Uganda’s opposition chief and leader of the Forum for Democratic Change Kizza Besigye has called for a transitional process that involves truth-telling, accountability and reconcilian in his country.
Dr Besigye, who has been arrested numerous times, charged with treason and kept under house arrest since the February 18, 2016 election in Uganda, said he hoped that international mediation would allay fears and allow President Yoweri Museveni to down from leadership without being the focus of retribution and revenge. “Part of the reason dictators are willing to go down with their countries is because of the fear of retribution, the fear of the crimes they have undertaken, the fear of the loss of the great wealth that they have robbed from citizens,” Dr Besigye said in an interview with JFJ’s Kwamchetsi Makokha on the sidelines of the Annual Jurists Conference in Durban, South Africa. Excerpts:
Q: What happened with the last election in Uganda early this year?
KB: Basically, on Election Day, I was arrested for identifying and insisting on an inspection of a house where most of the operation for rigging that election was taking place. A house where there were tonnes of pre-ticked ballot papers and where all the manipulations were being [coordinated]. We had located this house from insider information and insisted that it should be inspected. I was arrested and detained until the middle of the night when I was released. The following day, as results were coming in, the police violently invaded us, fired teargas into the office and premises around, and arrested us. Before that one of the senior police officers had come in to inquire if we wanted to release the results of the elections. He said they were concerned that releasing results was the sole responsibility of the electoral commission. We could not release the results even when voting was still going on because a lot of areas round the city, which were closest to the electoral commission had not received their voting material till the next day. We told him that we could not release results when voting was still going on… but we were free to comment on results that had been announced at the polling station by the Electoral Commission. We were horrified to hear the same Electoral Commission announcing totally different results at the national tally centre from those released at the polling stations.
Announcing what was presented at the Electoral Commission cannot be an offence because that is why we are given a copy of the result. This officer left, and what followed was the invasion and arrest on February 19, 2016. I did not become free again until May 11, when I escaped from them and appeared briefly in the city.
Q: How did you escape?
KB: My detention has been in my home, which is illegal, and we have challenged it in courts and politically, but it is sustained by acts of impunity by the Uganda police. They put a ring around the home, blockade the exits with police trucks and spikes and deploy soldiers all around the home. What they are doing is illegal … There is no provision for it in the law. It is inhuman. If you are put in official detention, you are fed, but no one provides food for our home. It is intended to torture and make my survival almost impossible. This encirclement is one I have been breaking simply to expose them that they are not efficient even in what they are doing. I cannot give you details of how I do it but suffice it to say that in the last election, in nearly all the areas where there were major encampments of the police and the military, we actually won even by the results that were announced officially. This demonstrates that even the coercive forces or arms of government are desirous of change. The people they rely on are the ones who voted for me.
Q: What was the effect of your arrest after the election?
KB: Our constitution provides that once the Electoral Commission has announced the final results, every candidate has 10 days to challenge those results. The capture and detention of myself who was the candidate denied me that opportunity. Besides, I was not the only one: our party president Gen Mugisha Muntu was arrested, the chairperson and so on. Across the country, more than 300 of our leaders had been arrested at the time of the elections. What has happened since the election has been an overthrow of the will of the people of Uganda, using guns that surround my home.
At the very minimum, everybody recognises that you cannot have a conclusively elected president if the constitutional process has not been available to all candidates as provided for. We do not have a conclusively elected president. Therefore, the detention of one of the candidates by another candidate – because Mr Museveni who ordered my detention was the beneficiary candidate -- is what constitutes the crime of treason. It is therefore paradoxical that it is me in the courts charged with treason and not Mr Museveni, who up to today is using guns to contain what we believe is the rightly elected person. We have evidence, which we believe is conclusive, to show that we won the election and not Mr Museveni.
Q: Out of 28,100 polling stations in Uganda, results for a sizeable number were not taken into account. In your own estimation, how many votes did you garner?
KB: The ones that were not taken into account were over 2,000; but we won 52 per cent of the vote. We do not have all the returns from all the polling stations because of what happened – some of our leaders were arrested and some of the results were captured from our agents. Some of the results were captured when from our headquarters when it was taken over; some were captured from our agents, but we have evidence from areas where we have no results of what those results ought to have been. That is why we are confident and have been demanding, since that time, our singe demand has been let there be an audit.
Q: Were you sworn in as President of Uganda?
KB: That is a matter before court; commenting on it would be sub judice. What I have said, even in court, is that we won the election, and when you win the election, you should form government. It is for saying that I won the election that I am being charged with treason; that I should not have said I had won and there should not have been a swearing in and things like that … These are matters that going to be tested in court.
Q: It is the second time you are dealing with charges of treason. Previously, there was also rape and possession of firearms. How do these charges make you feel?
KB: The guilty are the ones who are always afraid. I have always known in whatever circumstance that I am innocent. Anybody who sets out to challenge a dictator, to force a dictator to leave office, has to prepare for grave consequences. Being charged is not the most grave of the consequences that I know are possible to confront me … Many people have already died: my colleagues, even my own brother has died in this process… A lot of time, I hear a lot of concern and sympathy in … treatment I receive, but I am the lucky one. I am harassed, tear-gassed, imprisoned, shot at, but I am around, thank God. Many of my colleagues have perished; they are no longer here. I cannot feel so sorry for myself and complain as the most harassed or persecuted. There are many people, except that maybe I am the most visible of them.
Q: It has been speculated that you are about to enter the Guinness Book of Records as the most arrested person. What do you think is the purpose of these arrests?
KB: There are two purposes: to discourage me from continuing so that I to a point where I give. But the main objective is to cause fear in the whole population so that people can say if the person who is our leader is being treated like that, what will happen to us… this thing is too dangerous, let us give up. That is the intention: to send a chilling message to the population. Although it might have had some initial impact, I am happy to it is having the opposite effect. It is getting people more annoyed, more resolute and to be emboldened to stand up for their rights. I have been seeing young people who are boldly challenging the police… who even when they are traumatised by the police are back the following day without any fear. The time of fear being the source of paralysis in our society is gone.
Q: What did you do when you went into exile?
KB: We remained very active even when I was outside the country. The 2001 election occurred when the Constitution of Uganda did not allow for multiparty politics but it created the evidence to show that this was a flawed system. Mr Museveni had been arguing that he had been having a no-party system but the 2001 showed that it was a one-party system. He was endorsed as the candidate in preference to me. He was supported by an organisation, contrary to what the no-party system he was deceiving people provided for. So when I was out during that time, we were able to organise ourselves into a formal political institution called the Reform Agenda. It could not be registered as a political party but for all intents and purposes, it became an effective political structure that went to all districts. We launched it in Lusaka before our leaders went back and introduced it in all the districts. We challenged in the constitutional court. It was on the basis of allowing political parties to function that we were able to register our party, the Forum for Democratic Change, and I could return home as a leader of a formal organization … It was a tactical withdrawal to that extent.
Q: You have contested the presidency four times, the last perhaps reluctantly. When are you going to stop?
KB: Elections, whether won or not, are not the end of our struggle. Our struggle is not a struggle for leadership. It is a struggle to change the system, to have a system where citizens are in control of their own country. We have a country where citizens are subjects; they have no power at all. They service the wish of the leaders rather than the other way round. Our struggle is the struggle for citizens to regain control of their country. It is a liberation struggle. Elections can be a facilitator of that struggle because they open a formal time when people can rally support without being criminalised. They still interfere with our tight to move around, but it creates that opportunity…. We do not go to the elections with the illusion that by casting a ballot alone, the dictator will declare himself defeated and hand over power to another person. What we believe the election will do is to intensify the transfer of knowledge to have a confident and awake population; an organised population that can then through the defiance campaigns that we have been involved with, weaken and overcome and overwhelm the dictatorship and institute a transitional process through which we can have democratic governance.
Q: You haven’t practised medicine in many years. Do you miss it?
KB: Quite obviously, I prepared myself for practice. It takes a long time to et the kind of training to practice medicine… It is not an investment one would want to just lose and not use for the community and for oneself… I am quite obviously sad that I was not able to progress along the career path that I had chosen, but on the other hand, I know that of even if I had progressed along that path and became one of the most successful practitioners or specialists in whatever field, I would not have any impact on our country. Most likely I would be doing it from another lands. Even if I had progressed, and become one of the most successful experts… it would not have any impact on our country. I would be doing so from a foreign land. When I abandoned the profession, I had already been in exile. We do not succeed in getting good health care from good professionals but good health care policies that ensure good professionals, proper funding, professionals and lead to the kind of investment that will provide healthcare and lead to the kind of investments that will provide healthcare service. The work I am doing to impact public policy is more fundamental and profound than if I had continued sharpening my tools and intellect in the medical profession.
Q: Are you a wealthy man?
KB: I am not complaining. Wealth is a whole spectrum. I have never set out to accumulate wealth. I am happy enough if I can sustain myself, but you are raising a pertinent question. The choice to go into campaigns like I have been involved in entails a huge sacrifice that one must be prepared to make. Part of the sacrifice in my case has been the loss of a family because my wife is out there working. Presently, she is the executive director of Oxfam; before that she was in New York with the UN, before that in Addis Ababa with the African Union. Our children are in foreign lands, too.
Q: You have another child other than Anselm?
KB: Yes, I have another son, who is not Anselm. So through dividing ourselves, we are able to live. She works, and even in the struggles that we are engaged in …
I run a business in Kampala, not very well for obvious reasons, but I sell fuel. I have animals; I farm, and as long as I can put food on my table, I am not complaining.
Q: You have been Yoweri Museveni’s personal doctor, trusted minister, and friend. What do you think of him?
KB: In many ways, I pity him because he invested heavily in trying to cause change in Uganda and made major sacrifices. I think God was on his side, he succeeded in getting the opportunity to implement what could have been the greatest kind of agenda for our people that we had – transformation. Having invested himself that way, having made the sacrifices he made, I feel pity for him that he is going to bow out as a pariah, as someone who has become a huge problem for our country. It is not a legacy that is commensurate with the kind of investment that he made and the struggle that he waged for change in our country. But that is his choice – he has chosen short-term rewards: He wasn’t self-aggrandisement, self-enrichment, self-promotion and so on; he has chosen not to leave any positive legacy, which is a shame.
Q: Are your differences with Museveni personal?
KB: If they were, they would be much simpler to deal with because they would be involving only me and him, not the whole country. This is a question that has been mainly asked because of misinformation that my wife was a friend of Museveni and that our fallout may have something to do with that. It is quite far from the reality. First of all, when I fell out with Museveni around 1989, there was no relationship between me and Winnie [Byanyima], whom they claim would have been a source of misunderstanding. Secondly, I am not the only one who has challenged Museveni. His childhood friend, Eriya Kategaya, stood up in 2003 and said enough is enough; challenged him publicly. Just recently, his Prime Minister, Amama Mbabazi, challenged him publicly. Our party president today, Maj-General Mugisha Muntu, was his army commander for nine years, has challenged him publicly. The constant has been how he responds to these challenges. He has not responded to them any differently from how he has responded to me. What may be different may be how they have taken the assault that came their way. The aggressiveness with which he has attacked anybody who has come up to oppose him has been exactly the same.
Q: What is the trouble with Uganda?
KB: It is the same trouble with most parts of Africa. It is the trouble of having very narrow control of power. It was most profoundly brought about by the colonial takeover of our countries. The artificial creation of these countries, which were formed from many nations being forced together, and collectively losing our right as citizens. When the colonial powers left, it was not a change of systems, it was a change of the managers. The struggle remains the same, to regain control of our countries, and once the control has been regained, to then transform them into democratic entities through the building of relevant institutions so that we move from personal rule to institutional rule.
Q: Is there a window for dialogue with Museveni?
KB: Yes, part of our engagement with the international community is to attract them to encourage that kind of a process and be participant in it.
Part of the problem of having a dictator for 30 years is that domestic institutions and even leaders of opinion within the country become so weakened and compromised that you cannot rely on them to mediate between the dictator and others. We need some international engagement in the process of that kind of dialogue. It is a dialogue we are anxious to have. It can lessen the suffering of the country; it can reduce the cost of the transition – since independence, no leader has handed over power peacefully so every change of leadership has been violent and distractive… This is what we were keen to avoid in the next change. We are keen on dialogue, but it must be a structured dialogue where we have a proper mediator that is respected by everyone in the process; where we have some guarantors that what comes out of that dialogue will be respected, the biggest problem we have in the country is immunity; we must have mechanisms for guaranteeing the implementation of the outcomes. We must have a clear agenda. We are keen on dialogue but it must be structured. It is the elements that make it structured.
Q: You appealed to the international community in February to support democracy in Uganda. How did that go?
KB: The primary role and drivers of liberating our countries will have to be ourselves, the people of Uganda. It is not something that can be changed from outside. It will be changed from the inside but it will become that much easier if the international community with which we are integrated helped us to stand with the people of Uganda in bringing pressure to bear on the regime to undertake dialogue that can lead us to a transition. Part of the reason dictators are willing to go down with their countries is because of the fear of retribution, the fear of the crimes they have undertaken, the fear of the loss of the great wealth that they have robbed from citizens. We feel that if there was some kind of an international mediation, it is possible to allay those fears and provide some sort of guarantors for dictators to step aside and for countries to continue in their transformation and development without dictators being the focus of retribution and revenge. As part of the transitional process, there ought to be a process of reconciliation that must nonetheless have truth telling, so it is on record, some accountability but more importantly reconciliation.
Q: How did they respond?
KB: The international community is interested in what is going on because it is not just a question of Uganda. It is the whole region’s problem. If one could find a mechanism for successful transition in any of these countries, it would be a good template that could apply across the board. I think the international community has woken up to the fact that protecting dictators does not help them in the long run. Even terrorism, which is a major international problem, which some of the people like Museveni have been hiding behind, the international community now realizes that thought they may appear to help in that struggle, it is temporary gain that can lead to greater losses. There is sympathy with what we are doing. I cannot speak for them as to what they will be willing to do, but as the domestic struggle intensifies, they will come in with positive engagements.
Q: The election of Donald Trump as President of the United States represents a growing shift to the right… What does it mean for Africans?
KB: I think the challenges we have in Africa will be primarily be resolved by ourselves. In fact, I am glad personally that even the capacity of the West, who have been treated as donors, their capacity to provide funding and patronage has greatly reduced because of their own problems. That will give us the awakening that we must stand up for ourselves and face our challenges squarely. Whether Trump or Clinton, I would not be that much excited. We have just had an Obama for eight years and our situation has not changed even when we have an Obama who hails from the continent. We should not be overly concerned about who is running these countries outside. The outcome of the struggles by the people in the US and wherever give us more leverage because previously the focus has been on how to take our resources for use in their development processes. As they go through their internal reorganisation, this is the right time that for Africa to seize the opportunity to launch its own era of development without that much interference as there has been in the past.
Q: You came to Durban to give a keynote address to judges, lawyers and policy experts from around Africa. What was your message?
KB: We have the responsibility as Africans, but more so for them as legal experts, they can make a great contribution to raise public awareness; advocating and defending legal frameworks, advocating and supporting the building of institutions that can engender a transition to a democratic dispensation, which include the independence of then judiciary and various arms of government and to also consider supporting ordinary citizens by rendering pro bono services and public interest litigation. It was a great opportunity to relate to the legal professionals but also to members of an institution whose mission is to advocate and work for good governance, democracy, the rule of law, which are tenets on which the sustainable development of our country will depend.
This interview was first published in The EastAfrican: http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/news/I-accuse-Museveni-too-but-we-are-pursuing-dialogue-/2558-3451748-kvpe25/index.html
By Terry Jeff Odhiambo
Gambia stands as a testament to the glacial progress Africa is making in the sphere of human rights. With the country on the mend and efforts under way to bring former President Yahya Jammeh to justice, the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights could scarcely have found a better host country to hold its 30th anniversary.
The celebrations in Banjul, between November 1 and 4, 2017, come at a time of hope and restoration for the Gambia after the end of Jammeh’s 22-year dictatorial regime. Jammeh’s government was notorious for its disregard of international human rights norms despite ironically hosting the ACHPR. Arbitrary arrests, threats, enforced disappearances and torture were commonplace. There is still plenty of room for improvement. Attorney General Abubacarr Tambadou, who is also Justice Minister, told the opening of the 35th Forum on the Participation of NGOs in the 61st Ordinary Session of the ACHPR that notwithstanding the various strides made by nations in the application of human rights instruments, the full enjoyment of basic rights and freedoms since the adoption of the African Charter, continues to face challenges. The Justice minister reiterated that the new government of Gambia had reaffirmed its commitment to protecting human rights and to living up to its position as the human rights capital of Africa. As recently as September 2017 the Gambia, signed five international treaties on the margins of the United Nations General Assembly, including the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which seeks to abolish abolition the death penalty. In the coming months, Gambia is committed to ratifying more human rights treaties, including the Convention against Torture, and adopting a new republican constitution within the shortest time possible and developing a system of justice that can look into past atrocities and sustain its democracy. The NGOs Forum, which is usually held on the margins of the ACHPR Ordinary Sessions, is a platform for fostering collaboration between civil society organisations on the one hand and the ACHPR on the other, with the aim of promoting and protecting human rights in Africa.
Human rights abuses in Africa are a sad reality. The tableau of human suffering on the continent is scar on humanity’s conscience. From South Sudan, to the Central African Republic to Egypt and Ethiopia, abuses are increasingly being witnessed more than ever before. As one of the bulwarks against this depressing trend, the work of the ACHPR since its inception calls for evaluation. The promise by states and governments to guarantee human dignity and rights – through almost universal endorsement of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and ever-increasing ratification of international human rights treaties – seems to have had little impact on the daily lives of millions of people in the region.
The sad reality is that the human rights situation in various African countries continues to deteriorate on the ACHPR’s watch. There has been an escalation of threats to the enjoyment of human rights on the continent, ranging from arbitrary arrests, infringement of freedom of association and assembly, police brutality and threats to human rights defenders.
Since the inception of the ACHPR, seven states have never reported on the situation of human rights to the commission. The states -- Comoros, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Guinea Bissau, Sao Tome and Principe, Somalia and South Sudan -- continue to witness some of gravest human rights violations on the continent. Twenty other states have three or more pending state reports -- including Gambia, while 16 other states have one or two pending state reports. Only nine states, namely Kenya, Algeria, Burkina Faso, Cote d’Ivoire, Mali, Mauritius, Namibia, Niger and South Africa are up to date with their state reporting obligations. The Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda and Niger are set to report during the 61st Ordinary Session of the ACHPR. State reporting procedure is a stock taking that serves as a forum for constructive dialogue and enables the Commission to monitor implementation of the African Charter and identify challenges impeding the realisation of the objects of the African Charter.
Some of the critiques that the Commission has received over time include the failure to implement its findings, such as decisions on: individual communications, concluding observations on State reports, country and thematic resolutions, and recommendations made in relation to missions to countries.
The 61st Ordinary Session of the ACHPR will see the swearing in of new commissioners and the exit of those whose terms have ended. The ACHPR is composed of 11 Commissioners, who are “chosen from amongst African personalities of the highest reputation, known for their high morality, integrity, impartiality and competence in matters of human and peoples’ rights; particular consideration being given to persons having legal experience” (African Charter, Article 31). They are elected by the African Union Assembly from experts nominated by States parties to the Charter. The Commissioners serve in their personal capacity and are elected for a six-year renewable term.
The upcoming 30th Anniversary celebrations are an opportunity to reaffirm the values and enduring principles enshrined in the African Charter mobilize people around the continent, and take stock of human rights today in Africa.
Kenya's Chief Justice,David Maraga has asked the Kenyan police for the protection of the Judiciary.Read More
Kenyan police have a long history of using excessive force against protesters, especially in the western counties such as Kisumu, Siaya, Migori, and Homabay, where Odinga has had solid support for over 20 years.
Copyright © 2017. Journalists for Justice has asserted its right to be recognized as creators and owners of the content here.
Reproduction in part or in whole is permitted on condition that JFJ is acknowledged and notified.