Tribalism and Tribal Identities in Uganda, no need for polarization.

On Friday 22nd, October, 2010, while at Uganda Christian University, one of the lecturers that attended the competition that the Uganda Law Students Society and the International Committee for the Red Cross organize annually came close to me and asked, 'Are you Kenyan?' I was not surprised as much because my neighbor had in the last week observed that I have a Kenyan accent. But I didn't want to assume, I asked the lecturer why she thought I was Kenyan. She told me about my curly hair, that I speak so fast and yes, my accent!

In 2006, fate threw me to Pallisa where I was working in a restaurant. Pallisa is a melting pot of tribes; it has Bagwere, Basoga and Itesots among others. I was always bemused at how it was so easy for people to greet me in Ateso, than Lusoga or Rugwere. Almost everyone thought I was an Itesot. When I engaged one of my co-workers on the matter, she told me that all my physical features are Itesot, from my dark complexion to my height and small body.

Later in 2007, as we lined up at Makerere university freedom square (was helping a friend applying to join the university), some two tall boys fluked some space in front of us in the line. Annoyed at the arrogance, I told them that they should respect us and go behind. One of them sneered at me and blurted in heavy Runyankore, 'ogu omwairu egyi agyetsire Gulu?' meaning 'does this "mwairu' (Runyankore for servant) think this is Gulu?' I understand Runyankore because my mother tongue Rukiga is linked to it, but to this man, I was from Gulu, probably an Acholi. How wrong! Pretending not to have understood, I pestered them further and then they responded more rudely and even referred to me as a 'mukooko' (Runyakitara for animal)! That is when I lost my cool and I guess others in the line had been equally annoyed by the couple of these arrogant and no doubt discriminatory boys. We united and threw them out of the line, almost physically.

So, Brian Bwesigye, before disclosing his surname that always offers a free clue to his tribe has been mistaken for a Kenyan, an Itesot, an Acholi and a Rwandan (Tutsi)! Yet I am one simple Mukiga, born among the Basyaba of Maziba, Kabale! To judge a person's identity by their looks and physique is folly. Many a time when people realize that I am a Mukiga, the first comment is that I do not look as strong as Bakiga! My height, from an early age has always attracted comparisons to the Tutsi, my dark complexion when I started living in Kampala also attracted comparisons to Acholi and when I lived in Pallisa, I was a typical Itesot! That is not to mention my accent when speaking English, some have said it is Kenyan, others have said that it is Rukiga-influenced!

But that does not mean that tribal identity is non-existent because it can not easily be discerned by physical features. It is in fact important. Those who have lived and stayed with me, (they no longer judge my tribe by my looks) easily tell you that I am a Mukiga. My identity comes through many aspects of character. You can not see them the first time we meet. My ancestry, my history, my culture, my mother-tongue, my likes and dislikes, the taboos in my life, the values that my parents, community and folklore have inculcated in me are all that make me a Mukiga! Do not take it for granted that the hills of Kabale have also shaped this identity. Our interaction with nature shapes how we think and what we think and no doubt the hills have shaped that. One who has lived on the shores of a lake has their identity shaped by the lake.

And this is the identity the Baganda yearn for when they say there is one radio in Uganda (kingdom owned CBS), it is the identity the Bahima jealously guard including using force, when they clothe their fascination with large patches of land in legitimate claims of bonafide occupancy. It is the same identity that the Karamajong also want, despite the fact that other pastoralists like them get preferential treatment. The Rwezururu kingdom inhabitants of the Rwenzori mountain ranges want the same right to have their identity recognized, the same for Banyoro, Acholi etc. That does not mean we are dividing the country, it means we are uniting the country as we celebrate our diversity! So, why is there polarization among the different identities? Because politicians have messed us up! They have attempted to inflict their own identity on us, to destroy our identity in favor of theirs! And to judge our qualities and entitlements on the basis of our identity, than merit and citizenship!

Thus when Col. Dr. Besigye contested for FDC president with Maj. Gen. Mugisha Muntu in FDC, we did not hear any voice against "tribalism", when one won, now a one Nabillah is saying that FDC is ruled by "westerners", an ambiguous identity because as a Mukiga, to be humped together with a Muhima does not augur well for my identity! And was Col. Besigye voted for being a Mukiga and Muntu not voted for his tribal identity? And who did the Baganda vote because there was no Muganda in the race? Do people like Nabillah and Betty Kamya want an election where the eight plus tribes of Uganda are having a candidate each? It is shallow to resort to tribe to justify selfish ambitions. We should vote people because they deserve and have the qualities we want. And we should out rightly reject those who undermine our identities, those who look down upon us when we respect our cultures (like kneeling for our kings). Those who use tribal identity to divide us like one that once wrote that Bakiga should not contest for elective positions have no place in the Uganda we deserve. Our diversity should not polarize relations among us; our diversity should fortify our efforts to develop as country!

Ugandan media buried beyond resurrection?

A blogger named Tumwijukye tickled a topic I have been thinking about for years now in her post titled "Death of the Watchdog" (read the post here http://ugandaninsomniac.wordpress.com/2010/09/20/death-of-the-watchdog/)


The revelations made by the links in the blog make a moralist want to choke, the radical want to launch a revolutionary war (of words or of guns, whichever). Well, they added to some baggage that I have heard, seen, sensed and I thought my eyes were already wet with tears. Well, I did not cry, because it hit me that mere tears cannot help the situation! I would certainly lick them off my cheek and with them, I would lick the worries and the Ugandan media would continue losing its dignity and without dignity, credibility would be lost.


Then, a thought invaded my brain, maybe journalists need a Uganda Journalists' Society (like Uganda Law Society for lawyers)! This thought clarified itself by telling me that this society would have a disciplinary arm. Then I asked the thought, who would comprise of the body? Who would appoint members? By an election? Government appointments?


Then, my memory told me of the existence of the Uganda Media Council! First wait and I say something about that council.The council was established by the Press and Journalist Act of 1995 and charged with the regulation of the Mass Media. From their website (http://www.mediacouncil.ug/council_members.php), I gather that the members are Dr. Gorretti Nassanga (Chairperson), Mr. James Walugembe, Mr. Katebalirwe Amooti, Mr. Wafula Oguttu, Mr. Paul Mukasa, Mr. Paulo Ekuchu, Ms. Beatrice Were, Mr. Kawooya Mwebe, Mr. Sunday Wilson Ojiambo and Ms. Lina Zedriga. The council has a disciplinary committee. This council has heard around nineteen cases. My facebook friends that have followed my status updates since August easily recognise the last member of this council. At a personal level, I wonder which justice she dispenses, knowing that she left her magisterial job under unclear circumstances, left the job she had at Gulu university fearing a probe and with the recent turn of events at APILU where she is under a probe, to hear that she is adjudicating a matter makes the whole matter a joke! I respect some members of the council like Wafula Oguttu and others but why keep the company of individuals like Ms. Lina Zedriga who could assault an employee (that employee is yours truly) as a member of a council meant to regulate the media? And I have not mentioned the list of claims of forgery claims on her name and other undignified acts and incidencies of misconduct. Which dignity can such an undignified member instill in the media? Thus with the Media council, I do not think there is much hope for any help in regard to instilling dignity in the fourth estate. And it is not because of Ms. Lina alone, thus do not jump to dispute the African saying that one girl that produces before marriage taints the whole village (loosely translated Rukiga saying). The general public generally seems not to apprecaite the role of the council, you just need to see the statitistics of cases filed at the council and that does not mean that there are no cases to report. You perhaps remember the infamous role of the council in the "Vagina Monologues" saga sometime back!

Someone remembers that there is a Uganda Journalists' Association. I know it more for its scandals than its good work, I can not risk to talk about its good side which I do not know. (Read further on the dignity of this body here; http://ababaka.com/cms/index.php?option=com_kunena&Itemid=40&func=view&catid=15&id=9568&lang=en)


We know what the Mutabazi led Broadcasting council can do. Don't we remember the record closure of more than three radio stations in two days? And Mr. Mutabazi owns some media (broadcasting to be exact) entities as well, meaning he is the judge-goat judging fellow goats! I do not see any dignity in that.


One asks, where should those interested in an independent and dignified Ugandan media turn?I know a predictable comment that there should be a media tribunal like that proposed by the Zuma led government in South Africa, I am not sure that is a one-fix-all solution! I can not point out an exact and precise solution now and here, so should I cry and lick my worries?

UGANDA’S EDUCATION SYSTEM KEEPS US BEHIND!

Mr. Jesse Yesiga, the protagonist of Nick Twinamatsiko's novel, Jesse's Jewel studied Civil Engineering at university. He however had to study Structural engineering afresh courtesy of his employer when he was given a job, and he realized that university had not taught him anything useful as regards structural engineering! This same Jesse Yesiga, loved Literature so much besides his love for Mathematics! He actually attempted to offer PCM/L at A’ level and was refused on the basis that he could not combine an Arts subject like Literature with Science subjects! This same Jesse Yesiga however went on to read all sorts of literary works so much that he says when in the library he found himself reading more of Shakespeare than his Engineering notes and that is besides his immense love for mathematics!

This autobiographical novel is written by a civil engineer that a reviewer and literary critic Dennis Muhumuza has described as the civil engineer who builds words and sentences. Nick owns a publishing firm, has published two novels (Jesse's Jewel and my best, Chwezi Code) and an anthology of poems. Before you think that he digressed from Engineering, I should add that Nick is a lecturer of Civil Engineering and owns Kisaana Consults, a Kampala based structural engineering and construction management firm! Nick last studied Literature as a subject in his O'level but you should read his novels for you to understand that our Ugandan education badly needs reform judging from the quality of these novels coming from a man not trained to be a writer up to university level.

My opinion is that our education system should be remodeled to focus on developing students' talents' than mechanically instructing them to be what they are genetically not meant to be. I know a story of another man who was a hit in the media until he joined the European Union as a communications expert. This man had offered science subjects as we know them at secondary level up to A’ level. He was offered government sponsorship to study Veterinary medicine! He turned the offer down because he had set his target at human medicine! That is when he joined the faculty of social sciences! From there, he joined the media, literally working in all genres of the media including Television, print media, radio etc. Watching him on TV reading news, or listening to him moderating a talk show or merely reading his story in the print media made you believe that he had studied mass communication from the best journalism schools. Yet he had not even done Mass communication at university, neither had he offered an Arts combination at A’ level! He had been engrossed in studying enzymes and other biology related stuff for his secondary life, yet this he would throw to the gutter when he decided to follow his talent! Similar examples abound! I know another who actually studied veterinary medicine but has since found his feet fitting properly in the media. I should also add that Mr. Francis Bwengye was a public health official before studying law, and he is to date named among the top lawyers in town. There are also examples of those who have offered courses as law, medicine, engineering and have since never done anything worth writing home about in those fields, simply because their feet are misplaced!

I just want to emphasize that those who identify what they are born to be and their talents have without doubt excelled at their crafts and professions! Those who attempt to be mechanically made into something they are born not to be, struggle all through their professional life and can never reach the level of efficiency that those with talent are known for, even when the latter have no university or formal training in the areas where their talents lie! Now, one wonders, if everyone's talents are identified and developed, how far would Uganda be?

What the state of Electoral Democracy in the East African Community means!

All the East African community partner states have elections in the period from 2010 - 2012. However in four of these states, there are doubts on whether these elections will be free and fair. Far from the fairness of the elections themselves, talk of violence is rife in the four partner states of Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda and Kenya. Tanzania also has elections in 2010.

In Burundi, the only candidate in the Presidential Election slated for June 28, 2010 is the incumbent alone after opposition candidates boycotted citing failures in the Electoral managers;

In Rwanda, Victoire Ingabire, an intending opposition candidate in the August 2010 election is under house arrest, other forms of opposition also stifled; of late the govt under attack for a suspected assasination attempt at an exiled former army chief;

In Uganda, the opposition alliance of five parties has been demonstrating against the Electoral Commision; with skirmishes that have pitted youths and women against the police and militant groups of soliders disguising as civilians, meanwhile the president threatened to cut off the head of the biggest kingdom in the country where kingdom officilas have resigned to contest elections in 2011.

In Kenya, talk of violence is rife with bombs aimed at an assembly in the city... National elections will be held in 2012 in Kenya!

With this brief peek into the state of electoral democracy and governance in the four partner states of the East African community, isn't it well-founded fear for some Tanzanians who in 2008 preffered a go-slow on the fast-tracking of the East African community?

Some Notes For The New Makerere Law Society (MLS) Leaders.

Warning; This post might be longer than the normal posts on this page.

On Friday, 16th, April, 2010, law students at Makerere University went to the polls to select new leaders for 2010/2011. I personally voted my favourite candidates, some who went through and some who failed. I congratulate those who emerged successful and commiserate with those who did not win the hearts of the majority, especially the two “Brians”, Mr. Manyire Brian, one of the students who attended the founders’ meeting of the Makerere University Society of International Law and Mr. Bakampa Brian, the firebrand that characterised the student activism at Kigezi High School for the four years I was there and whose guts and candour always reassure me of a great future for our country. These notes are meant for all, whether winners, losers or even mere voters.

The notes are picked from a Report I co-authored with Mr. Black Moses Nyeko and Ms. Ivy Amoko after the MLS Speaker had appointed us to investigate alleged Mismanagement of the 2009 Annual MLS Dinner Funds following a petition signed by Mr. Male Hassan (LLB II), Reg. No. 07/U/880 and other students of the Faculty of Law requesting for the expulsion and an order of refund of the misappropriated funds against Mr. KAMAU Simon (President), Mr. SEBUUFU Usaama (Organizing Secretary) and Mr. KIWANDA Yusuf (Treasurer).

I have clustered the notes under four sub-headings; I request that you take heed of all the sub-headings to clearly understand my message. It might help you during your term of office at MLS.

Background.
During the course of the investigation, we invited the individuals against whom accusations had been levelled to interface with the commission but they all refused to meet us. They instead manipulated the office of the Inspector General of Government (IGG) of MLS to pen documents challenging the work of the commission. We however managed to meet some eminent members of the MLS including the petitioners, those who participated in the organisation of the dinner itself and those who merely have interest as members of the society. The people interviewed and gave public testimonies included Mr. Male Hassan, Mr. Jamiru Mujurizi, Mr. Brian Bakampa, Mr. Agaba Simon, Mr. John Teira, Mr. Humphrey Tumwesigye and Hon. Meddie Mulumba among others.

The Findings.
We broadly found that there were gross irregularities in receiving and spending funds meant for the 2009 MLS Annual Dinner; Improper Conduct and Mismanagement of the Dinner proceedings; that no one took the responsibility to account for funds received and how they were spent and that specific individuals in the MLS leadership should be held liable for abuse of office and embezzlement of funds.

It was found that selection of members of the dinner organising committee was based on selfish interests of the President personally following no set criterion. That the commercial sponsors of the Dinner including Post Bank U Ltd, Nile Breweries Ltd and Club Sway among others id not receive the exact performance of the terms given to MLS as part of the sponsorship deals clinched with them. That the said dinner organising committee was given a lot of money for facilitation referred to as “over facilitation” by one of the witnesses. It was found that for a short distance as the Faculty to Buganda Road, one would be given a sum of 20.000/= for their transport.
The commission also found out that individuals within MLS notably the President borrowed money on behalf of MLS which was not sanctioned and MLS had not paid them at the time of releasing the report. Mr. John Teira told the commission that he had not been paid the amount of money the President picked from hi on behalf of MLS. Some members of the committee who had lent their personal money to the committee decided to pay themselves by diverting the moneys they were collecting to pay the debts.
Creative accounting during organising meetings was engaged in by notable individuals. We received evidence that the agreed contract price for printing dinner cards was 1200/= for each card while the organising secretary, Mr. Usama Sebuufu declared to the organising committee that the cards were made at a cost of 1700/=.

Further, the president reported having received from State House a sum of 2,000,000/= yet several accounts were told to the committee with considerable evidence that the amount was much more than 2.000.000/=. One account from a witness who requested anonymity is to the effect that State House released 5.000.000/= while another account puts the figure at 10.000.000/=. The fact that only one member of the committee was involved in this matter, that is Mr. Kamau Simon makes the truth scarcer but the allegation that the amount was under declared was corroborated.

Several dinner cards were also issued without payment and little where payment was made. All members of the organising committee were given cards to attend the event for free. Members of the executive also gave out cards for free towards the final day. Mr. Jamiru Mujurizi confessed to having been given a free card by a member of the executive yet he was not even a member of the organising committee.

The President personally allowed some finalists to pay a less amount of 25.000/= compared the others who were supposed to pay 30.000/=. Evidence established that most finalists did not pay any coin and had cards given to them by the president, MLS. Further, on the real day of the dinner, cards were being sold as less as 10.000/=. All this resulted in an influx of cards which did not correspond to the paid up moneys.

According to Simon Agaba, as corroborated by Humphrey Tumwesigye on the day of the dinner, coupons were meant to be issued to those who would present invitation cards. The coupons were originally meant to be used for food purposes but were also used for entrance purposes. According to the testimonies of Simon and Humphrey, the students responsible for distributing the coupons before the organising secretary and the president arbitrarily removed them from the role, the coupons issued were fewer than the invitation cards that were in circulation by more than 50%. This therefore meant that some people would be denied entrance for lack of coupons yet they had invitation cards. This caused confusion and a scuffle at the entrance as students demanded to enter the dinner venue with their invitation cards, yet the security guard wanted them to present coupons which they did not have.

According to the hotel manger, they had been paid to serve only 150 people and had prepared food for only that number. This therefore meant that the more than two hundred guests that turned up for the function were not all guaranteed of food. As a matter of fact, only those who came early got food to eat. A few others were able to get food after shouting their voices hoarse. This happened after the person of the organising secretary and president had pleaded with the manager of the hotel to allow them more plates of food than planned. The manager insisted on having a surety before he could allow, and the dean was contacted and he refused. Some witnesses who met the commission said that having entered the venue late after a physical brawl to allow them in, they found when all the food was finished and in fact ever ate.

The performance of the ushers at the function came in the spotlight mainly in regard to the treatment if the VIPs who turned up for the function. Prof. Hon. George Wilson Kanyeihamba by his own complaint at the dinner and as witnessed by Mr. John Teira was not ushered in the function in a befitting manner. According to Mr. John Teira’s account, the justice of the Supreme Court was asked for a coupon by a couple of ushers which prompted Teira himself to go forward to welcome the justice. After attracting media attention, Teira narrated that the justice was swarmed by MLS executive committee members struggling to be captured by the camera near the Justice.

The selection of the chief guest raised issues of protocol exhibited the highest level of inexperience, ignorance and disorganisation. Prof. Kanyeihamba had been contacted before to officiate at the dinner yet when State House confirmed giving a contribution towards the budget, the chief guest was changed to the President of the Republic of Uganda. At this level, Prof. Kanyeihamba was not updated on the developments. Thus when the President delegated to the Attorney General as Chief Guest, there was an incident of disrespect of protocol. The commission finds that due to greed for donations, the position of chief guest was misused and the whole faculty was embarrassed especially when members of the bench were practically told to rise to respect the Attorney General.

The mode of awarding students at the dinner was not clear. With the heavy involvement of the treasurer in the organisation of the event and the unclear mode of selection of awardees, it is a clear case of conflict on interest for him to receive an award at the same dinner. Ample evidence also exists that other awardees as Mr. Chege Daniel Kamau, save from being the president’s personal friend and country mate, the only role he has played at faculty is managing Mr. Kamau Simon’s personal campaign to become Law Society president. To honour him with an MLS award for services he rendered to the person of the president is to personalise MLS thus abuse of office.

It was indicated on the invitation that arrival at the dinner venue was 5:00pm. By 5:00 pm however, only two students Mr. Humphrey Tumwesigye and Mr. Agaba Simon had reached. The other officials arrived an hour later. Evidence has revealed that Prof. Kakooza Joseph, founder member of the Faculty of Law, now the chairperson, Uganda Law Reform Commission arrived at the venue at around 4:15pm and found only two people who had given him a coupon in return for his card. Lacking company the good old professor left the hotel promising to return later. That when he returned, there was chaos and a series of brawls at the entrance and he left for good.

Having been told that their presentation on the program was at 6:00pm, the Post Bank marketing team arrived at the venue of the function at around 05:00pm. There was normal business at the hotel and in the view of the marketing team, no dinner was scheduled to happen at the hotel, so they left.

As laid out above, several issues arose in the course of the preparation and holding of the dinner itself. It is only prudent that the MLS executive was expected to claim responsibility and account for all that happened at the dinner, both positive and negative. What the President did was to congratulate everyone about the dinner and noting that the dinner was hugely successful. No report was produced even up to now.

The MLS constitution in article 30 provides that the treasurer shall ordinarily cause to be submitted and laid before the executive, IGG and the general assembly. The dinner happened on 2nd, May, 2009 which means the report was due by 9th, May, 2009. The commission officers received appointment letters on 25th, May, 2009, twenty three days after the dinner. Still there was no report. We released the report on 04th, September 2009, one hundred and thirteen days after the dinner and there is no report yet. Today, in April, 2010, there is no accountability at all detailing what happened at the dinner and how much money was raised and how it was spent.

In an undated communiqué from the IGG pasted on notice boards at the faculty, he purported to have waived the seven days requirement for the presentation of a report, after allegedly receiving a request letter from the treasurer and organising secretary asking for the waiver. After intense Investigation, the commission established that no such letter was written to the IGG asking for the waiver. There is also sufficient evidence that the communiqué by the IGG was penned by the President, Mr. Kamau Simon and as a matter of fact, the different copies of the communiqué bore different signatures with some which had no signature at all. The machinations continued even to interfere with the work of the commission. All the implicated officials declined to meet the commission and effectively discouraged other members of the society from meeting the commission citing the IGG’s communiqué which in any case, one of them penned it himself.

In the view of the commission, from its findings, there were strong reasons for the accusation levied on Mr. Kamau Simon, Mr. Usama Sebuufu and Mr. Kiwanda Yusuf. The commission added Mr. Wasswa Bengo among those who were responsible for the abuses of office.

The commission opined that Mr. Kamau Simon had a case to answer for false accounting under article 36(4) of the MLS constitution, gross misconduct and irresponsibility under Article 36(3) (d) of the MLS constitution. That Kamau’s forgery of a communiqué and impersonating the IGG, he did not only abuse his office but also can be charged for forgery and uttering of false documents. Under the principle of collective responsibility, Mr. Kamau Simon was the head of the executive, thus existence of faults within the executive implicates him as the head.

Mr. Yusuf Kiwanda, according to the commission violated article 30(1) of the MLS constitution under which he was supposed to prepare and present a report about the dinner within seven days which he never did. That Mr. Kiwanda was grossly negligent in the meaning of article 36(3) (d) of the MLS constitution in the handling of MLS funds. The commission noted that Accountability is key and Mr. Kiwanda as treasurer should know better. Merely not accounting for public funds shows incompetence.

Mr. Sebuufu Usama in the view of the commission violated article 23(6) of the MLS constitution, article 30(1) of the same constitution, and article 36(4) for having deceived that cards were made at 1700/= each yet the actual price was 1200/= among other wrongful acts.

Mr. Wasswa Bengo in the opinion of the commission did not only fail to do his duty of ensuring accountability but has abused his office by colluding with the implicated to muzzle a process intended to ensure accountability. Allowing Mr. Kamau Simon to pen a communiqué in his name intended to undermine the work of the commission of inquiry is a gross contravention of the constitution. Mr. Wasswa or anyone else has no powers to amend the constitution unilaterally. By attempting to waive the seven days requirement for accountability, Mr. Wasswa attempts to suspend a provision of the constitution thus Mr. Wasswa as IGG committed a wrong within the meaning of Article 26 (4) of the MLS constitution as incompetence and misconduct.

Recommendations made.
We recommended that the specific officers named in the report as potentially culpable (Mr. Kamau Simon, Mr. Yusuf Kiwanda, Mr. Usama Sebuufu and Mr. Wasswa Bengo) should make a genuine apology to all stakeholders that were involved in one way or the other in the process of organising and holding the 2009 Annual MLS Dinner. The persons to whom the apology in our view was to be made include the faculty of Law administration, the sponsors of the function, key guests at the function, the students who were embarrassed on the specific day and the general student population at the faculty of Law whose reputation they put at stake.

We also recommended that a report containing the accountability for the dinner be made by the implicated and should be published and publicised as much as possible. The implicated officials should ensure that all stakeholders receive a copy of this report and accountability most especially the faculty senior administration and the faculty student community.

In the event that the implicated officials did not abide by the above recommendations, we recommended that the speaker grants the petitioners their wish of establishing a tribunal to consider expulsion of the said officials from Makerere Law Society leadership. In the event that the tribunal starts work on considering the petition, we recommended that the Makerere Law Society Council takes over roles of Makerere Law Society activities to ensure continuity of activities.
We recommended that the speaker on receiving the report makes it public and all the recommendations considered for implementation.

Action taken and some pieces of Advice.
We released the report on 04th, September, 2009 and handed it over to the Speaker. Three days after the release of the report, I received several SMS messages and a telephone call from Mr. Jamiru Mujurizi urging me to erase his name from the report or else no action is taken on the report. He further warned that I would personally be reported for “disciplinary” action if I did not erase his name from the report as having received a card without payment, a confession that he made to the commission after agreeing to make public all the information he gave to the commission before he gave it.

I deliberately refused to edit the report as I had already handed it over to the speaker, but true to Mr. Jamiru Mujurizi’s threat, the report’s recommendations were not implemented. The speaker did not even publicise the report. No apology was given by the named officials as recommended thus the report and work of the commission was shelved in the interest of hiding the truth.

having invested a lot of time and personal resources in the process, I believe that we as the commission did our work though we were let down by the speaker, Mr. Adam Byarugaba who instead of implementing the recommendations of the report preferred to hide the truth that one of his friends, coincidentally one of the petitioner Mr. Jamiru Mujurizi had benefited from the mismanagement of the Dinner.

My call to the incoming MLS executive is to take note of the recommendations we made and our findings to a void future mistakes. As the Bakiga-Banyankore say, “eibare ririkurebeka, tiriteera enfuka” literally meaning that a visible stone can not hit the hoe.