Thursday, May 21, 2026
Home Blog Page 12

BLOODSHED ON LAKE KYOGA: Fishing dispute turns violent at Budipa Landing Site in Buyende following raid from Teso fishermen

Editorial
-
0
BLOODSHED ON LAKE KYOGA: Fishing dispute turns violent at Budipa Landing Site in Buyende following raid from Teso fishermen

By Ali Lukomo

Tension flared at Budipa landing site in Irundu Sub-county, Buyende District, following a violent clash between local fishermen and alleged invaders from the Teso sub-region over fishing territory and the use of illegal fishing gear.

Residents said more than 20 boats carrying fishermen from Teso crossed into Budipa waters on Lake Kyoga and allegedly began fishing using kokota, a prohibited fishing method. The intrusion reportedly angered the local fishing community, leading to a confrontation that left several people injured.

According to community members, nine of the alleged invaders were apprehended by locals and later handed over to police. The injured were admitted to various health centres in Irundu Sub-county for treatment.

Umar Mwase, a youth leader and fisherman at Budipa landing site, condemned the use of illegal fishing gear and called for urgent intervention by security agencies.

“For years, we have never used kokota on this lake. We will not allow people from Teso and Bulamoji to come here with illegal fishing tools,” Mwase said. “We are determined to protect this lake, even if it costs us our lives.”

Mwase claimed that the invaders initiated the violence, hacking several local fishermen during the clash. He appealed to local leaders, police, and the military to intervene and safeguard the community.

Confirming the incident, Julius Bwanga, the Gombolola Internal Security Officer (GISO) for Irundu, said the confrontation arose from a dispute over fishing territory.

“The fishermen in Budipa felt threatened when their counterparts from Teso encroached on their waters using illegal fishing gears such as kokota,” Bwanga explained. “When they attempted to stop the illegal activity, they were attacked, resulting in injuries on both sides.”

Bwanga added that nine suspects are currently being held at Irundu Police Station as investigations continue. He strongly condemned the use of illegal fishing methods on Lake Kyoga.

The Officer in Charge of Irundu Police Station, ASP Rogers Magabula, said the Beach Management Unit (BMU) at Budipa intervened promptly when the fighting broke out.

“An unknown number of fishermen crossed from Serere District in the Teso sub-region and started fishing in Budipa waters using illegal gear, which angered the local fishermen and led to the fight,” Magabula said in a telephone interview.

He further revealed that during the chaos, the invading fishermen reportedly fled with an engine boat belonging to a Budipa fisherman.

“The BMU team managed to arrest nine suspects, who are now in our custody. We are working with police in Serere District to recover the stolen engine boat,” Magabula added.

Authorities have called for calm as investigations continue, warning against illegal fishing practices that threaten both livelihoods and peace on Lake Kyoga.

Kokota nets have been classified as illegal under the Fisheries Act of 2019 because they cause massive by‑catch and threaten the lake’s biodiversity. The Ministry of Water and Environment has repeatedly warned fishing communities that the use of such gear will result in seizure of equipment and prosecution.

The incident underscores the fragile balance between livelihood needs and sustainable resource management on Lake Kyoga, a critical source of food and income for thousands of Ugandans. As the district grapples with the fallout, the call for decisive action against illegal fishing methods is likely to echo in the days ahead.

MAGOGO vs MULILIRE: An MP race fight fueled by a blind love for candidates, voters’ ignorance and an era of election violence

Editorial
-
0
MAGOGO vs MULILIRE: An MP race fight fueled by a blind love for candidates, voters’ ignorance and an era of election violence

For many supporters of Budiope East Member of Parliament Eng. Moses Magogo, Christmas came early this year. Just days into the festive season, the Electoral Commission annulled the parliamentary nomination of his strongest challenger, Mulilire Daniel, a decision that has since plunged the Buyende District constituency into political uncertainty, anger, and violence.

The ruling, delivered under case MIN. COMP 058/2025, followed a complaint by a voter, Yeko Ibrahim, who challenged Mulilire’s eligibility on technical grounds. According to the complaint, Mulilire failed to present proof of resignation from government service at the time of his nomination, a legal requirement under Section 4(4)(a) of the Parliamentary Elections Act.

Electoral Commission Chairperson Justice Simon Mugenyi Byabakama agreed, nullifying Mulilire’s nomination and overturning the Returning Officer’s earlier decision to clear him to contest. Legally sound or not, the ruling landed heavily on an already tense political landscape.

In Budiope East, politics is never just about paperwork.

A Constituency with a Long Memory

Mulilire’s rise in the race has been swift. A political newcomer, he gained momentum after Geoffrey Dhamuzungu, former MP and longtime rival of Magogo, bowed out following a bruising and violent NRM primary contest earlier this year. Dhamuzungu’s supporters, disillusioned but politically restless, are widely believed to have regrouped around Mulilire.

That realignment altered the political equation in a constituency where grudges run deep and elections are fiercely contested. Mulilire’s disqualification therefore did not simply remove a candidate; it disrupted an emerging political force.

Allegations, Suspicion, and the Shadow of Power

Almost immediately, murmurs of bias spread across the constituency. Some voters accused the Electoral Commission of acting under political influence, pointing to the fact that Speaker of Parliament Anita Among, wife to Magogo, is one of the most powerful figures in government. While no evidence has been presented to substantiate the claims, the perception alone has fueled resentment and distrust among sections of the electorate.

Mulilire has since taken the matter to court, with a hearing set for 30 December 2025. The court’s ruling, expected within days after the hearing, will likely determine whether the political temperature cools, or further escalates.

When Politics Turns Violent

The consequences of the Commission’s decision were felt almost immediately on the ground.

