Thursday, 11 August 2011

UGANDA INDEPENDENCE BILL


HL Deb 26 July 1962 vol 242 cc1145-72 1145
§ 4.27 p.m.
§ Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
§ THE EARL OF DUNDEE
My Lords, I have At in command from Her Majesty the Queen to acquaint the House that Her Majesty, having been informed of She purport of the Uganda Independence Bid, has consented to place Her Majesty's Prerogative and interest so far as they are affected by the Bill at the disposal of Parliament for the purposes of the Bill.
§ THE MINISTER FOR COLONIAL AFFAIRS (THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE)
My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time. The object of the Bill is to provide for the Independence of Uganda. I am sure that your Lordships will be pleased to know that it was the unanimous wish expressed at the Independence Conference that Uganda should remain in the Common wealth and be under the sovereignty of Her Majesty the Queen, as Queen of Uganda. It so happens that it is almost exactly 100 years since the explorers Speke and Grant discovered the headwaters of the Nile and it was from this date that our association with Uganda began. It is now 68 years since the Protectorate was first declared. During these years Uganda has been growing into a nationhood. Its peoples have been learning to work together to create a stable and happy country. There is a growing spirit of co-operation in Uganda and in recent years a read basis of political unity has been worked out. The Munster Com-mission (which your Lordships will remember was the Relationships Commission) did much to promote this spirit of unity, and I should like to record the gratitude of Her Majesty's Government to the noble Earl, Lord Munster, who led the Commission, and to his distinguished colleagues Professor Wade and Dr. Marshall.
At the Independence Conference which was concluded on June 29 at Marlborough House, arrangements were agreed which offer a permanent solution to many of the long-standing problems which have faced Uganda. The most important and baffling of these problems 1146 has been the welding of the traditional kingdoms of Buganda, Ankole, Bunyoro and Toro into a modern structure of Government The Report of this Conference is contained in Command Paper No. 1778, which was recently laid before Parliament. Uganda, perhaps more than any other British territories in Africa, has been notable for the exceptional strength of its tribal loyalties and institutions. Buganda, with its central position, with its highly developed system of Government, its Kabaka, and its traditional Council the Lukiko has tended to overshadow the rest of the country. The other kingdoms and districts have also been equally concerned to preserve their individuality. They have all, however, been willing to make sacrifices in order that the new Independent Uganda should have sufficient strength and cohesion to play its part in the affairs of the modern world.
The difficult question of the position of Buganda was to a large extent solved at the Lancaster House Conference last year. The work of the Independence Conference last month was greatly facilitated by this preparatory work. A federal relationship between Buganda and the Central Government had then been agreed, and a satisfactory relationship has now been worked out between the other Kingdoms and districts and the Central Government. Noble Lords will remember that the Central Government, under the leadership of Mr. Obote, has been in office for less than three months. None the less, during this short time much constructive work has been done.
The success of the Independence Conference was in no small part due to the confidence which Mr. Obote and his Ministers were able to inspire in the delegates from all parts of the country. Having myself sat for many hours in the Constitutional Committee, I was able to see this for myself. I should like to pay my tribute to the painstaking care and obvious sense of responsibility with which the Uganda delegates set about their task. I am bound to say that again and again during the course of the Conference regional interests were pressed; but equally, my Lords, when there seemed some danger that these regional interests were being over-emphasised, the good sense of the delegates prevailed, and they reminded themselves that their 1147 purpose was to achieve a Constitution which would benefit Uganda as a whole.
There was one issue at the Conference which proved incapable of solution by agreement. This was the dispute between the Kingdoms of Buganda and Bunyoro over the so-called "lost counties". As your Lordships will remember, the Prime Minister appointed a Commission consisting of three Members of your Lordships' House, under the chairmanship of Lord Molson, assisted by Lord Listowel and Lord Ward of Witley, to advise the Government on this difficult question. Those of your Lordships who have read their report will, I am quite certain appreciate the immense care and close consideration of all the facts with which they discharged their task.
Like the Munster Commission, Lord Molson's Commission treated the problem of the "lost counties" as a political question and not as a juridical one. Their report, your Lordships will remember, recommended that two of the counties, Buyaga and Bugangazzi, should be transferred from Buganda to Bunyoro. We entered upon the Independence Conference with the conviction that this would be the best solution to the problem, if the two Kingdoms could be brought to agree to it. But, my Lords, in the event, Buganda were adamant that there should be no transfer of territory. They maintained that the territory concerned was lawfully theirs, and, furthermore, that Lord Molson's Commission had to a very large extent acquitted them of charges of discrimination.
As there could be no agreement, my right honourable friend had to weigh very carefully the consequences of an imposed decision. He took fully into account the Commission's warnings of the risk of serious disturbances in the future if nothing were done. He also accepted their view that the atmosphere was quite unsuitable for holding a referendum in the short time available before the promised date of independence. He therefore decided upon a solution which gave the responsibility of the administration of the two counties to the Central Government for a period, and with it the responsibility to give the people who live there the opportunity by a referendum to decide their own future 1148 in conditions of peace and security. It is our belief that this solution will give security to the peoples concerned, and should greatly reduce the threat to peace and good order at this crucial period in the life of Uganda.
As your Lordships know, the view was urged in another place that there should be written into the Constitution a date before which the referendum must be held, or, at least, that a public declaration should be made in Uganda that a referendum will be held, without necessarily putting a date to it. An undertaking was given that these views would be put to Mr. Obote and this has been done. Mr. Obote is now embarking upon discussions on the practical implementation of the Conference's decisions. I am sure that your Lordships would not wish that by anything we say here to-day we should complicate the issue in Uganda.
My Lords, turning to the Bill itself, Clause 1 is in the normal form and provides for the fully responsible status of Uganda. Clause 2 deals with nationality matters consequent upon the attainment of independence by Uganda. The provisions here are similar to those for Tanganyika. Clause 3 deals with consequential modifications to other enactments. Clause 4 enables loans to be made to the East African Common Services Organisation under the Colonial Development and Welfare Act, 1959, after the Independence of Uganda. This follows the precedent in the Tanganyika Independence Act. Clause 5 interprets the words "existing Constitution Order", which means the Uganda (Constitution) Order in Council, 1962, which was made on February 26 this year. Clause 6 is the short title of the Bill.
My Lords, I think we can look back with pride at the period of the British protection over Uganda, and I feel sure that your Lordships will endorse the sincere thanks of Her Majesty's Government to the British civil servants who have contributed so much to Uganda's progress. We are particularly glad to know that the Government of Uganda is anxious to retain their services after independence, and that the arrangements made under the Overseas Service Aid Scheme have made it possible for many of them to decide to stay on. I think it is right that at this time we should also 1149 remember the part played by explorers, traders, members of the professions, doctors, lawyers, and the like, and above all the missionaries, whose work has been so particularly successful in Uganda. My Lords, I beg to move.
§ Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Marquess of Lansdowne.)
§ 4.40 p.m.
§ THE EARL OF LUCAN
My Lords, I should like to thank the noble Marquess for the clear and concise way in which he has moved the Second Reading of this Bill. My next task is to apologise to your Lordships on behalf of my noble friend Lord Listowel, who has had to go abroad and, to his great regret, has been unable to be hare. He particularly wanted to be here, having been, as your Lordships know, a member of the Commission of which the noble Lord, Lord Molson, was Chairman.
Looking at Uganda on a map of Africa, one is struck by its geographical situation. It abuts on the Congo and the new State of Ruanda-Burundi; on the Sudan in the North; and with the East African Territories; and one is impressed by the enormous importance of stability in Uganda, with its dangerous elements on several sides where disturbances have already taken place. If Uganda can continue to be, as it has been far the whole period of British occupation, an oasis of calm and stability, then we can see this Independence Bill go through with a good conscience and with good hopes for the future. I was speaking only a few months ago with a Canadian friend who had been travelling on United Nations business all round Africa. He said that it was at Kampala that he was struck more than anywhere else by the racial harmony and the general air of tolerance and good feeling, and we can hope that this state of affairs will continue.
The noble Marquess has referred to the unanimous wish of all Parties taking part in the Conference that the independent State of Uganda should continue to be a member of the Commonwealth. I think we can welcome that, and, as the noble Marquess says, we can welcome the spirit Of compromise that was shown by the parties taking part. One could, however, wish that that spirit had gone just a little further. I have seen it said 1150 in a letter from the Ruler of Bunyoro that "compromise is quite unknown to Africans. Yet," he said, "we willingly accepted the compromise proposed by the Molson Committee." The tribal loyalties are there held with great intensity and great feeling; and that tempts one to put over a more general idea: if we look around Africa to-day it is really deplorable to see how the epidemic of nationalism which is sweeping the whole of the world has taken hold of Africa. The fragmentation of that country, more particularly since the colonial Powers left, really puts obstacles in the way of the peaceful future for the continent and gives one cause for alarm.
On a smaller scale we have a manifestation of it in the case of the "lost counties" that are in dispute between the Kingdoms of Uganda and Bunyoro. The Commission of which the noble Lord, Lord Molson, was Chairman went into this subject in great detail and came to a unanimous conclusion—and I can say on behalf of my noble friend Lord Listowel that he was entirely in agreement with the Report of that Commission. They recommended a certain course to Her Majesty's Government, and the noble Marquess has explained that Her Majesty's Government also thought that that would be the best solution; but we have to face it that when they saw that they could not get agreement with this solution they decided against imposing a solution while Her Majesty's Government was still in control. Remember, my Lords, that the Act says, in line 14 of the first page: … as from the appointed day Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom shall have no responsibility for the Government of Uganda or any part thereof. I and my friends feel that Her Majesty's Government have shirked the responsibility which was theirs of deciding on the solution which they themselves thought was the best. They decided that it would be dangerous to leave things as they are and that a referendum was impossible in the time they had available. Delay, surely, will be dangerous. Two years' delay before there is a referendum will give opportunity for feelings to be inflamed and for passions to be played upon, with every risk that they will lead to a situation which cannot be settled peacefully. A 1151 referendum when carried out by an independent State cannot be supervised by outside impartial authorities.
The changes in the Constitution and territorial changes in the new State have to be passed by a two-thirds majority. Everything depends on the two-thirds majority. At the moment I understand that Mr. Obote is leading a Coalition Government and his principal supporters are the Buganda Party. The Buganda Party have gone on record as saying that they are irreconcilably opposed ever to giving the control of any of the disputed counties to another kingdom. That is what leads one to look on the situation with some alarm. We think that Her Majesty's Government have taken the wrong decision and have shirked their responsibilities. There is hope that the peoples of Uganda who, after all, have recognised the value to them of a peaceful combination to make the new State a success, may see that, no matter what they feel now, some compromise by both parties to the dispute is inevitable.
But that sort of attempt requires mutual confidence on both sides, and the confidence of the smaller of the two disputants, Bunyoro, is not likely to be forthcoming when you get threats expressed like those reported in The Times of July 19, when the acting Buganda Premier said: The Kabaka's people had been prepared to invade Bunyoro if Britain had ordered any of the Lost Counties to be transferred. That is not the kind of language calculated to permit of a peaceful settlement. We can only hope that more moderate counsels will prevail; that the future will be assured; and that this country, which has been, as the noble Marquess said, such a good example of a Protectorate under the British Crown, thanks to the devoted efforts of the British Colonial servants, will continue on its path of independence. We hope that the dispute between these two component parts is settled peacefully. I would extend our warmest wishes to the peoples, all of them, of Uganda.
§ 4.50 p.m.
§ LORD OGMORE
My Lords, on behalf of noble Lords on these Benches I very much welcome this Bill. I also appreciate the language that was used by the noble Marquess in moving the 1152 Second Reading. It was a little warmer than that which some Ministers have used in this House in the past on independence Bills. I have sometimes felt that we have missed a great opportunity, in that they have been treated in a rather doleful way, when, from their point of view, this particular period in their history is, of course, a very joyful one. The noble Marquess mentioned one particular class of people who in my experience are very rarely mentioned; and yet in Uganda, particularly, they have had a tremendous effect upon the happiness and wellbeing of the people. The sequence of British association in Uganda has been like this: first of all the explorers; secondly, the missionaries—those are the people that I was glad to hear the noble Marquess mention; thirdly, the civil servants, and fourthly the businessmen.
So far as the first are concerned, the explorers, the noble Marquess mentioned Speke. It may be of interest to your Lordships to know in this very month in Jinja there is a big celebration in honour of Speke. The poor man certainly did not get much honour in his own country; be was called liar and cheat, and all sorts of things, when be was alive. It is a very good thing that after his death, 100 years after the finding by him of the beginning of the Nile, his great achievement should be recognised. When I was in Jinja a month ago I said to them, "I am very glad you are recognising Speke; it is time he was recognised. But there is one memorial to him already; it is a few hundred yards from my residence in London—I refer to the obelisk that is erected to him in Kensington Gardens". But for some reason it is singularly uninformative, since the only inscription on it is, "Speke. Victoria, Nyanza", which cannot give very much information to the people, nursemaids and others, who visit Kensington Gardens.
Then we come to the missionaries. I said that they had performed a great service. When I visited Uganda about fifteen years ago there was an old lady still living there, an old French or Belgian missionary, who 50 years before had walked all the way from Mombasa, through the bush, in peril of wild animals, and wilder men, to Uganda. In fact, of course, the reason the railway was first developed through Kenya was 1153 to take the products of Uganda down to the sea at Mombasa. Then, finally, we have the civil servants, who, as the noble Marquess quite rightly said, played a great part, and the businessmen who have also played their part in the development of this country. I should also like to pay my tribute to nine Uganda Development Corporation, under its chairman, Mr. Simpson, who have made a tremendous contribution to the economic development of the protectorate.
My Lords, I feel that the prospects of Uganda are bright, because, unlike so many countries whose independence we celebrate in this House, it is economically viable. It has a small population for its size—only some 6 million or 7 million in a country the size of Britain—and it has a rich soil, with many natural resources. There is no large settler element there and there is no large racial minority. Such racial minorities as are there are badly needed in the development of the country; and I am sure—indeed, I know—that this fact is understood by the African leaders. Politically, therefore, so far as those problems are concerned—problems which are so acute in other parts of Africa—there is no difficulty in Uganda.
They also need, as the noble Marquess said, and as I know from personal discussions with the African leaders in Uganda, the assistance of the European expatriate officers. Unhappily, I do not feel that they are going to get it; because in Uganda, as in every other country to which we grant independence, at the moment of granting independence we commit an act of extreme folly in bribing the officers who are most needed for the development of the territory to leave it. Just at the moment when their skill and their expertise, their advice and wisdom, are most required they are off, bribed by the British Government. Moreover, a great deal of the money which is at that moment granted by loan or grant to the country from Britain has to be applied to the compensation of the officers, so that money is not available for the development of the country.
I have mentioned this point to your Lordships on many occasions on these independence Bills. The situation has not altered. What should be done, of course, is to do for the civil authority 1154 what the Army does. If the Army seconds officers, as it does in large numbers, it does not expect them to lose all their pension rights or anything of that kind. They remain as officers in the British Army, under the War Office, and when they have finished in the other countries they come back. These civil servants of whom I am speaking should be part of the Home Civil Service. They would normally work not at home, but overseas where they are needed. But the mere fact that they are part of the Home Civil Service, pensionable as home civil servants, would avoid this problem of having to get rid of them and compensate them for exercising their right to leave the territory at this very delicate moment.
With regard to the Uganda Independence Conference last month, there is just one minor matter I would mention: it does not affect your Lordships, but it might cause a little confusion later on. When the noble Marquess kindly made a reference to myself in the course of the proceedings on the Jamaica Independence Bill he said that I had been the adviser to the kingdom of Toro at this Uganda Independence Conference last month. In fact the people who had the advantage, or disadvantage, of my advice were not the Kingdom of Toro but, as it is now to be called, the Territory of Busoga. I mention that because it might lead later to some misunderstanding.
I have been on a number of these Independence Conferences and I am sure that, above all, one has to have boundless patience, especially with Africans. You cannot hurry them; they must know the reason why. They must be satisfied with what is happening; they will take nothing on trust or for granted. It is not often that I have the opportunity of congratulating Her Majesty's Ministers—usually I have to criticise them—but I should like to say that the noble Marquess, Lord Lansdowne, who was, as be has just told your Lordships, the Chairman of the Constitutional Committee, on which I also sat, showed boundless patience and no and of courtesy. In fact, sometimes when we had been sitting from 9 in the morning until about 11.30 at night, I thought his patience was a little too boundless; but, at all events, it was a fault on the right side.
1155 How do we harmonise the need for a strong central Government with the tribal feeling and the attachment of these small territories to their own kingdoms? The noble Marquess said, quite rightly, that this was the main problem at the Conference. It is particularly so in Uganda, because they have such strong attachment to their local kingdoms. On the whole, I think that the solution found at the Independence Conference was the right one, and that there is enough power in the centre, and yet enough authority in the various kingdoms and districts and the territory of Busoga, to allow for the needs both of a strong central Government and of tribal attachments to their own particular districts and kingdoms and territory.
I think we have to understand the difficulties of African political leaders. Your Lordships occasionally read and hear rather flamboyant statements from various leaders, although I am glad to say that this does not apply to the Uganda leaders. These statements are made because to a large extent they are entering what is to them a new world, and there is no comfortable body of political and constitutional doctrine to fall back on, as there is in this country or in the United States, where politicians who are in doubt can always call up some precedent from something that has happened at some time. These people cannot do that. As I say, they are really entering a new world without any of the guide posts which in well-established democracies are always present—sometimes, some of us think a good deal too much present. Therefore, you will find unco-ordinated speeches and you will find rather inflammatory speeches, but I am quite sure that they must not be taken too seriously.
As the noble Marquess said, the acute problem was over the lost counties. Originally, there wore six, and now, as the result of the Report of Lord Molson's Commission, that is cut down to two. There were three courses which we at the Conference thought that the British Government might take. The first was to give the two counties to Bunyoro; the second, to allow Buganda to retain them for all time, as it were; and the third was to do nothing. After some experience of Her Majesty's Government, I must admit that I was 1156 afraid they would take the third course and do nothing. It seemed to me highly important that they should do something. It was quite beyond reason to expect a young Uganda Government to handle a problem of this kind which was, in any case, sixty years ago the responsibility of Her Majesty's Government, and on which nothing has been done ever since.
So I was very glad indeed that they took action and did take a decision. It was quite an unexpected one—namely, that the Central Government should administer these two counties for a period of not less than two years, after which the decision should be taken by a referendum organised by the National Assembly of Uganda. I thought that was quite an imaginative proposal. It was a decision which was accepted by the Uganda Government. It was a great step forward. Mr. Obote, with great courage I may say, accepted the decision, and I think it may well be that it will be found in time to be the right one. The only question in my mind is whether there should be a maximum period as well as a minimum one—in other words, whether the referendum must be held within a certain period of time. But, on the whole, I think it is perhaps just as well not to include it in the Constitution. If a declaration can be obtained from the Uganda Government, so much the better. All these things will be in the hands of the Uganda Government, and I personally have every confidence in Mr. Obote. I think he is a remarkable man and, so far as he is concerned, I am sure he will carry out any obligations to the letter.
So far as Clause 4 of the Bill is concerned, I am pleased to see that the Colonial Development and Welfare Act will be made applicable to the East African Common Services Organisation, after Uganda Independence. This is definitely a step in the right direction. As your Lordships know, the East African Common Services Organisation took over responsibility from the East African High Commission and they administer a number of common services, such as the railways, the posts and aviation. I am certain that this tendency will increase as time goes on. In fact, quite recently Mr. Mboya said, on a future East African Federation, that the three territories—that is Uganda, 1157 Kenya and Tanganyika—and Zanzibar could no longer shy away from the question. He said: They not only have so much in common, but are so interdependent that it would be futile for any leader to ignore the logical consequence of this interdependence. Call it a federation or anything else, but it must be a workable and viable unit, formed by courageous leadership, far-sightedness, and the ability to accommodate the sensitivities, weaknesses and legitimate interests of the various sections of our community. I feel sure that we should all support Mr. Mboya in that expression of view.
There is only one other point I should like to raise, and that is on the future of the East African. University. As your Lordships know, this is spread over various colleges throughout the three territories. The main one, and of course the largest one, is Makerere in Uganda. It is beautifully sited, and I think it is quite likely that, after independence, the headquarters or part of the headquarters of the University will move to Entebbe. That again is a beautiful little place, and in every way suited for the headquarters of a university. But beauty does not in itself, although it is a valuable constituent in a university, mean that the university is going to be successful; and I urge the United Kingdom universities to give all the help they can to the new University of East Africa. The University certainly needs it. In my opinion, it is vital that university development should be on a large scale in the next decade, because there is a great shortage of African professional men—technicians, managers, administrators and so on. This can be made good, in my opinion, only by an expansion on sound lines of the University.
Finally, I fed that the future for Uganda is particularly bright; and I must say that for the rest of East Africa I feel that the clouds have a silver lining. I am sure that with our help and sympathy, and the help and sympathy of the United States, of various international organisations, and other European countries, like Switzerland and West Germany, we can really help to develop this vast, undeveloped and under-populated area of the world. The blue-print for progress is there. It needs to be put into operation. There is a great deal of moaning in this country over East Africa, much of it unnecessary. 1158 Only to-day I had a vast sheaf of paper posited to me. This conitinually happens. This one starts off in a most lugubrious way: There must be few who have any illusion left about Kenya now. This is by a man who claims to know a great deal about it. Well, I do not think there is any need for pessimism about any of these territories. What they need is help, support, and encouragement, not people going around the City of London, Wall Street, Zurich, and so on, running them down. In my view, if we in this country and the people in the United States and elsewhere do our part, then they will do theirs, and their future will be a happy one right throughout East Africa. My Lords, we on these Benches send our best wishes to Uganda for a most happy and prosperous future.
§ 5.12 p.m.
§ VISCOUNT WARD OF WITLEY
My Lords, may I begin by asking for the customary indulgence which your Lordships extend to those who are addressing the House for the first time? To-day, I join that growing, but I hope still select, band of Peers who have the distinction of having made two maiden speeches in the same Chamber. Indeed, it was almost from exactly this same seat that I made my first maiden speech in January, 1946, when your Lordships' House was temporarily another place and when these Benches were the Opposition Benches. I am glad to note that the little red button which, in my nervousness while waiting to speak, I detached from the upholstery, and which I have preserved in my stud box till to-day, has been replaced by another. I only hope that I shall not now receive a bill for it from the Treasury.
My Lords, I have never regarded myself, and certainly no one else has ever regarded me, as an expert on Colonial Affairs, and I ventured to intervene briefly in this debate to-day only because I was one of the three Privy Counsellors, under the leadership of my noble friend Lord Molson, who, at the request of the Prime Minister, visited Uganda last January to inquire into and report upon the long-standing boundary dispute between Buganda and Bunyoro. Anyone who has once been to Uganda will, I believe, always take a close interest in its future development. For one cannot 1159 fail to be captivated by the beauty of the country and by the kindness and charm of its people; nor can one fail to recapture much of the magnetism which compelled the great Victorian explorers to return there again and again, determined, in spite of immense hardship, danger and disease to uncover the wealth of secrets it held.
So, my Lords, I am glad to welcome this Bill which gives Uganda her independence as a sovereign Power within the British Commonwealth. I believe, like other noble Lords who have spoken before me, that Mr. Obote and his Government will guide the future progress of their country with wisdom, courage and statesmanship, and I wish him every success. I should like also to add my own warm tribute to all those members of the British Civil Service whose wisdom and devotion to duty over so many years have brought Uganda quickly and smoothly to independence. Many have elected to stay on; and their knowledge and experience will still prove to be invaluable to the new Government.
