I can’t resist the temptation to react to this item of news that has challenged me. The news item that youths, some colleagues in a political party of which I am a member are threatening to demonstrate at the ICC Review conference arguing that the ICC prosecutor has delayed to respond to their petition in which they want the ICC to try Museveni and others for the killings during the September 2009 riots. http://www.ugpulse.com/articles/daily/news.asp?about=Uganda+opposition+youth+threaten+to+block+ICC+Kampala+meeting+&ID=14600

They have been advised already about this very matter but maybe, they are taking it too far. http://www.ugpulse.com/articles/daily/news.asp?about=Uganda+opposition+youth+advised+on+ICC+matters+&ID=14602

I honestly think as a member of FDC and also a law student who has keen interest in International Criminal Law that there is a small hiccup not with the demonstration alone but also the petition itself. Sad, but I think genuinely and with due respect that these youths, many my personal friends were not advised properly on what the ICC is, its jurisdiction and how its organs work as an international court set up to try international crimes of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and aggression, soon. I respectfully doubt the killings in September 2009 during the “pro-kabaka” riots fit within the limited jurisdiction of the court.

I know that justice should be done, I actually referred to the same killings myself as a “genocide” in an article on this blog but mine was in regard to the intention; I don’t think the dual-genocide was committed though signs indeed were present. https://bwesigye.wordpress.com/2009/12/29/2009-the-year-that-brought-genocide-closer-to-uganda/

Do the killings legally qualify as crimes against humanity? Well, I do not think the requirements of systematic commission and others as set down under the Rome Statute are satisfied. Of course they are not war crimes, because there was no armed conflict legally speaking but is what can be referred to as internal disturbances in International Humanitarian Law and neither was it genocide though some signs were apparent as I argue in my earlier blog article.

I understand that the Ugandan justice system can not be trusted to try Museveni of counseling and procuring murder under our Penal Code Act because of the nature of the DPP’s office and the factor of presidential immunity.

So, I ask, did our colleagues think of the East African court of Justice (EACJ)? Well, the EAC Treaty provides for human rights, and good governance principles as fundamental principles of the EAC and ordering a “shoot-to-kill” policy to armed people who kill others is a blatant violation of the right to life and other antecedent rights, thus is a violation of the Treaty. This streak of argument was used by Mr. Wandera Ogalo in the famous Katabazi and the 22 others case before the EACJ, though the rights in question in that case were not life but freedom and other rights. And Mr. Wandera Ogalo is a senior lawyer of the FDC party, one of the parties in the IPC.

And why not consider the variety of accountability mechanisms in the African system? Uganda has ratified the Protocol to the African Charter establishing the African court on human and Peoples’ Rights, and the IPC youths can even contact the African commission on human and people’s rights on the blatant violations of human rights. Did it really have to be the ICC? Maybe, a step-too-far or too much trust in the ICC. Or, perhaps these youths are learning from Museveni; using the ICC, a judicial institution for political ends, than a genuine search for justice. I am tempted to believe the latter because of the timing of the demonstration and the thought of it alone.

Demonstrations are political than legal tools. You do not expect a legal/judicial decision by demonstrating. And I think that my friends have gotten this wrong. We should not drag judicial institutions to our political wrangles. That way, we strip the judicial institutions of credibility and respect and render them illegitimate. Perhaps, I should have started by asking, do the IPC petitioners to the ICC expect justice or a political goal scored against NRM? Well, I think the tactics are wrong and not noble. And I say this as a proud FDC member and law student, with a keen interest in seeing an international Criminal court free of politicking but sound justice.

I am curious to know what my party (FDC) lawyers have to say about the petition to the ICC. Maybe, the IPC youths should pick a leaf from the advice alluded to above.

Brian Bwesigye (+256782036263)
Final Year law student, Makerere University
Member, Forum for Democratic Change (FDC)

For many a Ugandan born in 1986 and after, nothing is known through first hand experience of the period preceding the 1986 take-over of government by the NRA. The situation is so horrendous that the name “Museveni” has at times become synonymous with Presidency as far as this generation that I fondly refer to as musevenised is concerned. I will cite an experience from my childhood in Nyanja, Maziba, Kabale, my rural home village in south western Uganda. In 1994, when a bunch of toddlers (me inclusive) heard the news over the radio that the leader of the “Inkotanyi” (the RPF soldiers) Mr. Paul Kagame had taken over power in Rwanda, one of us exclaimed; “Rwanda yatunga Museveni omusya!”; literally meaning that Rwanda has gotten a new “Museveni”. A president to us had to be Museveni. In other words, Museveni was a word that meant presidency, not the person of Yoweri Museveni. The Ugandan society generally was unbothered about telling us Uganda’s correct version of history, including that there were other presidents before Museveni which would have cleared the confusion between Museveni and presidency. From an early age, the musevenised generation has had to learn the authentic Pre-Museveni years of Ugandan history on its own against society-held notions and versions of history.

This voyage of discovery beyond the jargon of the NRM establishment brings with it several contradictions and inaccuracies that you wonder whether this batch of guerrillas, particularly their leader set off on a mission to turn Uganda from what it was or were simply attempting to re write what they call “Uganda’s bad history”. All ways, the truth always bears its sweet face dumping the ugly look of lies to the dustbin. So, some of us, in the musevenised generation are beginning to stumble onto some truths. And what is depressing is that these are simple facts, so one wonders why someone is interested in not telling them as they are. I will cite two scenarios where I have on my own discovered that the “official” version of history as told by NRM is to put it plainly incorrect, only that I can’t ascertain the motive of distorting the historical facts in question.

A meticulous reading of the history of the period leading to the coup that overthrow the UNLA government and finally the NRA take-over of Kampala reveals that the real day, on which the NRA snatched power, was 25^th, January, 1986. This is the same day, save for the year on which Field Marshal Idi Amin Dada, Life President of Uganda had taken power, back in 1971. So, why not take humble pie and accept that they (NRA) did not wait for a day longer for Kampala to fall but were so ravenous for power that they never thought about Amin having taken power on a similar day? And, why try to rewrite history later by using Amin’s take-over on the same day fifteen years as an excuse to make 26^th, January their Liberation day yet it was actually 25^th, January? Does it hurt to have 25^th January as a liberation day? Is it merely because it was also Amin’s day? Or there is some untold story we can only know by our own discoveries?

And that is not all; there is some other more intriguing discovery. As I did my prying into this history, I discovered that 9^th; June was allegedly made heroes’ day in honour of Mr. Edidian Luttamaguzi, peasant leader in Semuto, Luwero. The NRA legend has it that Luttamaguzi was hiding Museveni in his house and government troops came to surround the place and kill Museveni. Museveni hid up in a tree and as the UNLA troops killed Luttamaguzi, Museveni perched in the tree, watched helplessly. They say that this happened on June 9, 1981 and that is why the NRM marks that day as Heroes’ Day because Luttamaguzi saved Museveni’s life by refusing to tell the UNLA where Museveni was. The story is impressive, but not before another discovery is made. That same day in 1981, Museveni was not in Uganda but in Nairobi signing a merger agreement between his Popular Resistance Army and Yusufu Lule’s Uganda Freedom Fighters to make NRA. The same NRA history books and other independently written literature confirm that Mr. Museveni was actually in Nairobi at the time. So the man was in a tree hiding and in Nairobi at the same time!! Strange!

Why would the NRA (Museveni) tell us (especially us of the musevenised generation) such blatant lies? Are these people (NRM) habitual liars? Or have they wisely manipulated our lack of serious history tellers and writers to hoodwink us, especially us of the musevenised generation? When asking such questions, it is commonplace particularly from NRM apologists to brand those who pose the questions like myself as disgruntled and disoriented. Indeed, why would I not be disgruntled if my country’s history is being given very many versions, some for unknown reasons, shrouding the Ugandan national identity? I consider it true that without a correct version of Ugandan history, we can not have a true Ugandan identity. No wonder, the musevenised generation is struggling to stamp out the inclination towards tribal identity than national identity.

It is because we as a country have lacked a clear account told of how Uganda became a nation, what binds us together as a nation-state, yet in our ethnicities, tribes and clans, we find legends, folklore and narrations of the past that clearly tell of a history of our ethnicity. The NRM has fanned this trend by its leader himself dedicating personal time into telling Ankole folklore, even going an extent to explain how the Hema of Congo are related to the Hima of Uganda among his other narrow tales of history. Had we rather devoted time and other resources in understanding, researching and telling the true versions of Uganda’s history and emergence as a nation-state, we would rise beyond our ethnic backgrounds to proudly be identified with Uganda. One may perhaps wonder why a Nigerian will first tell you of his being Nigerian if you are a foreigner despite all the internal divisions the country, sometimes referred to as the giant of Africa is entangled in. We deserve a true account of our history as a nation, let alone the NRA bush story in an empirical way than the misleading legendary form it is in now.