On 26 December 2025, according to police, violence broke out at Miru Trading Centre in Kagulu Sub-county. According to police, supporters of both Magogo and Mulilire clashed following news of Mulilire’s disqualification. The unrest quickly spilled into nearby Kasokoso and Bumpanga villages, where improvised shrines were torched and several people injured.

By the following day, retaliatory attacks had displaced residents, forcing families to flee their homes in fear.

Busoga North Police spokesperson Samson Lubega confirmed that security forces were swiftly deployed, including the FFU Zonal Commander and the Buyende District Police Commander. Three suspects have since been arrested, statements recorded from victims, and patrols intensified across the affected areas.

Beyond enforcement, police have turned to community policing and dialogue in a bid to calm tempers in a constituency where emotions are running high.

An Election Still in the Balance

As the festive season fades, Budiope East remains on edge. At the heart of the crisis lies a familiar Ugandan dilemma: where the letter of the law collides with political loyalty, power, and public perception.

Whether the courts will reinstate Mulilire, or affirm his disqualification, remains to be seen. What is clear, however, is that the contest for Budiope East has already left blood spilled long before ballots are cast.

TOUGH JOB AHEAD: Uganda Cranes left frustrated after late penalty miss seals 1–1 draw with Tanzania in AFCON 2025 thriller

Editorial
-
0
TOUGH JOB AHEAD: Uganda Cranes left frustrated after late penalty miss seals 1–1 draw with Tanzania in AFCON 2025 thriller

The Uganda Cranes saw their hopes of a crucial first win at the TotalEnergies Africa Cup of Nations 2025 slip away in heartbreak fashion, as a missed penalty in stoppage time left them sharing points with regional rivals Tanzania in a rain-soaked 1–1 draw in Group C.

In a tense and dramatic encounter at Al Medina Stadium, the Cranes fought back from behind to level the score, only to be denied all three points when Allan Okello sent a late penalty over the crossbar in the dying moments of added time.

Tanzania struck first in the 59th minute after a controversial handball decision against Baba Alhassan inside the box. Simon Msuva stepped up confidently and converted from the spot, sending goalkeeper Ivan Runge the wrong way to put the Taifa Stars ahead in front of a passionate East African diaspora crowd.

However, Uganda responded with renewed vigor. Head coach Paul Joseph Put made decisive substitutions, introducing Denis Omedi and powerhouse striker Uche Ikpeazu, who immediately changed the complexion of the game.

The tactical shift paid off in the 80th minute when Omedi, cutting in from the left flank, delivered a pinpoint cross into the box. Ikpeazu, rising above the Tanzanian defense, powered a header past goalkeeper Asuman Lubanza to send the Ugandan faithful into raptures and level the score.

With momentum swinging in their favor, Uganda continued to press and were awarded a golden opportunity in the sixth minute of stoppage time. James Bogere was brought down inside the penalty area after a well-timed run and cross, prompting a penalty call.

But the moment proved too much for Okello, who struck the ball high over the bar, sparking wild celebrations from the Tanzanian bench and leaving the Cranes crestfallen.

Despite dominating possession and creating more clear-cut chances — including Rogers Mato’s first-half header that cannoned off the crossbar — Uganda could not convert their superiority into a winner.

Speaking after the match, an emotional but composed Coach Paul Put expressed his belief that his side deserved more. “I think we didn’t deserve a draw. I think we had more opportunities. If you look at ball possession, we had more of it. We also missed a penalty, which is very painful — but that is part of football,” Put said.

He emphasized the need for resilience, particularly given the team’s young profile and the long-term goal of preparing for the 2027 AFCON, which Uganda will co-host.

“We have a very young team, so my responsibility is also to build a team for 2027. I spoke to the players and told them we need to keep the belief. You have to play until the last whistle. Yes, we are disappointed — but we need to reset the mindset and prepare for the match against Nigeria, which we know will not be easy.”

The result leaves Group C wide open heading into the final round of fixtures. Uganda sits mid-table with one point, behind Nigeria and Tanzania on goal difference, while all four teams in the group remain in contention for the knockout stages.

The Cranes’ next match — a must-win clash against group favorites Nigeria — will take place in three days’ time and could determine their fate in the tournament. A victory would reignite their progression hopes, while a loss or draw is likely to spell an early exit.

EAST AFRICA DERBY: Uganda Cranes look to rebound against Tanzania’s Taifa Stars after AFCON opening defeat to Tunisia

Editorial
-
0
EAST AFRICA DERBY: Uganda Cranes look to rebound against Tanzania’s Taifa Stars after AFCON opening defeat to Tunisia

The Uganda Cranes’ journey at the TotalEnergies CAF Africa Cup of Nations 2025 got off to a rocky start with a 3-1 defeat to Tunisia in their Group C opener at the Prince Moulay Abdellah Stadium in Rabat.

Despite a spirited second-half resurgence, Uganda were unable to overcome a determined Tunisian side, leaving fans across the nation crestfallen.

Back home, social media and sports forums erupted with frustration, as passionate supporters expressed their disappointment over the team’s underwhelming first-half performance.

Introduced late in the match, forward Allan Okello made an immediate impact, orchestrating Uganda’s lone goal through substitute Dennis Omedi in the 78th minute.

Omedi, also brought on in the second half, capitalized on Okello’s intelligent through-ball to slot past the Tunisian keeper, giving Ugandan fans something to cheer about.

Though disappointed, the Cranes are refusing to dwell on the loss. Both players and management are focusing squarely on the next challenge — a crucial East African derby against regional rivals Tanzania, set for Saturday, December 27, 2025, at 8:30 PM (EAT), at the same Rabat venue.

Speaking at a pre-match press conference, forward Allan Okello acknowledged the setback but remained optimistic.

“We didn’t start the way we wanted, but it is a tournament and we know what we need to do right to get a good result,” said Okello, who has been in fine club form recently but was left on the bench for the Tunisia clash.

Head coach Paul Put echoed that sentiment, praising his team’s improved intensity in the second half against Tunisia.

“The reaction in the second half was encouraging. We raised our aggression and started to create chances. This is the level we must start with from the first whistle in the next game,” Put emphasized.

With pressure mounting, the Belgian tactician urged his players to show resilience ahead of the Tanzania showdown.

“We have to stand up, we have to believe, and give a good performance to make everybody in Uganda happy,” Put declared. “It’s now about character. We must respond with pride and determination.”

The upcoming clash with Tanzania is more than just regional bragging rights — it’s a must-win encounter if Uganda hopes to keep their knockout stage dreams alive.

The two East African nations have a long-standing football rivalry, and with both teams likely starting from the same point after their opening matches, the stakes couldn’t be higher.

Kickoff for the Uganda vs Tanzania match is scheduled for 8:30 PM (EAT) on Saturday, December 27, 2025.

TOOLS OF DEMOCRACY: Electoral Commission receives parliamentary ballot papers ahead of 2026 general elections

Editorial
-
0
TOOLS OF DEMOCRACY: Electoral Commission receives parliamentary ballot papers ahead of 2026 general elections

The Electoral Commission (EC), led by Chairperson Justice Byabakama Mugenyi Simon, on the night of 25 December 2025 received a consignment of ballot papers for Directly Elected Members of Parliament at Entebbe International Airport, marking a key milestone in preparations for the 2026 General Elections.

The latest delivery follows the arrival of Presidential ballot papers on 24 December 2025. The consignment was received in the presence of key stakeholders, including representatives of presidential candidates, political parties, accredited election observers, and members of the media. The Electoral Commission says the open handling of election materials reflects its commitment to transparency, accountability, and public confidence in the electoral process.

According to the Commission, the timely arrival of sensitive electoral materials is intended to allow adequate time for verification, storage, and distribution to polling stations across the country ahead of voting day.

Ugandans are scheduled to go to the polls on 15 January 2026 to participate in the Presidential and Parliamentary Elections, during which voters will elect a President and their respective Members of Parliament.

The Electoral Commission has called upon all eligible voters to turn out in large numbers and exercise their constitutional right to vote, while urging political actors and the general public to maintain peace throughout the electoral period as the country prepares for another national democratic exercise.

INTERVIEW: Waiswa Baluye gives reasons why Ugandans still believe Yoweri Kaguta Museveni should continue as President of Uganda

Editorial
-
0
INTERVIEW: Waiswa Baluye gives reasons why Ugandans still believe Yoweri Kaguta Museveni should continue as President of Uganda

As Uganda continues to debate the legacy of President Yoweri Museveni, whose leadership has spanned nearly four decades, public opinion remains deeply divided. While critics point to concerns over democratic erosion and political repression, some Ugandans still credit Museveni with transforming a war-torn nation into a relatively stable economic and regional power.

In a recent interview, Michael Waiswa Baluye, the Office of the National Chairman (ONC) coordinator for Buyende district and long-time supporter of the National Resistance Movement (NRM), shared his perspective on why he believes President Museveni’s long tenure has been beneficial for Uganda.

President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni has been in power since 1986. What do you see as his greatest achievement?

That’s easy – relative peace and stability. Before 1986, Uganda was a country ravaged by coups, dictatorships, and civil conflict. From Idi Amin to Milton Obote’s second regime, we saw endless cycles of bloodshed.

When President Museveni’s National Resistance Army (NRA) took power, they didn’t just win a war; they brought an ideology of disciplined governance. For nearly 40 years, we’ve not had a full-scale civil war. That’s a monumental shift, and it cannot be dismissed.

Critics argue that stability has come at the cost of democracy. How do you respond?

I understand the concern, especially among the youth. But let’s be honest, Uganda today is not perfect, but it is functional. President Museveni brought experience and continuity.

When you have a leader who has navigated the Cold War, regional conflicts, terrorism, and global economic crises, that institutional memory is invaluable. We don’t need abrupt changes that could destabilise the system. Leadership isn’t a popularity contest; it’s about who can steer the ship through storms.

How do experience and continuity factor into this support?

President Museveni’s long tenure is seen by us supporters as an advantage. We believe his experience enables him to manage regional security threats, diplomacy, and internal governance with fewer disruptions than a sudden leadership transition might cause.

Let’s talk about development. What has changed under President Museveni’s leadership?

Look at the roads. I remember travelling across the country in the 1980s and 1990s; it took days and weeks on terrible roads. Today? It’s under hours on paved highways. The same goes for electricity; access has more than tripled in the last two decades. Urban centres like Jinja, Gulu, and Arua are growing fast.

We now have industrial parks, new schools, and better hospitals. This didn’t happen by accident. It happened because of long-term planning. You can’t implement infrastructure projects over five-year election cycles and expect results. President Museveni’s longevity enabled consistency.

Some people say Uganda’s influence in the region has grown. Do you agree?

Absolutely. President Museveni is respected across Africa, not just as a leader, but as a strategic thinker. Uganda has contributed troops to AMISOM in Somalia, played a key role in mediating conflicts in South Sudan and the DRC, and remains a cornerstone of East African regional security.

That gives Uganda a voice on the global stage. We’re no longer seen as a backwater state; we’re a country that matters. And much of that diplomatic capital comes from President Museveni’s personal involvement and experience.

What about internal security? The LRA insurgency, for example, caused immense suffering.

President Museveni’s government is credited by us supporters for defeating or weakening insurgent groups such as the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and for participating in regional and international efforts against extremist groups, which we say has improved national and regional security.

True—the LRA was a nightmare, especially in the North. But under President Museveni’s direction, the UPDF eventually degraded Joseph Kony’s forces to the point where they’re no longer a national threat. We also see Uganda playing active roles in countering Al-Shabaab and other extremist groups.

The security apparatus isn’t perfect, but it’s far more capable than it was in the 1980s. Ugandans today can travel, do business, and live without fear of rebel invasions or coups. That peace is priceless.

President Museveni is often seen as a Pan-Africanist. How important is that for a modern Uganda?

Very important. President Yoweri Museveni is often praised for advocating Pan-Africanism, African self-determination, and regional integration. We see him as a leader who resists excessive foreign political pressure and promotes African-led solutions.

He’s one of the few African leaders who consistently speaks out against foreign interference. Whether it’s rejecting conditional aid or advocating for regional integration through the African Continental Free Trade Area, he pushes for African self-determination.

He stood with Mandela, supported liberation movements, and still believes that Africa must solve its problems without Western imposition. That message resonates with many of us who want dignity and sovereignty.

How do supporters assess social and economic reforms under his leadership?

We point to gradual reforms in education, health, and the economy. Programmes such as Universal Primary Education (UPE), expansion of health services, and economic liberalisation are cited as milestones achieved during his presidency.

Universal primary education was revolutionary. Millions of children who would have never seen a classroom are now literate. We’ve expanded healthcare access, fought HIV/AIDS aggressively, and made strides in maternal health.

Economic liberalisation opened doors for private sector growth. Yes, youth unemployment remains a problem, and corruption is a challenge—but progress has been made. You can’t reform a broken system overnight.

Some fear that after President Museveni, Uganda might descend into chaos. Is that a legitimate concern?

A key concern among President Yoweri Museveni’s supporters is the fear that abrupt political change could trigger instability, unrest, or economic uncertainty. For us, continuity is seen as less risky than an untested transition.

We’ve had one dominant political figure for nearly four decades. A sudden vacuum could trigger power struggles. I’m not saying President Yoweri Museveni should rule forever, but a managed, peaceful transition is essential. The alternative? We risk repeating the chaos of the 1970s. Stability must come first, even as we push for reform.

What is the broader lesson for citizens, especially young people?

In a democracy, it is healthy for citizens to listen to multiple perspectives, critically examine evidence, and form independent opinions. Understanding why we support President Museveni does not require agreement—but it helps enrich national dialogue.

EXPLAINED: The difference between riot and protest – the case of Uganda

Editorial
-
0
EXPLAINED: The difference between riot and protest – the case of Uganda

By Oweyegha-Afunaduula

I don’t usually argue with my children whose ages range from 35 to 54. We exchange ideas. I occasionally I continue reaching them and they continue learning in an andragogical way, in which we are all learners and teachers. However, the other day an exchange between one of my sons and myself turned into a healthy argument, but I don’t remember convincing each other on the difference between a riot and protest

My argument was that a protest is not the same as a riot. I was drawing from my experience at Makerere University in the late 1990s when, as Secretary General of the Makerere University Academic a staff Association (MUASA) I would organise sit down protests, together with my Chairman, Dr Moses  Mukiibi and other members of the MUASA Committee, which at one time included Mrs Mary Okurut who was Vice-Chairman before she was snatched away by President Tibuhaburwa Museveni to serve in his government as a Minister.

Our protests arose whenever the academic staff failed to reach agreement with the university administration, university Council on how to resolve our grievances. Those days talking and listening were balanced, but when listening resulted in no compromise academic staff had no choice but to protest by withdrawing their academic tools and engaging in sit-down protest, sometimes called sit-down strikes.

The Government would send in spies and security operatives, but they would never start violence, which is the case today. One time, in 1997, we sustained one of our protests for 28 days. However, government, in collusion with University administration and University Council, was able to undermine the protest by dividing MUASA into two -professors and non- professors, and taking two of the professors – Prof. Nsibambi  and Prof. Kidhu Makubuya – away to serve in his government. There was no physical state violence on the academic staff, although the unity and integrity of MUASA was violated and harmed.

It has never been the same since then. Academic staff are not as free and independent minded as they were then. They are filled with fear and silence is their tool of protection since every office has been captured by the State, there by distorting academic freedom. Intellectual discourse is almost absent in the academia. Protest as as a show of disillusionment, discontented and dissent is almost erased or if it takes place it is not effective. It is of course worse in private universities.

My son, said he did not see any difference between riots and protests. He said that ever since he came of age, he has seen that when people and institutions in Uganda stage protests they almost without contradiction develop into riots. People’s businesses are looted and some people are killed. Although I tried to explain to him that protests develop into riots when others that have nothing to do with them infiltrate the protests, and when government applies force to quell them, and also infiltrates then, he was not convinced. He even added that under those circumstances he cannot support protests. I imagined there are many elites who think like my son about protests. Besides, my son said, “Right now I have to work to make money. Whenever there are protests it means I don’t work and earn, and businesses will close”.

Even if I tried to explain that if intruders, including government security organs, did not infiltrate protests,they would be peaceful he was not convinced.

Yet government has made “protecting businesses” the cornerstone of quelling any kind of protest, despite the fact that the Uganda Constitution 1995 protects protests constitutionally. With this stance of the government, protests and riots are indistinguishable. However, when protest are by National Resistance Movement (NRM) or pro-NRM Institutions, they are extremely peaceful. The same is true if political rallies are staged by NRM people.

This implies that the governance of Uganda is apartheid-like as if the country was invaded, conquered and occupied. Ugandans are not allowed to dissent or display any discontent but are driven to subscribe to their situation as if it is normal; negotiated between the rulers and the people.

The truth is that most governments  are fearful of gatherings of any kind because their “captors” believe the gatherings can easily result in challenge, even change, of power. The citizens are collectively perceived as enemy number one of the State, especially in Africa, where governments frequently arm themselves to the teeth against the citizens. In Uganda, the citizens are simultaneously being denationalised and decitizenised!

But what really is the difference between a riot and a protest?

Therefore, in Uganda the rulers disagree with the Constitution and cast riot and protest as one and the same to control the thinking, movements and actions of the citizens so that there is no threat to power. However, in this article I take riot and protest as different phenomena.

Generally speaking a protest is usually organised public demonstration of disapproval of a law, policy, strategy, idea, actionor state of affairs that harms the public interest. If there was no herding of Ugandans, things like corruption, building roads in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) or the UPDF Act 2025 would have evoked public demonstrations.

I agree with the definition of “riot” by the US government that “a riot is a disturbance of the peace by an assemblage of usually three of more people acting with a common purpose and in tumultuous manner to the terror of the public (see also Merriam’s Dictionary of Law).

As I have explained elsewhere in this article the boundary between riot and protest is erased  by the vested actions of the government and others in pursuit of their interests that have nothing to do with the intent and purpose of the protest. This explains why well-intentioned protests are violated a and they relapse into riots.

Otherwise a protest becomes a riot when those who organised it lose control, either to some errant overzealous  participants or to government security organs ordered from above to frustrate the demonstration,the same way the rallies of the Opposition are in the interest of power.

Once demonstrations (protests) are discouraged, a government goes in to claim that the citizens are happy with what it is doing. It draws the public and international community attention away from its failures, such as inability to provide social goods and services and to assure the people of minimum wage, humanising salaries, employment, humanising prices for crops, access to their natural resources, protection of their natural belonging and identity,  democracy, freedom, justice, equity, development, transformation and progress.

Let me end the article by giving examples of protests that were violently suppressed by the colonial government and the neocolonial NRM regime in Uganda in the fashion of a country invaded, conquered and occupied without the will of the people.

*Mabira Rainforest protest (2007): Protests against the government’s decision to give away 7100 hectares of the Mabira Rain Forest to SCOL, a sugar company,  turned violent, with police using tear gas and live bullets to disperse protesters.

* April 1949 Buganda Kingdom riots: Protests in Buganda Kingdom demanding democracy and resignation of the Katikkiro (prime minister) Kawalya’s government turned violent, resulting in loss of lives and property.

*July 2024 anti-corruption protests: Protests against alleged graft by elected leaders were met with police brutality, with over 104 people arrested and charged with public order offences.

*July 23, 2024 March to Parliament protest: Anti-corruption demonstrations were violently dispersed by police, with reports of arrests, intimidation, and sexual assault of protesters.

 *2020 protests*: Protests against the arrest of opposition leader, Bobi Wine, resulted in the deaths of at least 54 people in my district, Luuka District, and many more disappearances.

*Kabaka Riots (2009): Protests triggered by the government’s ban on the Buganda King, Ronald Muwenda Mutebi, from visiting Kayings, resulted in fatalities,  injuries and arrests.

 *Walk to Work protest (2011): Protests led by opposition leader Kizza Besigye against rising costs of living were met with police brutality.Kizza Besigye was brutally assaulted

*Togikwatako campaign (2017): Protests against the amendment of the Constitution were violently suppressed by police.

These protests highlight the ongoing struggles for democracy,, freedom, justice, human rights, and accountability in Uganda.

They have helped the government to generate a lot of fear and silence in the country, which are key of its governance and leadership. Indeed fear and silence have also characterised elections since 1996 when President Tibuhaburwa Museveni offered himself for elections. During the forth coming elections we have seen how Bobi Wine, a presidential candidate, has been treated to doses of state-inspired violence., confirming that however many times elections will be held the ballot paper cannot change government because the country is under siege – invaded, conquered and occupied.

For God and My Country.

RIDE FOR RICHES: 66 Riders eye new motorcycles up for grabs at MTN Busoga masaza cycling finale 2025

Musa Kikuuno
-
0
RIDE FOR RICHES: 66 Riders eye new motorcycles up for grabs at MTN Busoga masaza cycling finale 2025

A total of 66 cyclists have qualified for the MTN Busoga Masaza Cycling Championship 2025 grand finale following competitive county-level qualifiers held across Busoga between December 20 and December 24, 2025. The qualifiers produced 33 riders in the Mountain Sports Bike category and 33 in the Tippa category.

The grand finale will be held on Saturday, January 3, 2026, featuring the Tippa and Mountain Sports Bike categories.

Mountain Sports Bike Category

The Mountain Sports Bike category attracted stiff competition across all counties. In Bunha County, Farmer Shafik, Yanga Salaka and Ochwe Zevilini secured qualification after finishing in the top three, underlining Bunha’s growing strength in cycling.

Other counties also delivered strong contenders. Bunhole–Bunanhumba County produced Lukakamwa Nelson, Kakaire Tegike and Masaba Ben, while Kigulu County was represented by Kazimingi Lukumani, Odoto John and Muwanguzi Silver.

From Bukooli County, Malinzi Sam, Ogutu Ronald and Bogere Atanansi advanced, as Luuka County sent Magemeso Mensulamu, Kiwanuka Musilim and Muwereza Lawrence. Bulamogi County qualifiers were Dakasi Akim, Younger Sadam and Isabirye Latifu.

Butembe County produced Lobo Micheal, Kapio Augustine and Wavamuno Muzamiru, while Bugabula County qualifiers were Bamutaze Wycliffe, Kimbugwe Mathias and Badigaye Dauda. The Mountain Sports Bike list was completed by Bukono County’s Waiswa Mulongo, Omunyelupa Isma and Munyangala Falasiko, Bugweri County’s Kasadha Hajji, Mutengu Rajawe and Mwesigwa Tonny, and Busiki County’s Bazale Bosco, Kabyanzo Kasima and Ruzira Atoni.

