war and it was very wrong for General Tinyenfunza to threaten him in response.  I first heard the statement:’we will crash you’ when Besigye decided to start the Reform Agenda prior to 2001 elections. A certain ‘gentleman’ called General Salim Saleh allegedly aired the same words. By the way, these guys dont make threats as Mr.Otunnu may think. They mean real business. Besigye has since been subjected to anything you can think of , to the extent that he had to shift the remainder of his close family abroad. He has to make tours to USA every now and then to see his wife and son.Ambassador Otuunu should be ready for the fire in the kitchen because it’s gonna be very hot. He should seek comfort in Dr.Kiiza Besigye who has seen it all before- the threats, the prison, the charges, the courts, the handicuffs, exile, loss of relatives,……………..Those who are just joining the field should pay a visit to the good doctor.

However, I must warn Ugandans that there are legal arguments in this area of what is considered moral and immoral when fighting a war. It is not an easy case of pointing fingers as some people are doing now. For example, to defeat Germany in World War II, it was deemed necessary to bomb civilian centres, or in the US Civil War, for General Sherman to burn Atlanta. Secondly, how do you morally justify the discovery and use of nuclear weapons in a war and end up killing more people than those that were killed in Luwero Triangle and bushes? The Soviets acquired nuclear and thermonuclear weapons in 1948 and 1953 respectively but an attack in 1948 was not seriously considered.  An attack on the Soviet Union was quickly rejected by Eisenhower in 1953—although the main obstacle seems to have been the feasibility of removing permanently the threat in one attack. Similarly, would you consider the Israeli destruction in 1981 by F-15′s and F-16′s of a plutonium-producing nuclear reactor in Iraq a just war or not—although the U.S. and U.N. at the time formally condemned the attack and the Israeli policy? There are several examples including the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.

Well the point am trying to make here is that wars are justifiable depending on what I have mentioned above. However, what happens during the war does not make a war unjustifiable. Therefore, Museveni’s war against Obote’s forces was justifiable and if he had not done it, probably some body else would have done it.

Byebyo Ebyange.

Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba

ICC is a real ‘international’ treaty despite its weaknesses

Dear friends,

The ICC treaty is international by all the definitions of an international treaty. Because some ‘big boys’ are not part of the treay, it does not make it less international though it would have been stronger if they were part of it. USA and China do not solely define internationalism in a written document. The ICC became international and ratified when the UN got 60 ratifications necessary to bring the ICC into being. By 2005, 99 states had ratified the treaty.

There is something else I want Ugandans to note here. Belgium was one of those countries who started a law in 1993 within their borders similar in work to the ICC Treaty. The law permitted human rights prosecutions where by non-Belgians could be tried for violations against other non-Belgians in a Belgian court. I don’t know whether this law is still operational with the existence of the ICC now. If this law is still operational, then those who don’t trust the ICC can file their charges against president Museveni from there.

ICC headquarters

Germany is another country that has a similar law to Belgium. German law provides “universal jurisdiction” allowing for the prosecution of war crimes and related offenses that take place anywhere in the world. In 2006, former prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay filled criminal charges in Germany against Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, and other officials. So if it is also operational, Ugandans who want to bring cases against certain individuals in the government can go for it.

My only problem with the ICC is in the Articles: 15, 42, 53, 54, 86 and 87 of the treaty which grant the ICC prosecutor global authority to bring charges anywhere, against anyone. The prosecutor can collect secret evidence that’s never revealed to the defendant — only to the jurists hearing his or her case. I don’t know the intention of this but I think it is unfair for the defendant not to know the evidence against him or her in advance. These are the things our legal representatives to the ICC need to iron out in their next global conference.

Yes, I do think that all Israel prime ministers should be punished for the crimes committed against the Palestines and Lebanese. What has been happening in Gaza is against the international law but I think Israel has not yet ratified the ICC treaty and, therefore, it is difficult for anybody to drag them to ICC. Israel and Russia are already regretting putting their signatures on the ICC treaty because the treaty is always in their faces whenever they commit crimes.

Having said this, there are some people who have tried and still trying to bring some Israel prime ministers to face justice for the crimes committed against humanity. For instance, a special war crime court was set up in the 1990s to charge Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for authorizing the massacre of hundreds of Palestinian men, women, and children in the Beirut refugee camps of Sabra and Shatilla in 1982. The Israelis themselves set up a commission called the Kahan Commission which found Sharon “indirectly” responsible for the slaughter and fingered Hobeika as the chief instigator. At the time of the massacres, Hobeika was intelligence chief of Lebanese Christian forces in Lebanon who were battling Palestinians and other Muslim groups in a bloody civil war. He was also the chief liaison to Israeli Defence Force (IDF) personnel in Lebanon.

I would also like Ugandans to know that Israel cannot be charged in any international court without exposing the evil side of the American administration. So the USA does everything in its powers to make sure that Israel never faces the law. An example is when Hobeika called a press conference in July 2001 and announced that he was prepared to testify against Sharon in Belgium and revealed that he had evidence of what actually occurred in Sabra and Shatilla. 7 months later, Hobeika’s car was blown up by a remote controlled bomb placed in a parked Mercedes along a street in the Hazmieh section of Beirut. It is alleged that this assassination was done by both the USA and Israel agents.

