Phone: 0414 532 083       Email: info@umdf.or.ug

Have any question? contact us here
  • MEDIA AND GENDER: UMDF impliments a project that campaigns against early girl child marriages
  • Ugandan Journalists work under hard conditions, including constant harassment by police

  • UMDF members regularly interact with different media rights stakeholders, including Members of Parliament

  • UMDF trains Journalists in governance issues, multi-media skills and conflict transformation

  • peace journalism coordinators from partner radio stations at an evaluation meeting in kampala

  • Under the peace journalism project: UMDF facilitates community dialogues in post conflict regions

in the media

The Constitutional court hearing into the consolidated petition challenging the amendment of the Constitution to remove the age limits resumed today morning at Mbale High court in eastern Uganda. 

The petition before a panel of five judges led by deputy chief justice Alfonse Owiny-Dollo, Remmy Kasule, Elizabeth Musoke, Cheborion Barishaki and Kenneth Kakuru. 
 

MP Betty Nambooze takes oath before cross-examination. Photo: @882SanyuFM

 
The petition challenging last year's constitutional amendments by parliament, which among others, lifted the presidential age limits as well as extended the term of office for members of parliament, presidency and local governments by two years. 
 
According to the petitioners, the executive and parliament breached the Constitution by withdrawing funds from the consolidated fund to finance a private member's bill that led to the amendment. The petitioners are also questioning the legality of the amendment process, arguing that parliament's rules of procedure were flouted when strangers believed to be presidential guards invaded the House and violently evicted MPs opposed to the amendments. 
 
Today's court session began with the cross-examination of Mukono Municipality MP Betty Nambooze on the rules of procedure by the respondents led by the deputy attorney general Mwesigwa Rukutana.
 
Nambooze was asked if she's aware of the fact that parliamentary rules state that the speaker of parliament shall at all times be heard in silence, which the respondents to the petition argue was not the case on September 27, 2017 - when MPs opposed to the amendments filibustered forcing the speaker to suspend plenary.
 
Nambooze said MPs are allowed to raise points of procedure during sessions. She seemed to suggest that is what MPs were doing before speaker Rebecca Kadaga suspended 25 MPs and the House for 30 minutes. The MPs were accused by the speaker of violating House rules. When asked whether she vacated the House immediately as directed by the speaker.
 
She said she didn't, "because there was no opportunity because we were under siege" by "strangers."  She was asked by Justice Kasule how the Constitutional court should interpret that "strangers" had entered the House. Nambooze said anybody who's not an MP and has not been officially introduced to the House, is regarded as a stranger. 
 
When asked if what she voted was a reflection of the desires of her constituents, Nambooze said it was because she lives in her constituency and there had public debates about the amendments but that her position would have been more firm, if she had consulted. She said she wasn't able to consult because she'd been hospitalised due to the brutality meted to her by the "strangers" believed to be presidential guards.
 
At this point, Justice Kakuru asked her now that she'd not consulted if she had returned the Shs 29 million consultation money that was given to every MP. Nambooze produced to court her explanatory note she wrote to the clerk of parliament on December 20, 2017 when she reportedly wrote and indicated that she had written a cheque on December 19, 2017 to refund the consultation money.
 
Justice Kakuru put it to Nambooze whether she had evidence that the money was indeed returned back to parliament or it was just a gimmick to fool the public. Nambooze said she wasn't sure if the money had been transferred back to parliament's accounts or not but said she hadn't received any protestations from the clerk. 
 
Nambooze raised her "disappointment" that the hansard had not captured her protestation to the speaker when she questioned the legality of the amendments despite participating in the process herself. She was asked by Justice Kasule if this "disappointment" had been captured in her affidavit but said only learnt that her statements were not captured by the hansard yesterday evening. 
 
During the re-examination by petitioners' lawyer, Erias Lukwago, Nambooze was asked why she, and other MPs did not vacate the House immediately as directed by the speaker. 

"Before the speaker could leave the chambers, soldiers had entered the house. In particular, I saw them grab Ssemuju Nganda and Muwanga Kivumbi yet these two had not been part of the [suspended] 25 [MPs]. Women, I believe to be presidential guards came towards me and I fell down..." she said. 

To this, Justice Owiny-Dollo said the "compliant" MPs "weren’t given the opportunity to comply."

Also in the witness stand today is permanent secretary ministry of Finance and secretary to the treasury (PSST) Keith Muhakanizi to answer questions on the financial implications of the amendments.

3 days 14 hours ago

The Constitutional court hearing into the consolidated petition challenging the amendment of the Constitution to remove the age limits resumed today morning at Mbale High court in eastern Uganda. 

The petition before a panel of five judges led by deputy chief justice Alfonse Owiny-Dollo, Remmy Kasule, Elizabeth Musoke, Cheborion Barishaki and Kenneth Kakuru. 
 

MP Betty Nambooze takes oath before cross-examination. Photo: @882SanyuFM

 
The petition challenging last year's constitutional amendments by parliament, which among others, lifted the presidential age limits as well as extended the term of office for members of parliament, presidency and local governments by two years. 
 
According to the petitioners, the executive and parliament breached the Constitution by withdrawing funds from the consolidated fund to finance a private member's bill that led to the amendment. The petitioners are also questioning the legality of the amendment process, arguing that parliament's rules of procedure were flouted when strangers believed to be presidential guards invaded the House and violently evicted MPs opposed to the amendments. 
 
Today's court session began with the cross-examination of Mukono Municipality MP Betty Nambooze on the rules of procedure by the respondents led by the deputy attorney general Mwesigwa Rukutana.
 
Nambooze was asked if she's aware of the fact that parliamentary rules state that the speaker of parliament shall at all times be heard in silence, which the respondents to the petition argue was not the case on September 27, 2017 - when MPs opposed to the amendments filibustered forcing the speaker to suspend plenary.
 
Nambooze said MPs are allowed to raise points of procedure during sessions. She seemed to suggest that is what MPs were doing before speaker Rebecca Kadaga suspended 25 MPs and the House for 30 minutes. The MPs were accused by the speaker of violating House rules. When asked whether she vacated the House immediately as directed by the speaker.
 
She said she didn't, "because there was no opportunity because we were under siege" by "strangers."  She was asked by Justice Kasule how the Constitutional court should interpret that "strangers" had entered the House. Nambooze said anybody who's not an MP and has not been officially introduced to the House, is regarded as a stranger. 
 
When asked if what she voted was a reflection of the desires of her constituents, Nambooze said it was because she lives in her constituency and there had public debates about the amendments but that her position would have been more firm, if she had consulted. She said she wasn't able to consult because she'd been hospitalised due to the brutality meted to her by the "strangers" believed to be presidential guards.
 
At this point, Justice Kakuru asked her now that she'd not consulted if she had returned the Shs 29 million consultation money that was given to every MP. Nambooze produced to court her explanatory note she wrote to the clerk of parliament on December 20, 2017 when she reportedly wrote and indicated that she had written a cheque on December 19, 2017 to refund the consultation money.
 
Justice Kakuru put it to Nambooze whether she had evidence that the money was indeed returned back to parliament or it was just a gimmick to fool the public. Nambooze said she wasn't sure if the money had been transferred back to parliament's accounts or not but said she hadn't received any protestations from the clerk. 
 
Nambooze raised her "disappointment" that the hansard had not captured her protestation to the speaker when she questioned the legality of the amendments despite participating in the process herself. She was asked by Justice Kasule if this "disappointment" had been captured in her affidavit but said only learnt that her statements were not captured by the hansard yesterday evening. 
 
During the re-examination by petitioners' lawyer, Erias Lukwago, Nambooze was asked why she, and other MPs did not vacate the House immediately as directed by the speaker. 

"Before the speaker could leave the chambers, soldiers had entered the house. In particular, I saw them grab Ssemuju Nganda and Muwanga Kivumbi yet these two had not been part of the [suspended] 25 [MPs]. Women, I believe to be presidential guards came towards me and I fell down..." she said. 

To this, Justice Owiny-Dollo said the "compliant" MPs "weren’t given the opportunity to comply."

Also in the witness stand today is permanent secretary ministry of Finance and secretary to the treasury (PSST) Keith Muhakanizi to answer questions on the financial implications of the amendments.

3 days 14 hours ago
Police commanders across the country are uncertain on how to enforce a directive to confiscate camouflage attire similar to that of the army and police from the public.
 
Last Friday, Asuman Mugenyi, police director of operations directed all district and district police commanders to confiscate the camouflage attire. He also directed the district security committees across the country to stop shops selling the camouflage immediately.
 
The district security committees, which comprises of the district internal security officer (DISO), district police commander (DPC), resident district commissioner (RDC), district chairperson and the chief accounting officer are expected to decide how to go about the directive.   

URN talked to about 16 of the 157 DPCs across the country on the implementation of the directive. However, none of them had a clue on how to implement the directive. The DPCs told URN on condition of anonymity that they were confused on how to implement the order especially with the business community.

"How do I go and stop someone from selling a cloth when there is no law that backs me," asked a DPC in Kampala. The UPDF act only criminalizes dressing in clothes that are of close likeliness to UPDF uniforms.

Patrick Onyango, the deputy police spokesperson, said he was only aware how they would confiscate the clothes from the civilians wearing them but not how to handle the business people.

"Talk to the DPC they are the ones who will be implementing the orders. They must be in the know on what to do," Onyango said. The DPCs couldn't speak on record and therefore referred URN to the Kampala metropolitan police commander (KMP) or spokesperson.

The KMP spokesperson, Luke Owoyesigyire asked for time to consult with his bosses. He however told URN four days later that he was still trying to get in touch with the director of operations. "I still need to consult with the director operation," Owoyesigyire said. 

In downtown Kampala, one can barely see the camouflage clothes on display since the order to confiscate them was issued. Most of the traders interviewed by URN, said they only bring in one or two clothes. 

Faridah Nakato, a cloth dealer who used to sell camouflage trousers, short and vests, says they will have to stop selling them if the worst comes to worst. "What can we do? We will have to stop selling them. For those who still have some in stock, it's sad, "Nakato said.

3 days 14 hours ago

The signing of the project framework agreement between government and the Albertine Graben Refinery Consortium (AGRC) for the $4 billion oil refinery was a great relief to the Energy Ministry as it races towards the country's first oil by 2020.
 
Sources at the ministry of Energy and Mineral Development indicate that it took a lot of behind the scenes negotiations that would at times involve President Yoweri Museveni on side, and the United States government officials through its embassy in Kampala. 

The oil refinery deal was signed last week

The US embassy was, according to sources, eager to see the conclusion of the deal in order to fight off Chinese firms still interested the multi-billion dollar deal in case the negotiations with AGRC failed. 
 
Over 40 companies had expressed interest in the deal which was initially estimated to cost $3 billion but now projected to cost up to $4 billion. The negotiations between the government represented by the ministry of Energy, National Oil Company and AGRC commenced in August 2017 when the parties agreed on the core project terms.
 
The selection process started in January 2017. At the time, it was anticipated that Chinese firm Guangzhou DongSong Energy Group which had scored highly during the second search would take the deal. URN did not independently establish whether Guangzhou DongSong Energy Group was still in Uganda from the time the Group was dropped from the deal.  
 
The then ministry of Energy permanent secretary, Dr Stephen Isabalija, however, announced that the Albertine Graben Refinery Consortium (AGRC) made up of General Electric (GE) Oil and Gas, YAATRA Ventures LLC, Intracontinental Asset Holdings Ltd (IA) and Saipem SpA had clinched it.
 
The project framework agreement with AGRC should have been signed within months after they had agreed on the core terms.  A source indicated that Chinese firms have quietly tried to find their way back into the deal backed by some government officials that have preferred working with China.
 
