Connect with us
  • NATIONAL

    OPINION: NUP Should Boycott IPOD Money, Too…

    Published

    on

    NUP boss Robert Kyagulanyi (L) and Faruk Kirunda (R)

    The nascent National Unity Platform (NUP) has declined to join the Interparty Organization for Dialogue (IPOD), a forum which brings together parties with representation in Parliament to dialogue on issues affecting the country.

    NUP was invited together with the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) to join the organization after the expiry of the 3-year MOU which member parties had signed before NUP was formed. Surprisingly, the NUP Secretary-General David Lewis Rubongoya, wrote to the IPOD secretariat communicating that they were declining to join, alleging that the platform has been “used to legitimize a brutal regime that has no regard or respect for democracy.” He described the forum’s meetings as “tea and photo” opportunities.

    Previously, it was FDC boycotting IPOD activities, their reasons including that they didn’t want to shake hands with President Museveni who usually attends in his capacity as National Chairman of the National Resistance Movement (NRM).

    Last year, FDC’s chair at the summit remained empty, symbolically representing its absence from the table of men. As we talk, FDC is paying for its mistakes, with its base steadily getting eroded because all potential allies see them as arrogant and uncooperative.

    At the time, I predicted that in a few years (if not before this year), FDC would be a limping shadow of its former promising self, and take on the mantle of a “sick man of Uganda’s politics’ ‘; isolated, defied, desperate and obsolete.

    I believe I was not far off the mark as the party has shrunk considerably, losing place to NRM and NUP in its former strongholds. I also based on FDC’s stance on IPOD to predict that opposition agitators for a single front by the opposition at the general election should forget it because a seed of discord has been sowed.

    When FDC boycotted the summit at Munyonyo, DP’s Nobert Mao, JEEMA’s Asuman Basalirwa and UPC’s Jimmy Akena attended. FDC made fun of them and claimed they were in bed with NRM. Such remarks were an affront on the dignity and rights of the other parties, and also an attack on the collective agenda to develop and grow multiparty politics in Uganda. IPOD is not a private enterprise of any one individual or group but a forum for discussing matters of mutual interest. It’s also a forum for raising some of the concerns that abstaining groups raise on the streets and in the corridors.

    NUP is making the same mistakes as FDC and will live to regret it. An attitude of self-importance and self-isolation is selfish and self-seeking.

    NUP is showing too early that they are not for unity and that they despise the efforts of other players. They are playing a defeatist game; they claim to have a lot of grievances but cannot come forward to table them formally for solutions to be found. Who did they consult before deciding to boycott IPOD? Why not recall its MPs since it is by virtue of their presence in Parliament that it qualifies to belong in the body? Why not completely relocate from Uganda since the Museveni/NRM they loathe so much is present all over the country? It is not enough to avoid him in IPOD circles.

    Among the key benefits of belonging in IPOD is receiving a share of funding under its arrangement to support their activities. Is NUP turning down this support or they will only go for the buttered side of things? I will follow up to see how they will reconcile themselves on this-even FDC.

    NUP’s level of intolerance is very worrying. As a young party, they would set a good example by promoting the politics of dialogue and reconciliation. It is possible that other having representation in Parliament, they have not put together a proper political programme to sell in the political common market, and this worries them that they may be overwhelmed by the superior programs of NRM, which has majority MPs, and DP, or even FDC, or UPC, which are more established and experienced.

    NUP should style up and act with maturity if they are to set an example of how they want others to treat them.

    NRM has its own grievances and is committed to democracy and dialogue as part of its contribution to a better Uganda. Whoever has grievances should table them for consideration among peers instead of gossiping about them in the media- and to foreigners.

    Museveni, whom the opposition loves to hate, remains a most valuable partner at every turn in support of democracy and has also been very warm and supportive of IPOD which can be a springboard for dialogue between all political groups-not just parties represented in Parliament-so that the polarization we have witnessed of recent does not escalate, but NUP cannot see because their politics is amateurish and lacks ideological depth. If any group needs the auspices of IPOD, it’s NUP!

    The problem is that some of the opposition players are so uncooperative and arrogant yet they accuse Museveni/NRM of the same whereas facts disprove their claims.

    Faruk Kirunda  is a Private Secretary to

    H.E the President in Charge of Media Management

    Contact: kirundaf2@gmail.com

    0776980486/0702980486

    Comments

    NATIONAL

    Justice Kisaakye Drags Boss Chief Justice Dollo To Court, Narrates How She Has Been Tortured Since She Ruled In Support Of Bobi Wine Election Petition….

    Published

    on

    Justice Esther Kisaakye (L) and CJ Owiny Dollo (R)

    Supreme Court Justice, Dr. Esther Kisaakye Mayambala has dragged his boss the Chief Justice Alfonso Owiny Dollo (respondent No.1) to court.

    Kisaakye Mayambala has also dragged the Judiciary Permanent Secretary, Pius Bigirimana (respondent No.2), Judiciary Commissioner Human Resource, Apophia Tumwine (respondent No.3), Chief Registrar, Sarah Langa (respondent No.4), Judicial Service Commissioner (respondent No.5) and the Attorney General (respondent No.6) to court.

    A letter from the Registrar Court of Appeal tasked Dollo and his co-accused that, “Take notice that the Petitioner Justice Dr. Esther Kitimbo Kisaakye, JSC has filed a Petition against you in this Court. You are hereby required to file an answer within seven (7) days after the Petition has been served on you.”

    “Should you fail to file the answer on or before the date above mentioned, the Petitioner may proceed with the Petition, which may be determined in your absence. Given under my hand and Seal of this Court this.”

    KISAAKYE NARRATES ORIGIN OF HER WOES

    In Her petition, Justice Kisaakye disclosed that her woes started when she decided to write and deliver her own ruling in the Presidential Election Petition of 2021, Kyagulanyi Ssentamu Robert vs. Yoweri Museveni Tibuhaburwa, Electoral Commission

    & Attorney General.

    She noted, “Your Petitioner notified the 1st Respondent and all other empanelled Justices of the Supreme Court that she was writing and would deliver her own Ruling in the Recusal Application together with her reasoned Rulings in Miscellaneous Applications No. 1, 4 and 5 of 2021.

    “Following the withdrawal of Presidential Election Petition No. 1 of 2021, the Court then fixed 18th March 2021 as the date for the delivery of all the reserved reasons in Miscellaneous Applications No. 1, 4 and that from 18th March 2021 until the date of filing this Petition, the Respondents have jointly and severally engaged in unconstitutional acts and omissions which are inconsistent with and contravene the Constitution as outlined herein under.”

    Kisaakye narrated that, “on 18th March 2021 the day set for delivery of final detailed

    rulings in all Miscellaneous Applications arising from the said Presidential Petition, Court was convened and the majority reasons for the decisions were read by three Justices who were part of the majority.”

    Kisaakye added that when Court was adjourned for 30 minutes, during the adjournment, Dollo asked her for copies of her ruling.

    She says that she told him and the rest of the Justices that due to tight timelines within which the Court was working, she had not been able to complete typing of her Ruling and as a result her consolidated Rulings were partly typed and partly hand written. ‘

    “Your Petitioner (Kisaakye) informed the 1st Respondent (Dollo) and other Justices of the

    Court that there was no constitutional or legal requirement imposed on her to share her reasons before delivery since the Court had already made all its decisions and issued the respective summary Rulings in all the Applications under reference,” she said.

    She added, “During the adjournment, the 1st Respondent (Dollo) then directed your

    Petitioner (Kisaakye) not to deliver her Rulings on grounds that your Petitioner (Kisaakye) had not shared with the 1st Respondent and other Justices of the Supreme Court her detailed reasons for the respective Rulings which had been earlier reserved by the Court, as stated herein before.

    “Your Petitioner (Kisaakye) maintained that position throughout the rest of the interaction with the Chief Justice and other Justices during the adjournment. She also informed the 1st Respondent (Dollo) and other Justices of the Court that she would go ahead and deliver her reasoned Ruling even though they had all declined to return to the Court.

    “That following the 1st Respondent’s unconstitutional directive and the decision by 1st Respondent (Dollo) and the refusal of all other Justices of the Supreme Court to return to the Court, your Petitioner (Kisaakye) proceeded back to the Court Room to deliver her Ruling.

    “As your Petitioner (Kisaakye) returned to the Court to deliver her Rulings, the armed police officers attached to the 1st Respondent ran ahead of her and collected your Petitioner’s Files along with those of other Justices.

    “That during the adjournment, your Petitioner’s files containing her consolidated reasoned Rulings were confiscated by armed police officers on the directives of the 1st Respondent and they were handed over to the 1st Respondent.

    “That subsequently, the lights and public address system in the Court tent which had served as the Court room were switched off and the Court room was locked up on the Orders of the 1st Respondent.

    “That your Petitioner was compelled to use a duplicate file to deliver part of her Consolidated Rulings in Miscellaneous Applications No. 1, 4 & 5 of 2021 and she set the 19th day of March 2021 at 11:00am for delivery of her Ruling in Miscellaneous Application No. 3 of 2021.

    “That thereafter, your Petitioner repeatedly requested the 1st Respondent and the Registrar of the Supreme Court to return her confiscated Rulings and Files to enable her to issue her full Rulings of the Applications but the 1st Respondent has continued to keep your Petitioner’s files since March 18th 2021 and has adamantly refused to return them.

    “Your Petitioner also repeatedly requested the 1st Respondent and the Registrar of the Supreme Court to fix a date for delivery of her Ruling in Miscellaneous Application No. 3 of 2021 but the 1st Respondent refused the Registrar of the Supreme Court to fix a date for the Petitioner to deliver her said Ruling on grounds that the Court was functus officio. The 1st Respondent further directed the Registrar of the Supreme Court to close the File.

    “That since 18th March 2021 to the date of filing this Petition, the 1st Respondent has continued to confiscate Your Petitioner’s Rulings and files and has obstructed your Petitioner from issuing her full reasoned Rulings in Miscellaneous Applications No. 1, 4, & 5 of 2021 to the parties and the public and from delivering her Ruling in Miscellaneous

    Application No. 3 of 2021.

    “That as a result of the 1st Respondent’s said actions, the Supreme Court of Uganda has not released its full reasoned Rulings in the said Miscellaneous Applications to the parties and the people of Uganda.

    KISAAKYE NARRATES HOW SHE HAS BEEN “TORTURED”

    Kisakye narrates that since then, Dollo and Bigirimana have made her life hard.

    She adds that Dollo refused to allocate her work since then and Bigirimana refused to give her driver and bodyguard their leave allowances.

    “That your Petitioner duly completed her leave and resumed her duties on 27th June, 2022 but the 1st and 2nd Respondents turned around and accused your Petitioner of having been away from office without official leave (AWOL) since September 2021.

    “The 2nd Respondent (Bigirimana) has also refused to pay the allowances for Your Petitioner’s driver and body guard and your Petitioner contends that the 2nd Respondent’s omission to pay the leave allowances for the Petitioner’s driver and body guard is discriminatory, amounts to victimization and is inconsistent with and in contravention of articles 21 (1) & (2), 22, 26, 28(1) 40(1) (6), 42, 40 (1) (c), 128(1 ), (2) & (7) and 173(a) of the Constitution,” she says.

    She adds, “That since Your Petitioner returned from her leave on 2th June 2022; she has since been omitted from Supreme Court duty rosters and cause-lists despite informing the 1st Respondent, the Administrative Judge of the Supreme Court and the Registrar that she is available and ready to work.

    “That following the indefinite closure of the operations of the Supreme Court on 30th May 2022, the 1st Respondent directed that there would be a Justice on duty every week but your Petitioner has been excluded from all duty rosters released by the Registrar of the Supreme Court since 30th May 2022.”

    Kisaakye says that her research assistant was also withdrawn and transferred to Jinja.

    She narrates, “That on 7th July 2022, your Petitioner’s Research Assistant (who had been recently appointed as Magistrate Grade I in accordance with Judiciary policy) was summarily removed from the Petitioner’s chambers by the 4th Respondent and redeployed in Jinja with the knowledge of the 1st Respondent.

    “That in contrast, the Research Assistants of all other Justices of the Supreme Court who had also been appointed as Magistrates Grade I, were retained by the respective Justices of the Supreme Court where they had been serving prior to the appointment.”

    Kisaakye adds that Bigirimana even denied her a letter of undertaking when she asked for a salary loan from the bank.

    “That on 22nd June 2022, Your Petitioner applied to the 2nd Respondent for a letter of undertaking to her bankers for a salary loan top up, and the 2nd Respondent declined to write the said letter of undertaking on grounds that your Petitioner was under investigations by the 5th Respondent,” she says.

    She contends that Dollo, Bigirimana and the Attorney general removed her from the judiciary payroll.

    “That on an unspecified date, the 2nd Respondent purportedly acting under Article 164(1) of the Const1tut1on gave instructions to the judiciary staff responsible for processing Judges’ salaries not to process your Petitioner’s salary and benefits with effect from July

    2022.

    “That your Petitioner was consequently removed from the Judiciary and Government payroll and was not paid her salary and benefits for July and August 2022 to her great financial and social embarrassment, general inconvenience, mental anguish and adverse publicity and institutional ridicule.”

    SETS TOUGH TERM FOR DOLLO AND TEAM

    Kisaakye wants court to compel Dollo, Bigirimana and other respondent to;

    Immediately reinstated as the administrative Justice of the Supreme Court by the 1st Respondent.

    The Petitioner be included in the Supreme Court duty rosters and cause lists and be allocated work to do.

    The Petitioner be refunded with the cost of buying a pair of reading glasses and the expense incurred for the eye surgery in the United States of America.

    The 2nd Respondent pays interest at 25% per annum on the Petitioner’s salary and allowance for the period when the said salary and allowances were unconstitutionally withheld by the 2nd Respondent and also pays all the Bank penalties incurred by the Petitioner to her bankers when her salary was not remitted to the Bank to service her salary loan with compound interest thereon at 2S°/c, per annum from the time the penalties were incurred till payment in full.

    The Respondents jointly and severally pay General Damages to the Petitioner with interest thereon at 25% p.a from date judgment till payment in full for;-

    1. Damages to her judicial, professional and personal reputation from 18th March 2021 till the filing of this Petition.
    2. Pain, suffering and mental anguish suffered from 18th March 2021 till the filing of this Petition.
    3. Damage to her credit worthiness with her bankers for the delayed payment of her salary loan instalments.

    Kisaakye also wants the respondents to jointly and severally pay the Costs of the petition.

     

     

    By Hope Kalamira

    Comments

    Continue Reading

    NATIONAL

    I’m Going To Celebrate My Rank Down On Kampala Road – Muhoozi Vows After His Father Promotes Him To Rank Of General…

    Published

    on

    The First Son Muhoozi Kainerugaba welcomed the rank of General given to him by his father President Yoweri Museveni.

    “I thank Ugandans for loving me. I will wear this rank, we celebrate and work continues!” Muhoozi tweeted.

    “We are going to have a celebration down Kampala Road for this rank. I thank my father for this great honor!” he added

    President Museveni, who is Commander in Chief of the Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces (UPDF), also dropped Muhoozi as Land Forces commander.

    In a statement released today by UPDF Spokesperson Brig. Gen. Felix Kulayigye, Muhoozi will continue with his duties as Senior Presidential Advisor for Special Operations

    The statement reads, “H.E the President and Commander in Chief of the Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces has promoted and appointed General Officers as follows: Lieutenant General Muhoozi Kainerugaba promoted to General and continues with duties as Senior Presidential Advisor for Special Operations.

    “Major General Muhanga Kayanja promoted to Lieutenant General and appointed Commander Land Forces. The Ministry of Defence and Veteran Affairs and UPDF fraternity congratulate the General Officers upon their well-deserved promotions and appointments.”

    Muhoozi’s promotion and demotion follows uncontrolled tweets from him with one stating that his army would capture Kenya within two weeks.

    “It wouldn’t take us, my army and me, two weeks to capture Nairobi.”

    “I’m happy that members of our district in Kenya, have responded enthusiastically to my tweet. It’s still two weeks to Nairobi,” he sarcastically said.

    Muhoozi further provoked tweeps that they (Kenya and Uganda) are going to be one country. Any war against them will end quickly.

    “The borders that were established by the colonisers mean nothing to us, revolutionaries. Nairobi.”

    His tweets forced the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to clear the air on how they conduct the country’s foreign policy.

    According to a statement dated October, 4th, 2022, Ministry of Foreign Affairs noted that the debate on social media in respect to the relationship between Uganda and the brotherly neighbour, the Republic of Kenya, (initiated by Muhoozi), should not be taken seriously.

    “The Ministry wishes to emphasize that the Government and the people of the Republic of Uganda treasure the existing strong bilateral relations between the people and the Government of the Republic of Kenya based on our shared history, common values, mutual respect, trust and the desire to build a unified East African Community,” the statement read.

    “To this end, the Government of the Republic of Uganda wishes to reiterate its commitment to good neighbourliness, peaceful co-existence and cooperation.”

    The Ministry of Foreign Affairs further clarified that the Government of the Republic of Uganda does not depend on social media sources in dealing with other sovereign Governments.

    “The Government of the Republic of Uganda, therefore, wishes to reiterate its cordial relationship with the Republic of Kenya and assure the people and the Government of the Republic of Kenya of our harmonious relationship that we value.”

    Minister for Security, Maj. Gen. Jim Muhwezi has distanced himself from the matter noting that he doesn’t want to talk about media reports because it is not authentic and not worth the energy to talk about it.

    “Someone asked about media reports (Gen Muhoozi’s tweets) and I don’t even remember what it was about but I don’t want to talk about media reports. It is not authentic and not worth the energy to talk about it. I have no comment about that.”

     

    By Hope Kalamira

    Comments

    Continue Reading

    NATIONAL

    Mwenda Narrates How Intelligence Advised M7 To Fire Kagame Girl Who Prepares His Bedroom….

    Published

    on

    Veteran journalist Andrew Mwenda (L) and President Museveni (R)

    Celebrated veteran journalist Andrew Mwenda has narrated how intelligence advised President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni to fire president Paul Kagame’s girl to save his life.

    Mwenda revealed that when the misunderstanding between Rwanda and Uganda was at its peak, with each nation accusing the other of espionage, intelligence operatives advised President Museveni to fire all his assistants of Rwandan descent.

    Mwenda said that among the people that intelligence wanted to be removed from the state house was the beautiful Munyarwanda woman who has been in charge of President Museveni’s bedroom for a long time.

    He added that after reading a strongly worded intelligence report, Museveni took his time to interrogate the dossier and he took a strong decision which hurt his intelligence team by refusing to fire his assistants.

    While moderating ‘The hot seat’ talk show on KFM radio on Friday, Mwenda explained that Museveni trusts Rwandese more than Ugandans that’s why all the people surrounding him are Banyarwanda.

    It is on this note that Mwenda wondered why the President does not come out to rescue Rwandans from the ongoing harassment from country’s immigration department.

    He revealed that he has investigated and established that these people are facing a lot of hardships to get passports and National identity cards.

    He said that many of the people who have Rwanda like name are stateless because Uganda refused to give them passports and National Identity cards yet they cannot go to Rwanda because they were born in Uganda and all are parents have lived, died and have been buried in Uganda.

    Mwenda gave an example of Ritah Kanya, a news anchor with NTV Uganda and wife to senior investigative journalist Raymond Mujuni who is currently stateless because both her National Identity card and passports were canceled at the Immigration over her Rwandan roots.

    He insisted that Kanya was born in Uganda in Kisoro district and his grandfather was a sub county chief, so it is wrong to declare her stateless.

    He pleaded with President Museveni to intervene in the matter because National Unity Platform(NUP) supporters are also threatening Banyarwanda that when they take power, they will be sent back to their country.

    Land forces commander and also first son, Lt. Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba led the Uganda-Rwanda negotiations which resulted in the reopening of the Katuna border which was closed by president Kagame in 2017 on allegations of mistreating Rwandese in Uganda.

    Lt. Gen. Muhoozi revealed through twitter that very soon, he is going to travel to Rwanda to meet his loving uncle.

    Efforts to reach Simon Peter Mundeyi, the immigration spokesperson, were fruitless because his known phone numbers were not going through.

     

    By Sengooba Alirabaki

    Comments

    Continue Reading

    like us

    TRENDING

    theGrapevine is a subsidiary of Newco Publications Limited, a Ugandan multimedia group.
    We keep you posted on the latest from Uganda and the World. COPYRIGHT © 2022
    P.O Box 5511, Kampala - Uganda Tel: +256-752 227640 Email: info@thegrapevine.co.ug
    theGrapevine is licenced by Uganda Communications Commission (UCC)