This action alone shows that the Israelis and USA are afraid of international law and if there was no international law, probably Israel would have used a weapon to wipe out the Palestine population by now. USA and Israel do everything they could to destroy evidence because they know that justice never decays. So the ICC or the international laws act as a deterrent to those planning to commit certain crimes. This is enough reason for us to support the activities of the baby ICC till when it will develop into something that can catch even the ‘big boys’ like Israel, China and USA. At the moment, let the ‘small boys’ like Bashir feel the heat that will shape the way they do things.

Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba

What exactly happened to Kiggundu’s Greenland Bank

Dear people,

Dr. Kiggundu is gone for good but there is still hope for the revival of the Greenland bank one day if what we read in the newspapers was true. I’m among the few Ugandans  and muslims who are still confused as to why Greenland was closed abruptly like that. My understanding is that General Saleh secretly purchased UCB through Greenland bank. General Saleh himself announced that he took over the bid from the Malaysian investors to keep the bank under local hands and this was in December 1998.Immediately after General Saleh’s announcement, Greeenland bank was placed under state management. Greenland bank had subsidiaries in Tanzania and Kenya (commercial Bank and foreign exchange in Kenya respectively) which were also later closed. Nobody in the government has come up to give us a detailed explanation of why the Greenland Empire was closed and whether this was necessary at the time. It is the kind of pain we have been carrying for ages and it became so much when the death of Dr.Kiggundu struck us.

Secondly, Greenland was closed when the country’s savings were improving. Before the emergency of Greenland, the savings stood at 3% of the GDP compared to 6% of GDP in 1998. At that time, Kenya had a savings rate of 22% compared to the now ill-managed Zimbabwe which had a savings rate of 32% by then. When the savings rate is higher it means there are more funds that can be borrowed for development. Ugandans can borrow money in great number to their things. All this went into decline after the closure of Greenland Bank because so many people were relying on that bank. Was the closure of Greenland an act of a president who loves rapid development in the country?

The only major management error I blame Dr. Kiggundu is the principle of disclosure in the banking sector and he was jailed for 6 months because of some of these errors. Disclosure is about providing information to the outsiders about the organization. This includes corporate social disclosure. This is where the society wants to know what it gets from the business for supporting it. It is when the society and other third parties see such benefits that they see the organization as legitimate. Whereas developed countries have disclosure measures, the developing countries like Uganda don’t have the culture of disclosure. No ends of year accounts are shown! Even banks that should display their financial statements don’t do so! That is why in 1998, Greenland Bank Ltd, and Cooperative Bank Ltd  were closed by Bank of Uganda, without any sign of financial weakness being known by the customers. So this was wrong on the side of Dr. Kiggundu but still the state should not have closed the bank. The Gordon Brown government used all the means at its disposal to save the Northern Rock Bank despite the problems they were having because Gordon loves his country and he loves the common man on the ground in the UK.

Other reasons which were given by the economists in the country for the closure are all considered just schools of thought including: failure to meet the minimum capital requirements, insider lending, corruption and mismanagement as the causes. This is all nothing when you are a politician who loves your people.The root cause of commercial banks’ problems lies in their desire to increase profits by rapidly expanding their asset portfolio (by extending loans) for which there are no adequate provisions in the form of a capital buffer. Greenland bank did this by investing in a variety of businesses and lending to people without security, and it would have worked if they had been given a chance with time to rectify their mistakes. Remember, these were long term investments NOT short term investments. Yes, Dr.Kiggundu was running the risk of the inadequacy of minimum capital standards in accounting for the risk in banks’ asset portfolio but so many international banks run this risk. In the UK here, people access credit without any security and there was nothing weid that Greenland was doing in the banking sector. I also heard that a Saudi investor offered to fix the capital problems Greenland was experiencing at the time but still the government declined the offer. All they wanted was to close the damn Greenland Bank.

Lastly, Bank of Uganda (BoU) introduced new banking rules after the closure of Greenland to justify their act but why didn’t they give Greenland more time to operate under the new rules. According to the BoU new policy, all banks will be required to maintain sufficient capital, while those under-capitalised will not be bailed out. Under the revised minimum deposit requirements, all commercial banks – both local and foreign-owned – are required to maintain at least a minimum balance of USh1bn (US$750m). All banks are required to comply with all the provisions of the Financial Institutions Statute (FIS) of 1993. According to the BoU, they will only intervene in banks that either fail to meet the capital requirements or comply with the laws and regulations as stipulated in the FIS Act. ´Where a bank is intervened and closed, the BoU´s commitment to the depositors will be limited to USh3m per depositor, covered under the Deposit Insurance Scheme´, the bank stated. My question is how is a Ugandan in USA going to recover her money now if she wakes up one morning when one of the banks in Uganda is closed particularly if her savings exceed USh3m? Can anybody also convince voters in Uganda that Kiggundu’s Greenland had failed to raise the capital of USh1bn to keep itself in business? Can you also tell voters in Uganda of what the judicial inquiry commission found and recommended after the closure of different banks in Uganda that year? This was a commission set up by Finance Minister Gerald Sendaula. Why isn’t all this information made public up to now?

Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba

United Kingdom

semuwemba

Semuwemba Calendar

March 2010
S M T W T F S
« Feb   Apr »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Uganda at heart

Semuwemba is a Ugandan residing in the UK

Blog Stats

  • 120,625 hits

Categories

"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy. "~ Martin Luther King Jr. ~

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,296 other followers

%d bloggers like this: