Category Archives: Mengo wars

Do all these People qualify to be Buganda’s Judas Iscariots?

Standard

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Shouldn’t people like Nsibambi be spared since they have never said anything bad against Buganda? What can Buganda do to make sure that most of these people don’t come abck as members of parliament? What is the best way to get candidates that can fight for Buganda’s interests in elections?

Over to you!

Abataka to Chief Secretary, Government of Uganda, 1921

Standard


May 1921.

Kampala

Abataka to Chief Secretary, Government of Uganda

We have humbly addressed to you this letter while emploring you to kindly consider that is embodied therein and which have made us ap proach His Excellency the Governor, and which runs thus:

We have eventually realized that a considerable length of time has been taken in our country of Buganda Kingdom, since the Abataka brought up their complaints for the re-acquisition of their Butaka lands: notwithstanding the fact that they have put up their rightful claims to the auth ority of our Buganda Government which should do justice, nothing is yet done for them because of the reason that those who are expected to arbitrate are the ones who unlawfully acquired their fellowmen’s butaka lands by reason of the 1900 agreement: which provided that each one should survey his own estates which he held in possession. Having realized our rights as the lineage sons of the Bataka in Buganda ; who pre served our country from long ago on the system of butaka land tenure, have to be recognized as well as our ancestors.

We, some of the Abataka, having discovered that a serious mistake was made in this matter, and are of the opinion that unless we try to put it to an end, it will ruin our kingdom, therefore humbly pray you to grant what we are asking you in this petition – which is that, ‘We have formed an association with the aim of preserving our Butaka estates in Buganda and is known as Ekibiina ky’ Abaganda Abataka’ (The Association of Baganda Ancestors or Bataka); and the following are the chief aims of its formation:

1. To start the reorganization of Butaka estates that existed before the advent to this country of His Majesty’s Government of England ;

2. To give ,back all butaka estate’s to the original proprietors in accordance with our native customs;

3. To preserve and to see that each one gets his original butaka estate and the British Government ratifies and preserve same;

4. To recognize all’clan institutions that existed in the country and their relative duties to our Kabaka and for each clan to have a repre sentative who airs her interests in the central legislature as we used to do in the olden times.

This association declares to be loyal to all good laws and to serve George V and all his successors as all other countries are directed to do in the Empire of His Majesty George V.

We humbly pray to the British Government to sympathetically con sider the petition of the Abataka of Buganda , because of the grave error committed in our nation of Buganda and referred to above. We further humbly state that we realize that it will be difficult for our country to progress as is planned and promised by Government (unless the above error is remedied).

We have come to realize that the foundation of our country based on 1900 (agreement) tends to develop a smaller section of the country where as the larger section is on the contrary discontented and petitioning about the “preservation of the good customs of Buganda: we visualize the difficulty in the way of progress by Government without the support of the Abataka who form the nation of Buganda. Without the Bataka, there is not Buganda . We assume and hope, Sir, that you will agree to grant what we ask you in this letter and to receive and entertain whatever we shall submit to you for consideration and to sympathize with our case, as without such assistance, we feel we shall not endure and win what we are aiming at; we have formed this association not because of planning a rapid progress, .hut solely to have a pr6per foundation laid upon which progress, may be based. The agreement to send up this petition has been reached at the time when the chief signatories to the 1900 agreement are still alive because after their departure, it will be most difficult for the younger generation to come to settlement of such historical affairs now in dispute.

We earnestly pray soliciting your sympathy for any of our petitions and for your excused in having appended our signatories on matters of such an important nature as these.

We are, Sir, Your humble servants:

Daudi Basudde

Yuda Musoke Kasa

The Secretaries of the Association of Bataka of Buganda .

Kabaka Mutebi Should Chose Between 92.72 Acres OF Makerere And 570.813 Acres Of Kibale

Standard
Dear Baganda,
1/7 We know that the question of Makerere land by petulant, tantrum throwing Mmengo is diversionary.  RM Mutebi is facing bigger difficulties sitting comfortably on the throne and together with his retainers, he will do anything to attempt to distract attention from those problems.  You know the challenges that he is facing from the extra-Mutesa Chwa line.
2/7 Beisdes that, you may have to be a bit economical with some of your assertions on what Mmengo can reasonably lay claim in respect of what is Buganda, and of Buganda.  I see some people state: Makerere is in Buganda. It was built in the Buganda Kingdom autonomy times on land that belonged to the Kingdom, to the Kabaka then.  If we get more people out there making assertions like those, things will turn very interesting even for RM Mutebi himself, personally.
3/7 Example:  Is Buyaga or Bugangaizi in Buganda?  Why should Mmengo royals own tracts of land there?  What do I mean?  According to records in the land department, plot 1 block 42 with 1,433 hectares in Buyaga belongs to Kabaka Mutesa II while Ronald Mutebi himself owns plot 3, block 90, measuring 231 hectares (570.833) in Bugangaizi.  That is a total of 4,111.833 acres between those two good gentlemen.  The government is aware of that fact, and the people of Kibale, in Bunyoro Kingdom also know that fact, so do their supporters.
4/7 In the map below, those red bits are the tracts of land in Bunyoro Kingdom that are owned by Buganda Royals.  All of the purple is owned by Baganda absentee landlords.
5/7 And some people were quoted on the UAH forum then say: If a visitor came to your home, assuming that you are married, and you slept in the children’s bedroom in honour of your visitor. Then the days when he should leave come to pass but he is still there and does not even mention of leaving at any time, starts to order everyone around like he is the Nyampara or you.”
6/7 Visitor?  Do you know that the people of Kibale, whose headquarters is on land fully owned by a Muganda were actually not just visited, but were savagely invaded, roasted in caves and literally enslaved? Do you know that up to now, when an old Munyoro man really wants to insult you he wil belch: “Kanyagwe Abaganda”, depicting the visit by the Nyamparas?
7/7 Why don’t Kabaka Mutebi supporters play the role of  a uniter instead of championing a hidebound line of reasoning?

Lance Corporal (Rtd) Patrick Otto

Kabaka Mutebi is being Diversionary as far as Makerere Land is Concerned.See Evidence

Standard

From: Otto Patrick

UAH forumist

Note: The court verdict on this case is attached in the message below. Just click on the link below to open the document:

Mmengo erina okutuddiza ettaka lyaffe

“Why are Baganda not liked by non-Baganda?”

Standard

Archbishop Lwanga asked a very relevant question, “Why are Baganda not liked by non-Baganda?” The question has since been re-written, and changed to make it look like he did not put it that way.

Whether he asked it in that manner or not, let us suppose another person, not the respected Archbishop, asked it. Its relevant and
requires an answer.

When it appeared in the press I personally understood that the Archbishop  has asked a very genuine question which, indeed, has been
troubling genuine Baganda, but who have no guts to ask it. The Archbishop being an innocent man of God  had the guts.

Knowing that it requires a very long answer, I referred him to history books which would inform the archbishop, and the Church for that
matter, and the millions of innocent young Buganda who have been denied the opportunity to learn and know what their grandfathers did to make Buganda acquire that indelible original sin stigma.

Before somebody answered, there came Minister Kirunda Kivejinja who minced no words and pointed out,  unashamedly, why Baganda are disliked by non-Baganda.

Let me quote the Minister’s reported remarks about why Baganda are dislike by non-Baganda. Appearing in The Red Pepper of April 5, 2010, the headline read, KIVEJINJA STINGS MMENGO. He accused Mmengo of having bad will towards the NRM. He said, It was unfortunate for Mengo which was restored by the NRM not to loudly tell ordinary Baganda that the NRM Government had nothing to do with the Kasubi fire which gutted the Amasiro.