Uganda's oil and gas sector is one of the sectors promoted by the US Commercial Service of the Department of Commerce. The 2017 US commercial country guide on Uganda pointed the $10 billion infrastructure required to develop Uganda's oil reserves as one the opportunities for the American in Uganda.
 
This explains why the signing of the agreement did not only excite ministry of Energy officials but the US Embassy as well.
 
US ambassador Deborah R. Malac called a select number of journalists to the embassy. Key on the on the topics was the Albertine Graben Refinery Consortium (AGRC) deal.
 
She says her embassy was quite pleased with the signing of the agreement between the government of Uganda and the Albertine Graben Consortium which she said was put together by a US-led company.
 
"In particular, the the Albertine Graben Refinery Consortium presents the opportunity for project financing, financed by the private sector which doesn’t contribute to Uganda’s debt burden. As many of you know, we’re all watching with some concern, the government borrowing that is going on. So this is one more, it showcases a model and an opportunity to do things differently, still address the infrastructure needs and other needs in the economy," sais Malac.
 
Malac said the AGRC which includes General Electric, one of the largest global companies with over one hundred years of existence made the American firm competitive.
 
The almost year-long negotiations have centred on financing arrangements, risk mitigation measures among others. The consortium now has the rights and licenses to develop and manage the refinery as lead investor in a joint venture partnership with the Ugandan government.
 
One of the sticky issues under the back and forth related to regulations on the consortium itself and other related laws. Under the Petroleum (Exploration, Development and Production) Act, joint ventures may be licensed to participate in a range of petroleum-related business undertakings provided there is, within such a joint venture, participation by the Ugandan government or a company that is at least 48 per cent Ugandan-owned.
 
Ambassador Malac revealed that agreeing on the regulations was not as easy as envisaged at the time when they agreed on the core project terms.

"Some of the concepts that were brought in terms of this project financing - private sector debt and private capital equity markets is a new model in many ways for Uganda. So, there is not much expertise in the ministry of Finance, in the ministry of Energy about how you handle it. This is not the same as government debt - borrowing from China Exxim [bank] or borrowing from the World Bank, hiring a contractor who is gonna go out and do your project. It is very different concept, a very different legal framework." she added. 

She revealed that it had to take an education process to help the government team to understand how it worked. That she said could have partly delayed it. 

"...the reality is, it is much faster than it has happened in some other places. Each business proposal, each project that comes forward when you’re doing a private sector negotiation is different. Some can take a long time…we say 15 months but it has been just a little bit under that. But you know, there was time when nothing was happening when both sides wanted to go and do something else and then had to come back."

Joint ventures have become popular especially among the US refinery companies because of their competitive edge. The companies there look to joint ventures, alliances, and other combinations to try to improve performance.

It is anticipated that the joint venture arrangement will help the companies under the consortium and the government financing mobilisation for the project. Malac alluded to the fact that funding into the consortium will not be borrowed from other governments or loan money that will have to be paid back.
 
The private sector companies under the joint venture are expected to go to the capital markets, find investors and share the risk of building and operating the refinery.
 
More details about the deal between the governments with the consortium remain guarded with the Energy ministry, National Oil Company lawyers as well as the US embassy reluctant to disclose the details.
 
Ambassador Malac said the non-disclosure is a globally established practice.  

"This [non-disclosure] is very common when private companies are negotiating because you don’t want your competitor to steal your information, to steal your intellectual property, to take what you're trying to do and propose. It is not an effort to hide anything in the sense that you’re doing something bad, the point is, you have done all your research about the market, you have done all your research about what you want to build about, about your proposal, about what needs to be done. And you understand how it will work and that is your product that you bring to the government and say this what we can do and how we can do it together. But I can assure you that, there was nothing untold on the part of our companies that were involved in these negotiations." Malac added. 
 
Ugandan National Company, executive director, Josephine Wapakabulo could not be reached for more details regarding the sharing arrangements. Crude oil reserves in Uganda are estimated at about 6,500 million barrels. The refinery to be based in Hoima is expected to process between 50,000 to 60,000 barrels per day.

3 days 14 hours ago

our partners