Reigning Mountain Sports Bike champion Odoto John (Kigulu) will be aiming to defend his crown at the grand finale.

Tippa Category

In the Tippa category, Bunha County qualifiers were Kigenyi Hussein, Kakaire Meni and Basalirwa Japhari, who finished in the top three to book their places at the grand finale.

From Bunhole–Bunanhumba County, Ilaaka Yoweri, Waiswa Ivan and Wandalo Ronald qualified, while Kigulu County was represented by Magumba Ashiraf, Teyebaka Kenneth and Majidu Kyawa.

Bukooli County sent through defending champion Luganda Tiffu, Ngodobe Brian Koowa and Friday James, as Luuka County was represented by Musitwa Andrew, Nassan Junior and Kawoma Micheal. Bulamogi County qualifiers included Naika Robert, Nabikamba Daniel and Mukisa Amos.

Butembe County produced Mugooda Dominic, Wanduuba Henry and Nsuube Jude, while Bugabula County qualifiers were Wakibi Alex, Mugura Yasin and Mulondo Ayubu. The Tippa category was completed by Bukono County’s Cosma Kibulaku, Wadambisya Wilson and Mugalya Malesi, Bugweri County’s Kasango Livingston, Tazindula Paul and Kiirya Derrick, and Busiki County’s Mutabuza Denesi, Egesa Ivan and Bedi Ligani.

Defending Tippa champion Luganda Tiffu (Bukooli) returns as one of the favourites.

Prizes and Race Details

Winners in each category will take home attractive prizes, with the overall winner riding away on a brand-new motorcycle. The second-placed rider will earn Shs 2 million, third place Shs 1 million, fourth Shs 500,000, and fifth Shs 300,000.

In addition, every rider who completes the race but finishes outside the top five positions will receive Shs 50,000, a move organisers say is intended to motivate participation and reward effort.

Details regarding the course and distance for the grand finale will be communicated in due course.

Held under the theme “Abasaadha N’empango Mukulwanisa Ekifuna Mabuunda Mubaghaala Abato,” the championship continues to promote unity, discipline and youth empowerment through sport as Busoga counts down to the January 3 showdown.

FIRST CONSIGNMENT: Presidential ballot papers arrive ahead of January 2026 elections

Baz Waiswa
-
0
FIRST CONSIGNMENT: Presidential ballot papers arrive ahead of January 2026 elections

The Electoral Commission (EC) has announced the arrival of the first consignment of presidential ballot papers ahead of the upcoming elections scheduled for 15th January 2026. The announcement was made late Wednesday night via the Commission’s social media platforms.

The ballot papers arrived at Entebbe International Airport, according to the EC’s brief post on X (formerly Twitter). No further details about the consignment were provided.

Ugandans will go to the polls on 15th January 2026 to elect the President, directly-elected Members of Parliament, and District Woman Representatives.

The presidential race features incumbent Yoweri Tibuhaburwa Kaguta Museveni of the National Resistance Movement (NRM), Robert Kyagulanyi Ssentamu of the National Unity Platform (NUP), Mubarak Munyagwa Serunga of the Common Man’s Party (CMP), and Frank Burira Kavinga of the Revolutionary People’s Party (RPP). Other candidates include Robert Kasibante of the National Peasants’ Party, Elton Joseph Mabiriizi of the Conservative Party, James Nathan Nandala Mafabi of the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC), and Gregory Mugisha Mutu Oyera of the Alliance for National Transformation (ANT).

Recently, Justice Brabakama Mugenyi Simon, Chairperson of the Electoral Commission, reminded candidates, their agents, election observers, and the general public to strictly observe the respective voting dates and procedures.

The arrival of the ballot papers marks a key milestone in the preparations for what is expected to be a closely watched presidential and parliamentary election.

PARADOX OF POWER: 40 years of Museveni’s rule and Uganda’s governance challenges

Editorial
-
0
PARADOX OF POWER: 40 years of Museveni’s rule and Uganda’s governance challenges

By Oweyegh-Afunaduula

 This article is a Christmas gift to the present and future generations of Ugandans who curiously wonder, and will wonder, about the reasons why President Tibuhaburwa Museveni ruled Uganda for 40 years without interruption, unlike Apollo Milton Obote, who ruled Uganda twice but with the interruption of Idi Amin’s coup d’état and Tibuhaburwa Museveni’s guerrilla war in the bushes of Luwero.

If any living Ugandans are not ready to think, rethink, think critically, reason critically and consider an alternative analysis and narrative of Uganda’s governance under President Tibuhaburwa Museveni, then this article is not for this generation but future generations of Ugandans who will be asking, “How and why did we allow ourselves to be governed the way we were?”

I know some Ugandans believe the President has ruled for long because we are docile, while others believe he is popular and people give him votes. Some believe he is a strong leader who knows how to manage the armed forces. Some believe Uganda is better off with President Tibuhaburwa Museveni than with another person as president because they don’t see any difference between growth, which he cites as economic progress, and development, which he talks about in a cursory manner. Because many Ugandans can’t think beyond President Tibuhaburwa Museveni, this article is not for them. They will entertain any mention that alternatives exist or that an alternative to Uganda can have effective leadership and effective governance beyond President Tibuhaburwa Museveni. Many Ugandans stuck with President Tibuhaburwa Museveni see him as the best thing that happened to Uganda and cannot detect any faultlines in his leadership and governance. They take him as a faultless god whom they want to be the first and last ruler of Uganda.