He said Baganda had failed to realize that times have changed and the kabaka no longer had sway the way he used to do in the 30′s.
There was a time when Buganda was on top of Uganda. It worked with the colonialists (who were rewarding Baganda for embracing colonialism) and that is how all the schools, hospitas, and other good things came to be located in Buganda. That is how most Baganda came to be educated
because of the exclusive privileges their region got from British colonialists.

However, the unfortunate thing is that times have changed. But Baganda do not want to accept this reality. Let me tell you my friends, he told
Baganda, your country Buganda, is no longer as strong at it used to be.It cannot threaten the NRM Movement Government. We are here to stay no matter the opposition from Mmengo.

He  said, that Kabaka thing is only in people’s houses and you cannot impose i it on me, Let no nobody impose it on anybody including the
Baganda youths he was addressing.

There you are.

Henry Ford Miirima

Bunyoro Spokesperson

Tamale Mirundi is the perfect match for Nambooze, Lukwago, Segona and Nsambu

Standard
To all Ugandans-at-Heart:

I am a Ugandan hailing from Eastern Uganda. My granfather was born in a family of 8 boys and all his other seven brothers converted to Buganda and even their grand children today are Baganda in the Fumbe Clan. I do not clearly know why my grandfather in particular refused the conversion upon migrating to Kyagwe.

However, as we grew up, he told us that he enjoyed warm relations with the people of Buganda and as such I find myself knowing more about Buganda tradition that my tribe’s tradition. I support each and every other cause that unites the people of Uganda.

However, as a member of Democratic Party, I am rather disappointed with our party members who have chosen to mix politics with culture. I am of the view that people like Nambooze, Sebaana Kizito, Erias Lukwago should steer clear of Mengo and the same should apply to Nsubuga Nsambu, Husein Kyanjo,Semujju Nganda and all other partisan politicians.

I believe that for us who want to support Buganda in its quest for Federo will continue to find it hard to defend its arguments when it is clear that the Mengo Establishment has been eaten up by clear partisan politicians.

For God’s sake, the reason we continue to demonise Tamale Mirundi is because he tries to bring out the distinction between the Kabaka (who is non-partisan) and the Mengo Establishment which has taken to Partisan Politics.

My prayer would be for the Kabaka to sweep out all partisan politicians from Mengo and let them to come to us in Politics in their respective Parties and then the Katikiro(Eng. Walusimbi is not known to be a partisan politician of any Party) can assemble a neutral team to advance and advocate for Buganda interests.

Demonising Joseph Tamale Mirundi will not deliver Federo. Why do we demonise Tamale Mirundi when Peter Mulira and Gilbert Bukenya continuously carry the same message though delivered with a different tone. The tone differs because Tamale Mirundi is a villager living beyond his dreams, Bukenya is a professor of Medicine and Peter Mulira grew up in a decent Family and has attained ivy league Education.

I think we need to bring that into perspective and excuse Tamale Mirundi  and leave him as he is. Museveni is a master at this game and he believes in the old adage that set a thief to catch a thief that is why he chooses to use Tamale Mirundi at a time when Mengo is using Mirundi’s class of Nambooze, Segoona and Lukwago.

It would have been a different story if Mengo had been using people like  Prof. Frederick Ssempebwa to advance its cause. This also agrees with Solomon’s proverb that give a foolish answer to a foolish question. When Mengo sets the stage professionally, Museveni will be challenged to match the standard and issues will be discussed.

Segoona Lukwago, Nambooze Nsambu and Mirundi may differ in age and may hail from different parts of the Kingdom, but they are the images of one character and therefore must be dumped by their bosses because their rhetoric is toxic and intolerant.

Thank you! Ssabasajja Awangale.

RONALD LEONARD EGESA

Advise to Baganda from Kalundi Serumaga

Standard

Dear  Africans:

I am writing to thank you for all you are doing, and request you to avoid getting distracted

Always remember that you are arguing on a voluntary basis, to develop knowledge, against persons who are paid to maintain a flow of lies.

If you wish to conquer a people, you must first destroy their historical knowledge of themselves. This is the mission the British (and others) began with colonialism, but were compelled to leave before they were finished with the job.

The reason the Brits now love NRM so much is because they have been willing to take up and try and continue the task.

Peddling hate history is a key tactic in this strategy.

But for such Africans, the first thing they must destroy is their ability to love themselves as Africans. They become slavish “house negroes” , working as intellectual guard dogs for Europe’s continuing ambitions in Africa .

Yes, they hate you (in this case Baganda). But that hatred is small in comparision to the self-hatred and secret contempt they often feel for themselves. This is manifested in how they periodically “kwesiluwaza”  by resorting to schoolyard jeering and trying to make other “funny” noises in print. It is a recognition inability to maintain a sensible debate until they have been told what to say next. A dog cannot exceed the arguments of its master.

It is one of Africa ‘s modern tragedies.

Now, the challenge for you is to always stay on the point. Stick to the factual argument of substance, no matter how they try to provoke you into other ones.

The facts have been laid out in my last post.

But as I said, the real issue is: what can we learn from such history? Again, I have given my views on what lessons there are.

A increasingly relevant example here is this point I made:

” We see this again with those who used to be in NRM fleeing into exile from very system they have been part of, but also refusing to denounce it, and instead waiting to see how things may return to their favour. Their problem is not the illegitimate way in which the country is being governed, but rather the fact that it has “left them out” of the process.”

As some of you may know, Otto is actually the (partly UK-trained) UPDF officer Sabiiti Mutengesa who had to flee Uganda a few years back after seriously falling out with the then UPDF big man Gen James Kazini. The cause was the ghost soldiers/salaries issue. I don’t know the exact nature of their disagreement over this money.

Ask yourself why he has never returned, even after the death of his nemesis, to either explain his desertion, or resume his duties?

Ask yourself why he retains an unhealthy obsession with any negative thing he can find to say about  Buganda , but cannot write one word about what he personally knows about the faults of the UPDF/NRM administrative culture that made him leave the country he professes to love so much?

As a UPDF officer, he presumably would have greater chances of contributing to positive change in the force, than he ever will in Buganda , since he has no standing here. Yet he is silent where he could be effective, and very vocal where he can be of no help at all. What a waste.

Often, our obsessions with other peoples’ business is actually a mask for our deeper anxieties about our own problems. This is why it is good for us to keep our history alive. The more you know about your own ancestors, the less likely you are to become obsessed with other peoples’, as seems to happening with our friend.

The only “good thing” about this case is how Otto has managed to turn all this dysfunction into a paying career.

Once again, I urge you to stand firm, and keep on defending Africa and her cultures.

Sorry for the long post, but as you can see, the problem runs deep.

Regards,

Kalundi Serumaga

Blocking the Kabaka from visiting Kayunga was Illegal according to constitution

Standard

submitted by william kituuka

ARTICLE 29:

Protection of freedom of conscience, expression, movement, religion, assembly and association.

(1) Every person shall have the right to—
(a) freedom of speech and expression which shall include freedom of the press and other media;
(b) freedom of thought, conscience and belief which shall include academic freedom in institutions of learning;
(c) freedom to practise any religion and manifest such practice which shall include the right to belong to and participate in the practices of any religious body or organisation in a manner consistent with this Constitution;
(d) freedom to assemble and to demonstrate together with others peacefully and unarmed and to petition; and
(e) freedom of association which shall include the freedom to form and join associations or unions, including trade unions and political and other civic organisations.

(2) Every Ugandan shall have the right—
(a) to move freely throughout Uganda and to reside and settle in any part of Uganda;
(b) to enter, leave and return to, Uganda; and
(c) to a passport or other travel document.

OK! How do we reconcile these provisions, specifically, Article 29 (2)(a) with the recent blocking of Kabaka Ronald Mutebi’s visit to Kayunga?

And will Kayihuraa’s Police Force ever allow us to exercise the freedom in Article 29(1)(d) without invoking the infamous Police Act or some obscure municipal provision?

William Bogere

UAH forumist

BUGERERE INTEGRAL PART OF BUGANDA- MUSEVENI

Standard

NEWS RELEASE

Friday, 05th February

“Kayunga is part of Buganda”- President Museveni

President Yoweri Museveni has clarified that Kayunga is part and parcel of the Central Region of Buganda.

Mr. Museveni made the clarification at a public rally that was held yesterday at Kayunga hospital grounds in Ntenjeru County on the first day of his 2-day popularization and sensitization tour of the district to evaluate the performance of the Government’s Prosperity For All (PFA) programme as implemented by the National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) in the campaign to rid households of poverty.

The President told the rally that the indigenous people of Kayunga districts have a constitutional right to practice their culture unhindered.

Addressing himself to local issues that affect the area in particular and the country as a whole, Mr. Museveni discouraged the practice of rural – urban migration in a quest for greener pastures when the real development treasures in the form of fertile land that would be utilized to eradicate household poverty, is left idle in the rural settings.

He criticized the current tendency of selling off property in rural areas, especially among the youth, and flock to Kampala to open up small businesses, engage in bodaboda riding, among others. He attributed this behavior to ignorance of the potential and ability of rural areas in transforming society through modernized agriculture which has for long been recognised as Uganda’s backbone to development and eradication of poverty.

The President, therefore, advised residents of Kayunga district in particular and Uganda in general, to be take steps and be part of the government’s funded Savings and Credit Co-operatives Organisations (SACCOs) in order to access low interest loans that will go a long way in facilitating them to grapple with the much needed resources to fight against household poverty.

However, residents reported to the President that the conditions set for accessing such loans are so high for them to meet. Mr. Gonza Asuman, the Manager of Kangulumira SACCO group noted that some residents front properties that are not theirs as security to access NAADS’ fund, such as plantations, which when discovered leads them to forfeit access to the loans. He informed them that access to the NAADS funds is very much hinged on one’s behavior.

At a stop-over that the President made at Kangulumira Sub-County headquarters, residents complained to him the practice of over pricing the inputs of from NAADS when loans are not interest free. They observed that the practice defeats the overall objective of household poverty eradication. Complaints from children of school going age also confessed to the President that they do not access UPE benefits as provided for by government.

While in the area, President Museveni visited Mr. Geoffrey Kizito’s farm on which he grows pineapples. He also visited high quality farmers’ association wine processing factory that is owned by the area’s farmers. The President promised to help the group with modern machinery for their products to meet the required quality.

In Busaana parish, the President visited Mr. Joseph Kizito’s pineapple and banana plantations. He also toured Mr. Ssonko’s fish farm and Mr. Vincent Ssonko’s pineapple farm in Bumaali who earns Shs. 35 million per year.

E  N  D  S.

JOHNSTON’S LANDLORDS, BATAKA ENDED!

Standard

Dear UAH,

May be i can help to cure people’s  delusion about all this business of Abataka and SSabataka. Let me chip in.

With the signing of the 1900 agreement and the creation of the mainly protestant landed gentry, the Bataka lost all their estates.  Many had to dig up the bones of their ancestors as they were evicted by the new landlords.  Those evictions were effected by Bahima, as some people would want to tell us.  As you say, if it was not for the Busulu and Nvujjo law of 1928, the parasitism of the Johnstonian landed gentry was going to cause events similar to what France witnessed in 1789.
The heat was already on even in 1945-49, but AB Cohen helped Kabaka Mutesa II by deporting him.  That crystallised some sympathy from the same people that were already beginning to express disgust with Mmengo.  In many ways, the recent land act is the icing on the cake of the Busulu & Envujjo law of 1928: helps to clam down the restless former owners of Buganda land that were disinherited by the 1900 Agreement.
That whole business of some people claiming that they will defend their oppressors is a typical case of false consciouness: njagala omwami wange kubanga ankuba…Stockholm syndrome.
In any case, one of the UAH members called ,Mr Micheal Senyonjo, has titled land in Ruharo Ward in Mbarara.  Which Bahima have evicted him?  Is it because Harry Johnston declined to create landlords in Nkore and elsewhere?  I am assuming that we are talking about the Mr Senyonjo who was Baptised at St James Cathedral at Ruharo, as Michael Wilson Ishenyonzo, brought up by his Munyankore grandmother in that area, attended Mbarara Public School, and whose father is actually a Rwandan from Kyazanga, in Masaka….talk of weeping more that the bereaved.

Anyhow, let Mr Senyonjo and others in his category read the letter below of the grievances of the real Bataka that were robbed by those who are today pretending to be custodians of Buganda cultural heritage.  Let Mr Senyonjo show us how Kabaka Chwa responded to that petition, and I will show you an incurable Mukopi.

May 1921.

Kampala

Abataka to Chief Secretary, Government of Uganda

We have humbly addressed to you this letter while emploring you to kindly consider that is embodied therein and which have made us ap­proach His Excellency the Governor, and which runs thus:

We have eventually realized that a considerable length of time has been taken in our country of Buganda Kingdom, since the Abataka brought up their complaints for the re-acquisition of their Butaka lands: notwithstanding the fact that they have put up their rightful claims to the auth ority of our Buganda Government which should do justice, nothing is yet done for them because of the reason that those who are expected to arbitrate are the ones who unlawfully acquired their fellowmen’s butaka lands by reason of the 1900 agreement: which provided that each one should survey his own estates which he held in possession. Having realized our rights as the lineage sons of the Bataka in Buganda ; who pre served our country from long ago on the system of butaka land tenure, have to be recognized as well as our ancestors.

We, some of the Abataka, having discovered that a serious mistake was made in this matter, and are of the opinion that unless we try to put it to an end, it will ruin our kingdom, therefore humbly pray you to grant what we are asking you in this petition – which is that, ‘We have formed an association with the aim of preserving our Butaka estates in Buganda and is known as Ekibiina ky’ Abaganda Abataka’ (The Association of Baganda Ancestors or Bataka); and the following are the chief aims of its formation:

1. To start the reorganization of Butaka estates that existed before the advent to this country of His Majesty’s Government of England ;

2. To give ,back all butaka estate’s to the original proprietors in accordance with our native customs;

3. To preserve and to see that each one gets his original butaka estate and the British Government ratifies and preserve same;

4. To recognize all’clan institutions that existed in the country and their relative duties to our Kabaka and for each clan to have a repre sentative who airs her interests in the central legislature as we used to do in the olden times.

This association declares to be loyal to all good laws and to serve George V and all his successors as all other countries are directed to do in the Empire of His Majesty George V.

We humbly pray to the British Government to sympathetically con­sider the petition of the Abataka of Buganda , because of the grave error committed in our nation of Buganda and referred to above. We further humbly state that we realize that it will be difficult for our country to progress as is planned and promised by Government (unless the above error is remedied).

We have come to realize that the foundation of our country based on 1900 (agreement) tends to develop a smaller section of the country where as the larger section is on the contrary discontented and petitioning about the “preservation of the good customs of Buganda: we visualize the difficulty in the way of progress by Government without the support of the Abataka who form the nation of Buganda. Without the Bataka, there is not Buganda . We assume and hope, Sir, that you will agree to grant what we ask you in this letter and to receive and entertain whatever we shall submit to you for consideration and to sympathize with our case, as without such assistance, we feel we shall not endure and win what we are aiming at; we have formed this association not because of planning a rapid progress, .hut solely to have a pr6per foundation laid upon which progress, may be based. The agreement to send up this petition has been reached at the time when the chief signatories to the 1900 agreement are still alive because after their departure, it will be most difficult for the younger generation to come to settlement of such historical affairs now in dispute.

We earnestly pray soliciting your sympathy for any of our petitions and for your excused in having appended our signatories on matters of such an important nature as these.

We are, Sir, Your humble servants:

Daudi Basudde

Yuda Musoke Kasa

The Secretaries of the Association of Bataka of Buganda .


Lance Corporal (Rtd) Otto Patrick

We must get an answer to the “Buganda Question”

Standard

 
Mr President, I have dedicated a great deal of my time and research on the ongoing bickering between your Government and the Buganda Government. I have poured oceans of ink, in these very pages, about the Buganda Question.
 
I have talked to whoever matters at Mengo, except the Kabaka. I have found one apparent fact which we shall never run away from — no amount of intimidation or negotiation (in its recent form) or a combination of both will bring the standoff between Central Government of Uganda and Buganda to a conclusive end.
 
When I say “central government of Uganda” I am not particularly referring to NRM or President Museveni. No.
 
As I wrote before, this is not a disagreement between President Museveni’s Government and the Baganda.
 
This is a historical problem. Even if a Muganda took over the presidency and his Government behaves the way President Museveni’s Government is doing, he/she will be resisted in equal measure.
 
The subsequent text appeared in these pages before, but I find it as relevant now or even more relevant today than it was when last published.
 
I call upon you, Mr President and all fellow Ugandans to read this piece again, this time round with a pinch of salt.
 
“Every serious problem which we encountered in Uganda had its roots in the Buganda Problem,” quotes the Lord Munster Report of 1962. Forty-seven years later, this statement sounds as pertinent.
 
The writing is on the wall that Buganda has once again come back to haunt Uganda. It does not require one to be a political pundit to tell that NRM will not be same again, not only in Buganda but also in the whole Uganda.
 
The unresolved “Buganda Problem” which the leaders at Mengo prefer to call the ‘Buganda Question’ is written all over the political future of NRM and by extension of Uganda.    
 
Mr. President, I don’t think I qualify to give you a lecture on what the Buganda Question is all about and how complex it is.
 
But I think I qualify to at least remind you about it, more so because you seem to have misconstrued the numerable contributions your Government has made to Buganda in the last 23 years as a solution to the Buganda Question.
 
The Buganda Question has never been the restoration of Kabaka or restitution of some of Buganda’s expropriated assets (ebyaffe) or giving jobs to a few Baganda professors. No.
 
In any case the Lord Munster Report of 1962, cited above, was written at a time when all these so-called achievements of NRM government for Buganda were extraneous, because Obote had not yet arrived on the scene.  
 
So what is the real unresolved ‘Buganda Question’? What is that question that will never cease to haunt Uganda until it gets resolved?
 
The Baganda want to enjoy their right to self-determination, by virtue of which they should be able to freely determine their political status and freely pursue their destiny. This is the popular ‘federo’ everyone in Buganda is singing.
 
This is what is threatening NRM’s tenure in Uganda’s politics. This is what is likely to accomplish what politicians have failed to achieve — getting Museveni out of power.  
    
The Baganda know that ‘federo’ is achievable and feasible. The British attempted to resolve the Buganda Question in the London Constitutional Conference of 1961.
 
Indeed the 1962 Uganda Constitution had entrenched Buganda’s status as a federal state of Uganda, and Baganda tasted the fruits of ‘federo’ until Kawenkene Obote violently abrogated the Constitution in 1966.
 
This action made the then iconic Obote very unpopular not only in Buganda but the whole of southern Uganda, and five years later he had to go where he had sent Sir Edward Muteesa II — in exile.
 
Mr President I know you know this story pretty well. What shocks me is your failure to appreciate the reality that seems palpable — you cannot rule Uganda if you are in the bad books of Buganda.    
 
You have tried to play your cards smartly for the last 22 years, juggling the Buganda plates using a combination of co-option and coercion.
 
You co-opted a good number of the Baganda elite by incorporating them into NRM with the use of jobs and State patronage.
 
You also co-opted the Baganda peasants by providing them with public goods such as; UPE and USE, peace and security, electricity, healthcare, water etc. No region has benefited from NRM more than the Buganda region.
 
Not even the Ankole. Now you are drafting the land bill to further co-opt the landless Baganda peasants.
 
Those you have failed to co-opt, such as the current young breed at Mengo, you have often used coercive means to silence them.
 
Mr President, these young dogmatic leaders at Mengo decided to adopt a radical strategy to get the ‘Buganda Question’ resolved after realising that the negotiation (Enteesaganya), which for two decades has been the main strategy, has not only failed to deliver the results but also been abused.
 
To the ‘new’ leaders at Mengo, no negotiations can ever be meaningful when one party thinks of, and actually positions, itself as more equal than the other. To them inviting the Kabaka and/or his officials to State House for ‘negotiations’ is simply unacceptable.   
 
This is the reason the new breed at Mengo decided to go radical. Does it surprise you Mr President when you see that actually it is only Katikkiro Walusimbi — a member of the old breed embedded in the new breed — who is still pushing for enteeseganya?
 
Walusimbi is now the unofficially most unpopular leader at Mengo. His only crime is failure to embrace the confrontational strategy as opposed to enteeseganya.
 
This, however, is not my point. My point is that the reason Mengo has become radical in its approach to getting the Buganda Question resolved is a multifaceted one.
 
Firstly, Mengo has come to realise that NRM is a failing government and it has wisely sought to jump off this sinking ship called NRM and by extension Uganda.
 
You may recall in 2007 Hon. Hussein Kyanjo started the debate for Buganda secession.
 
He made his points rather blatantly asserting that the Baganda were feeling alienated, that they were being denied ‘juicy’ jobs in government, that they were being threatened by military generals of NRM, that they were continuously getting economically deprived and culturally oppressed.
 
I remember also talking to former Katikkiro Dan Muliika, the only member of the old breed at Mengo who shares a radical stance with the new breed, and he said, “Museveni’s government has weakened our (Buganda’s) economy with its negative policies.
 
Our people are in abject poverty. And there is a systematic plan to exterminate the Baganda. This is real genocide.”     
 
Muliika added, “Museveni’s government has tried all means to deny Buganda its historical sovereignty and economic status. He is a very dishonest man whose love for politics of intrigue and deceit is as evident as his continued grip on power.”
 
So, from now on, I see a Buganda that is evocative of the Muteesa II Buganda. The reign of Sir Edward Muteesa II (1939-1969) — the thirty-fifth king of Buganda — was characterised by protracted struggles to regain Buganda’s historical position. What I don’t know is whether his son will also end where he ended.
 
I talked to one of Mengo’s key strategists and he said “In the last 22 years of NRM rule, Buganda has actually lost more than it did lose in the earlier 20 years.
 
Unlike in the 20 years prior to NRM when Buganda knew pretty well who its enemies were and was fighting them, in the last 22 years Buganda thought it had a friend in NRM and, therefore, never bothered to fight, but to talk.
 
“So the ‘friend’ took advantage of Buganda’s unawareness of their frosty relationship and weakened it further. The ‘friend’ employed the most educated children of Buganda and thus provided them with a five-course meal.
 
And as it is always culturally expected among the Baganda not to talk while eating, these educated children of Buganda, who ought to fight and liberate their kingdom, went into deathly quiet episodes of banquet.
 
He also added, “While Obote took away Buganda’s independence and pride in 1966 rather candidly by attacking Ssekabaka Mutesa II’s palace sending him into exile; Museveni is undermining Kabaka Mutebi’s rule by creating chiefdoms where they never existed, such as the Banyala in Bugerere and Baluri in Nakasongola.”
 
So, according to the new breed at Mengo the NRM era has been the worst years for Buganda. They have been years when NRM pulled the wool over the eyes of the Baganda.
 
It made them continue singing “ekitiibwa kya Buganda kyava da” with such relish without realising that they would do better if they replaced the last suffix with kyafa da!
 
This is the very reason I strongly believe that this is the moment you, Mr President, and all fellow Ugandans must come off the fence, where we have been seated the last two decades, and find a lasting solution to the Buganda Question. Confrontation is by all measures no answer to this ‘easier said than done’ question.
 
By Ramathan Ggoobi

Hon. Kyanjo and the bigger picture

Standard

Dear friends,

I have followed the discussion about the statements Hon. Kyanjo made
during the Buganda Conference, the subsequent interrogations by state
agencies, and now it is reported that he has been disowned the Mengo
establishment.

I do not agree that Kyanjo was improper or out of context in his
remarks. Uganda has not lived a day without militarism and war for
almost 40 years. Kyanjo’s orientation and that of many Ugandans of his
age and below is tuned into war as the ultimate option to address
grievances over political participation and resource inequalities. The
ideological orientation of the leadership is equally the same, and in
1999 while addressing the manufacturers association at Lugogo, the
president referred to it as a business he has done for 30 years. I
have many times listened to the presidents’ aids, the army commander,
Ministers, government officials threatening war against those opposing
the NRM or the government. In the same Buganda conference, Kakoza
Mutale mocked Buganda for making demands yet they lack “power”, and
added that he has power because he “fought”. He has not been accused
of insinuating that if Buganda wants power or meet their demands, they
must go to war.

My view is that with more than 23 years in “power”, this is a time to
hold some difficult conversations about governance, and I believe this
is what Hon. Kyanjo is communicating to the country. The failure to
transform the culture of violence or to deconstruct narratives of war,
questions the relevance of three critical concepts i.e. National,
Resistance, and Movement that mostly influence politics in Uganda
today. His remarks are a microcosm of this conversation, around
questions like “what is national about governance in Uganda”, “is this
still a resistance or a replication”, “what constitutes the acclaimed
movement”.

Hon. Kyanjo appears to imply that one cannot talk about a “resistance”
where there was no resistance, but a replication of the same old ways
of governance he has seen 40 years of his life. He perceives exclusion
and domination by an oligarchy, as opposites to the nationalism and
statesmanship that dominated the political discourse in the late
1980s. Like many other opinions I have read, Hon. Kyanjo seems to have
concluded that this was not a “movement”, because “domination” and
“replication” contradict the central defining characteristics of many
known movements. The Anti-apartheid movement in South Africa did not
replicate apartheid.

But then he is also wrong, because he did not define what he meant by
“democracy” in a way that is relevant to Uganda. He looses the debate
if meant “constitutional democracy”, because that is where the NRM is
at its best and has impressed donors. Be he has a definite short at
winning the debate about “utilitarian democracy”, one that tailors
governance to serve and add value to everyday life of the common
people. Here, he may have tones of evidence at the grassroots to
disqualify many claims by the government and its advocates.

I therefore take the war talk in that context, and would expect the
government and readers not to individualize it. War defines many in
Uganda to day, not only in the north, many have grown up with “war in
mind” through images, threats and slogans, but mostly as perpetrators
or victims. It is not surprising that  one would use war talk to make
a political statement, and even promise to stand by his words
regardless of who disowns him.

Ashad Sentongo

Peter Sematimba Has Not Denied Anti Buganda Letter

Standard

Peter Sematimba Has Not Denied Anti Buganda Letter

Posted on 31 October 2009

For several days this week, a letter has been circulating on Baganda Internet discussion lists, allegedly written by Peter Sematimba, offering the NRM advice on how to weaken CBS FM Radio.  The alleged letter, which was supposed to be highly confidential, is addressed to the minister for Security in the NRM occupation government, Amama Mbabazi. It refers to a previous discussion on the subject with David Mafabi of Museveni’s state house.

Our state house sources most familiar with the activities of David Mafabi were not aware of any specific contacts between Sematimba and Mafabi. However, they confirmed that,  since the Kayunga civil disturbances, Mafabi has gotten more involved in activities to subdue Baganda. The source said: “Since the Kayunga riots, even Museveni now knows that Kabaka Mutebi could take him down, if he had enough bright and brave people in Mmengo to support him (Mutebi).  Because state house staff know that Museveni was shaken,  each one is trying to show that they have the best idea about how to isolate the Kabaka, scare the few bright and loyal Mmengo officials, strenghthen JB Walusimbi and disorganize the Baganda youth and Diaspora movements. In this environment, it would not be surprising if two money hungry people like Sematimba and Mafabi cooked up juicy deal along the lines of this letter. But I have no information to confirm it.”

On Sematimba’s part, he declined to reply to our email message, sent to the address he uses for business, info@superfmstation.com, inquiring if he could confirm or deny the letter. Calls to his radio station numbers 041- 272777 / 0782-222885 also got a “Boss is not in office” response.

On reading the anti-Buganda letter, a leading Buganda analysts based in New York,  claimed that serious Baganda should only be happy when Buganda’s enemies are exposed like this. He explained: “Many so called intelligent Baganda are still subconsciously slaves to the belief that a foreigner like Museveni or Besigye will save them. Others are equally delusional by thinking that some fast talking Muganda president of Uganda, like Abedi Bwanika or Samuel Lubega or Frank Musisi will help. Such Baganda are either ignorant or afraid to face the fact that Museveni and his Banyankore and Rwandese kin have ransacked the Uganda experiment. It  is a failed state! So, what does Uganda have to offer to Buganda anymore?”

The analyst continued: “What would stop Bwanika or Musisi from becoming a Sematimba once he gets power? The more intelligent Baganda know that a Muganda president of Uganda will have to go anti-Buganda, in order to maintain support from the other groups, who are uniformly anti-Buganda. This letter by Sematimba, is good for demonstrating that, Mulondo, Nsibambi, Bukenya, Mulwaanyamuli, Katende, Sekandi and Tamale Mirundi were not the last to betray Buganda. More like Bwanika, Musisi and Lubega are coming, only they might even be worse than Muwanga. The only way out is independence for the Buganda Kingdom. Fortunately, the younger Baganda who are the majority seem to instinctively understand it and that is why they are 100% behind Kabaka Mutebi.”

The controversial letter is reproduced in full below:

TO: The Minister for Security

Cc; David Mafabi O/P

Date: 2nd/October/09

RE: INPUT ON THE IMPACT OF THE CLOSURE OF FMs AND THE WAY FORWARD.

Honorable minister, we discussed with Mr David Mafabi (office of the president) regarding the closed Radio stations, and i raised several issues with him which I present to you and may as well share with the powers that be at an appropriate time.

First, I wish to express my reservations for the Broadcasting council for not doing enough to forestall the mess in the electronic media especially the fm stations more so in view of what befell the country .

As much as we have endeavored to set standards at Super fm, we have been let down by our competitors who either out of fear for positive competition or deliberately for failing fulfill the requisites of professional broadcasting.

With regard to the three closed stations, its my belief that the major protagonists are CBS and AKABOOZI while SUUBI FM is a nonentity in this jigsaw. It’s my conviction that you critically focus with CBS and AKABOOZI given their burgeoning presence in the FM industry.

Both FMs are a sister act especially with regard to violating the ethical code of conduct as per the press and journalist act 1995 and electronic media statute 1996 as well as the broadcasting council guidelines put in place for the electronic media to adhere to.

We at Super FM can use this time of relative normalcy before the closed FM stations  are re-opened to fix the situation both on behalf of Government and the party as well as check on the activities of the broadcasting council on their part.

Action Plan

I request that through your office you create a special desk where you can identify NRM cadres who can ably articulate party/ Gov’t issues on the air waves.

If this is implemented, am ready to offer a weekly program preferably during the day in fulfillment of this mission.  This will help us mobilize.