President Tibuhaburwa Museveni recently told the people of Lwengo District that he was in the Democratic Party (DP) in 1960, the year I was in Primary 4 (and am nearly 77). In 1960 I was nearly 11 years old.  Assuming the president was 20 or 21 years old then, how old is he now? Whatever his true age, he has had a continuous presence on Uganda’s political landscape, waging a guerrilla war against Idi Amin in the 1970s. Participating in the formation of what was called the Uganda National Liberation Front (UNLF) government in 1979; seeking to be President of Uganda in the 1980 elections; waging a guerrilla war against Apollo Milton Obote (1981-1985) and the Tito Okello Military Junta (1985), ultimately capturing the instruments of power on 25 January 1986.

In 2026, President Tibuhaburwa Museveni will mark 40 years in power in Uganda, raising questions about the country’s governance trajectory. Despite progress in economic growth and stability, challenges persist. Uganda’s governance struggles stem from institutional weaknesses, limited accountability, and restricted civic space. Strengthening transparency, protecting rights, and fostering citizen engagement are key to breaking this cycle of good governance failure in Uganda. He has continuously ruled Uganda since then for 40 years, 30 years less than the period the British colonialists ruled the country. If the colonialists invaded, conquered and occupied Uganda, there is a growing school of thought which holds that President Tibuhaburwa Museveni’s ruling clique also invaded, conquered and occupied Uganda because most of its members had exogenous roots in Rwanda and Mulenge in the DRC.

The question persists: what is the explanation of President Tibuhaburwa Museveni’s long stay in power even when he said the problem of Africa is leaders who overstay in power?

President Museveni’s nearly 40-year rule in Uganda can be attributed to a combination of factors. It is crucial that every Ugandan understand the factors that have enabled President Tibuhaburwa Museveni’s long tenure if Uganda’s future generations are to ensure effective leadership, governance and institutional strength during their time when virtually all of us will have transited to the decomposer chain and be living only spiritually. For lack of time and space, let me list them with some explanatory notes:

*Deception and Deceptive Democracy: President Tibuhaburwa Museveni has been able to break the cycle of democracy through lies, deception and disinformation. When he says no one knows democracy more than him, he means deceptive democracy: holding regular elections while subverting democracy by using laws, policies and the military and police.

*Strategic Politics: Tibuhaburwa Museveni has effectively managed Uganda’s complex political landscape, leveraging the country’s post-conflict situation to consolidate power.

*Economic Reforms: He has implemented economic reforms, which have driven growth, not development, making Uganda one of Africa’s fastest-growing economies.

*Military Support: He has forged strong ties with the military, which has helped maintain stability and ensured loyalty. Besides, he has ensured that the strong linkage which existed between NRM and NRA in the bushes of Luwero is maintained between NRM and UPDF.

*Weak Opposition: He has created a sociopolitical spectrum with fragmented opposition unable to unite and struggle together to mount a credible challenge to his rule. Then he repeatedly tells Ugandans that the Opposition is useless and cannot perform when he is the reason why the Opposition is in a state of helplessness.

*International Support: Uganda’s strategic location and Tibuhaburwa Museveni’s diplomatic skills and deceptive stance have secured him international backing, to the chagrin of indigenous Ugandans in general and the Opposition in particular.

*Constitutional Amendments: Changes to term limits and age restrictions have allowed Museveni to extend his rule and act like a life president despite holding regular elections. The elections are just to impart legitimacy to his regime, not a vehicle for ensuring Ugandans of democracy, freedom and justice, which he promised them when he was reigning mayhem in the Luwero Triangle and in his book, Sowing The Mustard Seed: The Struggle for Freedom and Democracy”.

*Sycophancy and Patronage: He has sown a culture of sycophancy and patronage, which has created a network of loyalists and beneficiaries dependent on his rule and public money, denying Ugandans public services such as quality education, quality health and adequate energy. 

Why This Works:

These factors have combined to create a system where President Tibuhaburwa Museveni’s personalised leadership is deeply entrenched, making it challenging for alternative voices and/or leaders to emerge. If alternative leaders emerge, his now formidable propaganda machine and almost personalised security forces are unleashed on them to crash their resolve, spirit and mind and create the impression that the President is unchallengeable, indispensable and a strong leader, the only one who can manage the security of the country and people. 

Implications

For future generations, prioritising institutional strength, merit-based leadership, and accountability can help ensure effective governance and prevent the perpetuation of sycophancy and authoritarianism, which currently dominate President Tibuhaburwa Museveni’s leadership and governance. Strengthening institutions and promoting critical thinking can help mitigate the risks associated with long-term rule and ensure Uganda’s development, which has been sacrificed for growth so hyped by international capital. 

Leadership

As I have frequently stated, behind every problem is the problem of leadership. This means that many problems are either leadership-based or generated by leadership. In the case of leadership, the problems arise when the leaders think, believe and are convinced they are so indispensable that other leaders cannot displace them. They decide ways and means to ensure that they retain power at whatever cost, which may be public money, human life or both.

Leadership plays, or should play, a huge role in Uganda’s development. Effective leadership can drive progress, while poor leadership can hinder it. This is the case when leadership concentrates on acquiring weapons to control the movements and actions of the citizens instead of providing public services for or to the people.

In Uganda’s case, President Tibuhaburwa Museveni’s leadership has had both positive and negative impacts:

*Positive impacts: Economic growth, infrastructure development, and relative militarily mediated security, stability and peace. Unfortunately, these essentials can easily crumble if the leader who puts the military before the people finds himself unable to maintain the balance between the people’s craze for development, freedom, justice, equity, and democracy.