Honorable, we are aware of the imposing status of these two stations and the expected new sense of belonging upon re-opening I think that there is a need to covertly reduce their influence in the industry.

The stations will re-open with a bang and every listener will naturally want to associate with them after all this time in suspension. Its against this that if  no advance counter measures are put in place the bubble will bust  and you might not achieve the goal of their closure.

For instance you can do this by demanding that they unconditionally shuffle various presenters in unfamiliar programs, i.e. from presenters to newscasters and vice versa.

By so doing, you can institute an “independent” survey to rate FM stations and am positive that  the programs will be rating low after some time or/ and even most of the presenters will be disenchanted by the new set up  and may end up thinking twice.

Through this scheme, we can make amends by promoting those stations that are on the same page with the system

(e.g Super FM) and by the time they re-organize it will be after months when we have steadily set off.

Alternatively, like we discussed with Mr. Mafabi, we can sweet talk a couple of presenters and draw them to the realization of not risking their careers and instead switch to the operating radio such as Super FM.

Personally am targeting two from CBS FM and two from AKABOOZI. For the fact I know that the management of both stations cannot agree to sack their prized presenters for the sake of re-opening them because they form the basis of their popularity.

But I can assure you that if we cunningly implement snatching them away, it cannot take long before these presenters are beaten into line with what we want.

We has suggested with Mr. Mafabi and Tamale Mirundi that I make a presentation on the above issues so that I can give you a more practical picture on the way forward on this matter for the continuity.

Sincerely

 

Peter Sematimba

Email

Letter from Abu Mayanja to the Uganda Argus

Standard

CROSSING THE RUBICON

Letter from Abu Mayanja to the Uganda Argus [6 March 1958]

The threat by the Kabaka’s Government to sabotage direct elections for Legislative Council in Buganda is so full of ugly possibilities for the future that it is high time somebody did some very straight talking to the reactionary elements in Buganda who seem to imagine that somehow Buganda can contract out of the 20th century, -and revert to a system of administration when the efficiency of guns used to be tested on human beings.

These elements are ‘seeking to block the development of democracy in Buganda whilst pretending to pay lip-service to its principles. An example of this was the attempted intimidation of Makerere students by the Lukiko speaker when the former demonstrated against the reject of direct elec  tions to the Lukiko. The Katikiro’s admonition of those who dared to criticize the speech from the Throne is another pointer in the same direction.  So, too, is the recent statement by the clan leaders threatening those joining political parties with expulsion from the, clans. Nor is it purely coincidental that leaders of the political parties have been subjected to a spate of denigration and prosecutions – only to be acquitted after their reputations had been tarnished.  Sir, it is not at all fanciful to see in these and other instances the presence of a plan not only to sabotage democracy within Buganda, but also to seek to entrench the anti-democratic system by cutting Buganda from the rest of Uganda where it might be subjected to democratic influences. I am not saying that it is wrong for anyone to be against democracy; the world is only too full of examples of anti-demo­cratic regimes. What I am pleading for is that we should recognize these facts for what they are. I am also appealing to those who think in this way to come out in the open and tell the country exactly what they believe in.

If they want Buganda to go back to the 18th century, with the Kabaka ruling through hand-picked men and clan heads, let them say so – they owe it to the country to speak the truth. I also think that the notion that the Kabaka’s Government – which is but part of the Government of Uganda – can defy the latter is a matter so grave that it must be clarified and the correct position authoritatively stated.

There is grave responsibility which these events cast on the Protectorate Government. There is obviously a clash of objectives between those who want to see a democratic system developing in Buganda, and   those who do not.

It would be dangerously tempting for the Protectorate Government either to observe a benevolent neutrality, or to playoff one faction against the other.  I hope the Protectorate Government will realize that it has a duty to pursue with vigour those policies calculated to fulfill Britain’s mission in her dependencies – to take Uganda to democratic self-government.

I hope that the Government will take this attitude not only in the full confidence that history is on its side, but also with the knowledge that it has the unstinting support of the overwhelming majority of the educated Baganda who will struggle tooth and nail to resist the reimposition of feudal tyranny based on the debasement of the human personality and the vagaries of the so-called customary law.

I should like to warn our reactionary rulers that they are running a great danger of discrediting our traditional institutions, and thus making it impossible for many of us to reform and adapt what is good in them to the conditions of modern life.

I also wish to address a word of warning to the forward-looking, edu­cated Baganda.  I think we intellectuals (yes, though some people may laugh at this word) – I think we intellectuals have been much too timid so far. I think we have allowed ourselves the luxury of sleeping in strange beds for too long; I think we have compromised our position much too much; I think it is not too soon for us to declare from the hilltops what we believe in.

Speaking for myself I have crossed the Rubicon. I have set my face firmly against any autocracy whether it be foreign and imperialist or native and feudal. I stake my future and dedicate my life to the realization of democratic principles in my coup try no matter from which side the obstacles may emanate. This is a declaration of political faith, and I call on other intellectuals to do likewise.

Abu Kakyama Mayanja

Busujju.

On the Issue of Kabaka not being Elected- Bothers m7-why?

Standard

On the issue of HH the Kabaka not being elected
That shows how m7 does not understand the cultures and norms in Uganda, “ebyensikirano n’ebye nonno”, have nothing to do with being subjected to elections. m7 has never been heir to any one in Uganda prominent as he thinks he is, simply because most probably he is not from Uganda and the issue that he is omunyankore is still a myth, even to the real Banyakore themselves though the chap is still alive and well in Uganda.

M7 refused the coronation of the Ankore Kingdom which is highly doubtable whether he hails from Ankore. Very soon m7 will have to preside over family issues where by if your grandfather/father/mother/uncle dies then you have to be elected by your family members in order to become a heir in this regard, especially where land and property is involved. Thats why he is fighting un-ethical simple wars and wants to give land to those who he thinks are like him, the squaters, which the baganda call the serwajja okwotas on people’s land, some of it of course came to them as in being passed on by those who have left us.

And the question still stands who elected m7 to become a minister in Lule’s Govt or Binaisa govt? and who elected him in 1986- up to 1990, we are not even sure that he was elected all this time but stealing the vote, thus being envious of the Kabaka, his Katikiros and Mengo officials and the wielding of what he calls political power, thats not political power its the love people embedded in their cultures and norms and can have their Kingdom and its leaders without question or doubt of the choices made by the King, Its the serwajja okwotas asking as to why the leaders and the KABAKA HIMSELF WHY THEY ARE NOT ELECTED. It is not the rigging or craftmanship of stealing votes and waging war that shows you have power, m7 use your btrains.

M7 is a typical example of what the Baganda call omukopi w’empisa, he thinks everything has to voted on, and when it comes to him, he has to dodge the vote and use dubious means to steal it, then the Sovereighn God and the devil should stand for elections, and guess what the devil will win since he has many people who think like m7, the majority in the world support the devil and his temporary gifts/powers that he has lent to many like m7 himself. And therefore Heaven will be taken over by the devil as Uganda is today.

If the people reject the idea of voting on the Kabaka then m7 will move the motion that muhoozi becomes president without elections too, since he thinks in his madness that he is a King of some sort, a sabagabe since he restored kingdoms in Uganda, his urgument is unintellectual that since he allowed this people the Kingships, then what is his title? isnt it sabagabe?, and why should he be subjected to elections when other people are not, like all the Kings we have in Uganda and elsewhere like england,

This is not ekanya land of comics mr., the reflection of all this check it out m7 has the greatest number of relatives in govt since independence in Uganda and most of them come from his wife’s side that he had never met before until he became the master rigger of the vote, so where are those from his side if they are not from a neighboring country?

Mayiko Makula

Kampala,Uganda

Ggwanga Mujje Appeals for Peace, Security and Freedom

Standard

We call upon all Ugandan nationalists in Buganda to be calm but vigilant. You should be courageous with firm convictions, principled in your behavior, reflective and philosophical in all your actions during this crisis. Resist the temptation to be lured into chaos and confusion by your enemies but do not easily succumb to the fear created by the muzzle of the gun as the unanticipated but predictable crisis sadly unfolds in our motherland.
We have to remember and learn from our history. In the past leaders have used political tricks to earn the trust, support and confidence of the people of Buganda. Some have threatened or actually used deadly force in order to suppress the people but in the end they have always failed to conquer Buganda. Remember that the Baganda, have, unfortunately, paid a big price for their misplaced trust and confidence in untrustworthy leaders who have neither principles to guide their political actions nor respect for our cultural institutions which have endured from time immemorial. Our cultural institutions are here to stay but leaders will come, go or fade way.
We are deeply saddened by the death of innocent people, the wanton destruction of property, the illegal surrounding of the Lubiri by armed forces and, as a result, the deprivation of the Kabaka of his personal liberty together with his immediate family and, by necessary implication, placing the entire kingdom of Buganda under detention. This has happened before!
In Buganda the Kabaka is not just another leader. To the Baganda the Kabaka is a national symbol and a cultural institution. The Kabaka is head of all clans and therefore he is fondly regarded by the Baganda as a member of one big family descending directly from Kintu. An attack on Kabaka as a person, or the Kabakaship as a cultural institution, is a declaration of war on all clans and each and every Muganda both individually and collectively as a kingdom.

 

We condemn the cowardly act of closing CBS radio, which is the voice of Buganda, or any other radio or media outlet. This action is reminiscent of the dictatorship Ugandans have endured for decades clearly manifested in the suppression of freedom of the media, political freedom and gross violation of human rights in the past.
The random arrest and detention of people for political reasons is a violation of human rights. It is intended to force people into submission. But it reminds us of the dark history of the “panda gali” era. The actions taken by the government of Uganda violate the constitution of Uganda. They must be unreservedly condemned because they are illegal and unconstitutional. Oppressive and illegal actions by the government of Uganda deserve no respect and should not be voluntarily obeyed by anyone.
It is an act of provocation to deprive the Kabaka of his individual liberty, to restrict his movement in his kingdom and to encourage the creation of new political entities within the kingdom motivated by a desire to control and enslave the Baganda. All these political machinations are accomplished without the consent of the Baganda. If the Banyala are not Baganda they are free to go back to their motherland.
The Bululi and/or Banyala issue should be resolved democratically by a referendum within the kingdom of Buganda. When the government of Uganda takes sides covertly or conspires to destroy or undermine the integrity of the kingdom of Buganda the Baganda have no choice but to fight for their freedom. Freedom is not bestowed upon the people by government;
it is an inalienable right protected by the constitution and recognized and guaranteed by international law.
We firmly believe that nobody can be proud of calling fellow citizens “sub-imperialists.” Such name-calling is divisive, provocative and essentially sectarian because it causes ethnic humiliation and hostility. It is demeaning to those who are labeled by such an unpalatable and abusive term. It must be condemned. But when it is done by our top leaders it acquires a particularly sinister character. It is a sign of hypocrisy. Moreover, labeling a group of people as “sub-imperialists” is not only discriminatory but also a violation the law enacted by the NRM government in 1988—a law which has never been objectively enforced but maliciously used to suppress political freedom by persecuting political dissidents and muzzling the media.
For all the reasons given above Ggwanga Mujje members are encouraged to be active in the struggle to fight for national unity, to be brave to face any future challenges but above all to strive for political freedom, cultural dignity, peace and security of all people in our diverse society. As long as suppression of freedom continues and the liberty of His Majesty Ronald Muwenda Mutebi is violated there will be no peace in Uganda.
Nevertheless, all people are encouraged to use peaceful means to achieve our objectives. We advise all peace-loving people not to support, subscribe to or buy any publications that are published, sponsored or promoted by the government of Uganda.
This statement is endorsed by members of Ggwanga Mujje who convened in an emergency meeting in Waltham, Massachusetts, USA, on Thursday, September 10, 2009.
Ssabasajja Awangaale.

Rumours against Ngoma Radio aren’t true

Standard

Michael Senyonjo and Musisi Bosco,

I think you are adults and probably educated people. Therefore before you start spreading silly rumours about Ngoma Radio – i think it is reasonable you do proper research. I know the guys who are running this radio and they include Major Mukiibi, Mustapha Semanda, Moses Nsubuga and other young volunteers. The radio was started and is funded mainly by Mustapha Semanda who is a local government civil servant in the UK. He is among the bright Fast Track scheme graduates the UK government  recruited from universities to be trained as future managers in the UK civil service. So he has a reasonable income. Unlike you Bosco Musisi – this young man is not unemployed or on the street as you claim. He was posted to Brighton & Hove City Council where he works as a Policy Development Officer and works very close with the Council politicians. If you want to confirm, his direct office number is 01273 291032. This young man was also the first elected DP UK chairman
who contested and beat Sam Lubega in 2007 – and last year he did not stand. Bosco some people are more able than others – when we see such young talents like Mustapha who has achieved something at the age of 26 – we should encourage them. I do not know how old you are (Bosco and Senyonjo) but surely get a life.

On the issue of advertising the Ngoma Radio in Bukedde.

Ugandans, it is true that the radio is sometimes advertised in Bukedde, but it is also advertised on www.radiokatwe.com and www.federo.com. It is not true that it has been advertised in the NewVision. To place an advert in Bukedde only costs about £100 a month – if you would like to confirm how Ngoma radio advertises contact Bukedde sales executive called Nganda.

The truth is that Senyonjo is a presenter and part of Kyeyo Radio which wants to rival Ngoma Radio. So we understand why he is keen to spread malicious rumours. I have lost respect for him. I think some of you are spies who pretend to fight for democracy yet you are moles destroying the true political activists. Michael Senyonjo – have you told everyone on here that you used to work for the NRM secretariate…………..

Museveni has divided us so much that some of us cannot even see the obvious. I wonder whether you two listen to Ngoma radio – these guys scrutinise everything and they are pro Federo and offer all Ugandans an opportunity to air their views. Click here for more information  http://www.theugandacitizen.com/about

So Ngoma radio is part of the Uganda Federo Confederates and The Uganda Citizen online blog. Click here to see how it was launched and its agenda http://www.theugandacitizen.com/news. These Senyonjos are failures and hate to see progress that they are not part of.

Have a good day

PADDY MATAMA

Buganda Think Tank

Standard

Dear Baganda banange,

Omutaka Kavuma wrote in one of the newspapers asking the Mengo adminstration to form a Think Tank and i think it is a good idea 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 own 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 nolonger 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

BISMARCK VS J.B WALUSIMBI IN ‘MENGO WARS’

Standard

Folks,

While I appreciate the positives done by the Katikiro of Buganda,J.B Walusimbi, to the extent that the speaker of Bunyoro Kingdom, Henry Ford Mirima, compared him to Bismarck, i feel some things need pointing out.

The only reason I see why Mr.Mirima comparing him to Bismarck is because Bismarck didn’t want colonies and he sees Buganda as an agent of colonialism. But like I said, Bunyoro is hiding some hidden agenda by hiding behind the unrealistic decolonization of Uganda. Then again, I cannot see how J.B Walusimbi will ever end up like Bismarck under the current circumstances.

Otto Von Bismark said that it was reprehensible for a great power to get involved in any kind of a conflict in which its own interests were not involved. On the other hand, the Banyoro supporters of JB (including the speaker of Bunyoro kingdom) just keep interfering in the interests of Buganda kingdom. They were at one time working with president Museveni to weaken the Buganda kingdom till he disappointed them over oil agreements/ shares.