*Negative: Authoritarian tendencies, human rights concerns, intensifying and extensifying poverty, intellectual decay and collapse, land grabbing, environmental decay and collapse, conversion of indigenous Ugandans into third- or even fourth-rate citizens, internal and international slavery, and entrenched corruption have come to characterise President

For Uganda’s development, leadership needs to prioritise:

*Accountability: Ensuring leaders are responsible to the people, not to themselves and their families or ethnic groups.

*Meritocracy: Appointments must stress competent individuals based on merit, not loyalty nor relations (familial, kinship or ethnic).

*Institutional Strength: Leadership must prioritise building strong and resilient institutions that outlast leaders.

Let me now focus on why effective institutional leadership is important. Institutional leadership is a major issue in Uganda. The country’s institutions have in the last 40 years been weakened by leadership through three main avenues:

 *Patronage: Appointments based on loyalty rather than merit.

*Political Interference: Institutions have often been influenced by the ruling party or directly by the president, such as in their structure and function or leadership. In other cases, such as universities, the president has interfered in what is taught, showing his preference (natural science) against the social sciences and humanities.

*Lack of Autonomy: When the leadership interferes in institutions, they lack independence to make decisions suitable for them and their clientele. If it goes on for a long time, the institutions will not do anything until the exogenous leaders (the president and others) instruct them what to do. When this is the case, the institutions cannot be autonomous. They are governed from outside. The institutional leaders manifest as puppets, or worse still, sycophants who cannot decide without reference to higher orders outside their institutions. When this is the case, the result is multifold:

*Ineffective Governance: Institutions fail to deliver quality services.

*Corruption: Weak institutions enable corruption and misuse of resources for personal gain.

*Lack of Accountability: Institutions are unable to hold leaders accountable.

To strengthen institutional leadership, Uganda needs:

Autonomy: Grant institutions independence to operate freely.

Merit-Based Appointments: Ensure leaders are appointed based on competence.

Transparency: Increase transparency in institutional decision-making.

*Promoting Institutional Autonomy:

*Legal Frameworks: It is critical to enshrine autonomy in laws and the Constitution.

*Independent Oversight: It is critical to establish independent bodies to oversee institutions. However, such bodies will be useless if they are used to hoodwink the citizenry while filling them with loyalists and presidentialism hovering over them.

*Financial Independence: No institution will be effective if it has no control over its budgets. 

Impact of Patronage

*Undermines Meritocracy: Patronage prioritises loyalty over competence.

*Fosters Corruption: Patronage networks enable corruption and abuse of power to flourish.

*Weakens Institutions: Patronage erodes institutional credibility and effectiveness.

Addressing patronage requires:

*Merit-Based Appointments: Prioritise competence over connection.

*Transparency: Increase scrutiny of appointments and decision-making.

*Strengthen Accountability: Hold leaders accountable for patronage and corruption.

Uganda’s institutions need rethinking to promote autonomy and reduce patronage. As far as the government is concerned, three institutions must be rethought to make them accountable and least vulnerable to patronage to ensure public trust is sustained in leadership and governance: 

Executive

*Overconcentration of Power: The President wields excessive influence, often overshadowing other branches of government.

*Patronage: Appointments are often based on loyalty, undermining meritocracy. Accordingly, patronage is used as a political weapon.

*Lack of Accountability: The Executive often acts with impunity, disregarding checks and balances. 

Legislature

Dominance by Ruling Party: The NRM’s majority limits opposition voices and undermines meaningful and effective debates.

*Weak Oversight: Parliament often rubber-stamps executive decisions.

*Lack of Autonomy: Parliament’s independence is compromised by executive influence. 

Judiciary

*Political Interference: Judges are often pressured or influenced by the Executive, thereby undermining justice and promoting judicial decisions that the Executive desires or prefers.

*Corruption: Judicial corruption undermines public trust in the judiciary and the government as a whole.

*Limited Autonomy: The Judiciary’s independence is questionable.

What Needs to be Done:

*Strengthen Checks and Balances: Ensure institutions can hold each other accountable.

*Promote Autonomy: Grant institutions independence to operate freely.

*Merit-Based Appointments: Prioritise competence over loyalty.

The issues with the executive, legislature, and judiciary impact Uganda’s governance in major ways, including:

*Weak Accountability: Concentration of power and patronage lead to unchecked decisions and corruption.

*Poor Policy Decisions: Loyalty-driven appointments result in ineffective governance and policies that benefit a few.

*Eroded Public Trust: Corruption and impunity in institutions undermine citizens’ faith in government.

*Stifled Dissent: Limited opposition voices and judicial interference silence critics.

*Public Intellectuals disappear: Ideas from a nonpolitical channel into government stop coming in.

*Presidentialism: The President infiltrates and overrides every institution.

All this leads to:

*Ineffective Service Delivery: Institutions fail to address citizens’ needs.

*Increased Corruption: Weak oversight enables misuse of resources, especially by the President, Speaker and Chief Judge – the heads of the Executive, Parliament and Judiciary. This could be seen in rewarding loyalty.

*Political Instability Risks: Unchecked power and suppressed dissent can spark unrest in the short, medium and long term, making our pride in reigning stability momentary and stability unstable.

For Uganda, addressing these issues is key to improving governance and making the country move from growth narratives that have dominated to development narratives. Uganda’s future hinges on addressing the governance challenges to ensure inclusive development, democracy, freedom, justice and stability. Ultimately, that is what good governance means.

For God and My Country.

1...111213...84Page 12 of 84

EDITOR PICKS

POPULAR POSTS

POPULAR CATEGORY

ABOUT US

Busoga Times is your news, entertainment, music fashion website. We provide you with the latest breaking news and videos straight from the entertainment industry.

Contact us: contact@busogatimes.com

FOLLOW US

© Busoga Times 2024