Bismarck made superficial concessions to pacify republicans in order to unify the Germans and consolidate the power of the monarchy in that time. On the other hand, J.B Walusimbi has done less to unify the Baganda and consolidate the Buganda monarchy within Uganda.Baganda are more divided now than they were under former Katikiros: Abebitibwa Ssemogerere and Muliika.

Under Bismarck, people were poor. Then Bismarck introduced the minimum wage laws (accompanied by social security in 1889) and Germany turned rich. On the other hand, J.B. Walusimbi has introduced some programmes on a paper such as: the establishment of a Buganda commercial Bank, building public libraries in all Buganda cities, e.t.c, but without any means to fund them. J.B should be fighting for federalism using almost all the resources at his exposure as this is the definite way he will fund all the economic programs he has put on paper. Most Baganda in the rural areas are very poor and are only eying the central government for rescue. Even programs like BUCADEF are not helping a lot of people and are doomed to fail.

Bismarck recognized Germany was inherently insecure because it was too big to be satisfied, but too small to dominate.On the other hand, J.B did not yet recognize that taking Kampala away from Buganda will make it too weak.The Kampala Bill that led to the creation of the post of the Executive Director and a ceremonial mayor were basically targeting both Democratic Party(DP) and Buganda kingdom. A small Buganda kingdom whose borders are being redrawn everyday will end up being ‘nothing’ as in nothing but Mirima’s future ‘Bismarck’ has not yet seen this. He is not talking about it so much but instead wants us to cooperate with the people creating more kingdoms within Buganda.

Bismark was very careful about avoiding things like two-front wars or getting involved in the Balkans. Bismark was shrewd and cynical, but also had an excellent understanding of what was achievable and what wasn’t. On the other hand, Mirima’s Bismarck,J.B, is neither fighting the central government to get what he wants or arch enemies like Bunyoro who keep poking their noses where they are not needed. J.B would make a great leader of some old party in Uganda whose leaders were always afraid of open ‘wars’.

I must say that Bunyoro should try as much as possible to work with Buganda to achieve certain things within Uganda instead of supporting certain ‘Bismarcks’ for reasons best known to themselves.Bunyoro should stop encouraging the Baluli and Banyara to break away from Buganda kingdom. There is no need for Bunyoro to keep fighting Buganda yet we are originally the same people. Buganda was once part of Bunyoro Kitala kingdom. Kabalega was a great leader but his successors seem not be as competent as he was yet they like talking about Bismarck whose successors (people like Caprivi and Holstein) were competent.

Byebyo ebyange

Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
United Kingdom

MENGO WARS

Standard
Abeebitiinisa Ssemuwemba n others opposed to JB Walusimbi;
After reviewing the comments and reasons why a group of Baganda Sitakange and ultra-patriotic Baganda, I, as an investigative journalist, and a person who grew up and was  educated in Buganda, and I even have children from Baganda women, I know the spirit of Buganda.
The Baganda who are opposed to JB Walusimbi as Katikkiro are the ultra-patriotic Baganda doing it honestly but ignorant of the trend of modern developments. These Baganda are still living in the last century. They have not woken up to realise that the world is moving very fast and that  it will not wait for those who are stuck in the last century.
I hate to repeat that my one-month holiday in the UK has re-enforced my belief that the world has moved out of the old order or politics. The former colonial/imperial  powers are today laughing at what their grandfathers did to commit sins againsit humanity, that is TO COLONISE AND SUBJUGATE OTHER COUNTRIES, TO  PUT HUMAN BEINGS UNDER SLAVERY BY CARRYING OUT SLAVE TRADE, TO  CARRY OUT THE INQUISITION, ETC.
When I visited Buckingham Palace, The House of Commons, the Catholic and Anglican Westminister Cathedrals, Covent Gardens where English street entertainers perform all sorts of plays and the audience and THE players are drawn from all nationalities and the atmosphere is friendly and love of each other, at the beaches where every activitiy is cosmopolitan, indeed by talking to the ordinary Englishmen on the streets, I wished these Baganda ultra-patriots should be given a chance to see that the Buganda special position they are clamouring for is an outdated, archaic, colonial mentality activity.
They should review their history. They will find that if JB Walusimbi sticks to his guns and goes ahead with modernising Buganda their childlren will hold Walusimbi in honour because he will have done to Buganda what Bismark and Garibald did to Germany and italy.
Germany and Italy before 1867 were  collections of different independent kingdoms. But using an iron hand in difiance of ultra-patriotic Prussians, etc, Bismark forced the unity of Germany which eventually became so strong that today Germany  is one of the great powers.  Italy was also the same. She was  a collection of small independent kingdoms but foward looking Italians, Garibald included, literally forced the unity of those small kingdodms, and did away with earthly powers of the Pope. Hence, let Walusimbi stick to his guns and push through with modernisation of Buganda. Those who are opposed to him today will in future praise him.
The issue of Walusimbi’s Catholic religion cannot be ruled out from those pushing for his removal. Colonial mentality amongst Anglican Baganda is still alive and kicking.  They aspire to the maintenance of Anglican/Protestant hegemony. Their eyes cannot believe that  even a Catholic can lead very efficiently.  They should learn what the whites majority in the USA  are leerning today that even a black man can lead mighty USA
As for the Catholics who are opposing fellow Catholic Walusimbi, they have a hidden agenda. Namabooze has openly stated that she wants to make history by becoming the first woman Katikkiro of Buganda. She does not realise that her utterances have misled peasant Baganda.
As for Emmanuel Sendaula, he feels terribly bad that he was not confirmed as the katikkiro. He feels Walusimbi usurped his post. So, he understandably wants Walusimbi to be booted.
I know my brother Kalundi Serumaga is going to accuse me of meddling into Buganda affairs. But, he forgets that when Buganda catches a cold, every Ugandan sneezes.  Reality is: Buganda is central in Uganda’s politics. Therefore, if Buganda chooses to remain in the last century, she will be dragging the rest of Uganda behind. Therefore, me, Henry Ford Miirima, will not fold my hands as a journalist and let Buganda drag Uganda behind just like that.
Therefore, Buganda elites listen, wake up. Do not fear the noise-makers (abawowoganyi)at Mmengo. You follow the example of Tamale Mirundi who tells Baganda that a spade is not a big  spoon.
Mulikenga ikookere.

Henry Ford Miirima

sucession of the Kabaka

Standard
I would like to clarify something about the succession of a Kabaka of Buganda. No Kabaka has ever come from the Balangira clan. The Balangira clan is not composed of “Abalangira ba Mujaguzo” (the sons of a Kabaka) or “Abalangira ba Kanabba” (the sons of a prince). Because these princes are potentially in line to the throne, they all belong to the clans of their mothers. Hence, Daudi Chwa belonged to the Engabi clan while his son Edward Mutesa belonged to the Ente clan.

The reason for this was so that no one clan could monopolise the position of Kabaka. The saying that “Ebukojja teva wa lubu lwo” strictly relates to us “Abakopi” and never to the above two classes of Abalangira. The order followed in choosing a Kabaka starts from among the “Abalangira ba Mujaguzo.” If nobody qualifies, then the order goes to “Abalangira ba Kanabba.” Two of the main qualifications for any prince before he can become Kabaka are (1) that prince must be born in Buganda (more like an American President must be born in America). Fyi, Mutebi’s mother had to be rushed to Kampala although she conceived in Europe during Mutesa’s first exile; (2) the mother must have a Muganda father. This means that that mother will, in effect, have a Kiganda clan.

Finally, “Abalangira ba Kanabba” must have a Kabaka as a grandfather. This limits the extent of this class of princes.
Yusuf Musoke