But, my Lords, even in a maiden speech which I know must not be too controversial, I cannot refrain from expressing my disappointment that it was not found possible to get agreement between Buganda and Bunyoro over the lost counties dispute before the date of independence. As the noble Marquess has said, our Commission recommended that two of the counties should be returned to Bunyoro and that the other four should remain in Buganda. We also recommended that Mubende Town should be placed under the administration of the Central Government. Those recommendations were accepted without reservation by Her Majesty's Government and, I think, by Her Majesty's Opposition as well. The Omukama of Bunyoro, although disappointed that we had not recommended the return of all the territory, generously agreed to this compromise in the interests of peace, stability and the unity in Uganda as a whole, and he renounced all claim to the four remaining counties. And if there could have been an equally magnanimous gesture by the Kabaka of Buganda, the problem would have been solved and the dispute settled for all time. But, unfortunately, the Kabaka, doubtless 1160 with the Kabaka Yekka breathing down his neck, refused to cede any territory at all.
This put my right honourable friend the then Colonial Secretary into a very difficult position. Whether or not he left himself enough room for manœuvre; whether or not our Commission was appointed too late; whether or not this nettle might have been grasped earlier and linked with the date of independence—all these are matters of argument which I prefer not to develop now, but to leave to other noble Lords if they wish to develop them. In any case, it is always easy to offer advice with the benefit of hindsight, especially from the back seat. But the point is that the Molson Commission recommended a solution which was welcomed by the Government as being fair and sensible, and which depended upon obtaining the agreement of both parties to the dispute before the date of independence. It is very disappointing indeed to me that the agreement of one Of these parties was not forthcoming. However, all that is now water under the bridge and the important thing is what is going to happen in the future.
As we know, my right honourable friend produced an alternative solution Which was agreed by Mr. Obote, but, unfortunately, by neither the Kabaka nor by the Omukama. It is that these two counties of Buyaga and Bugangazzi should be placed under the administration of the Central Government for a minimum period of two years and then a referendum held at some appropriate time to determine the wishes of the people. I have read carefully the arguments put forward in another place that there should be a maximum period within Which the referendum must be held as well as a minimum cooling off period, and I must admit that I have some sympathy for the views expressed; but I very much doubt whether it would really be practical politics. One reason (and I think my noble friend Lord Molson will agree) Why our Commission was so anxious to get this matter settled before the date of independence was precisely because we felt it would be impossible to bind the Uganda Government to settle it after the British had gone. And, of course, the same thing applies here. One cannot bind them to stick to a maximum period.
1161 It may be asked: "If you lay down a minimum period, why not a maximum one?" But, of course, they readily agreed to a minimum period. As every Chief Whip knows, there is no difficulty about agreeing to speak for a minimum of ten minutes; but to promise to limit one's speech to a maximum of ten minutes is quite a different matter. In any case, I am sure Mr. Obote wants to get the matter settled. Indeed, I believe that both the major political Parties in Uganda want to gat the matter settled, although I am not so sure about the Kabaka Yekka, which unfortunately holds the balance of power. But, certainly, Mr. Obote will be in the best position to judge the right moment to hold a referendum, and certainly in a better one, I think, than we are now at a distance of two years away.
Whether or not a referendum will work at all depends largely upon the kind of administration which the Uganda Government establishes in the two counties in the next two years. Certainly, it would not work now. As we said in our Report: a referendum would inevitably fan the flames of tribal feeling, would invite intimidation, and would create a situation in whch no lastng settlement could be expected. At worst it could lead to bloodshed. I cannot help feeling considerable doubt whether this will not be equally true two years from now. Certainly, Mr. Obote is shouldering a very great responsibility. There will be—and I am sure he realises it—much preparatory work to do in the selection of local chiefs, for example, and insistence upon absolute impartiality in their administration. Supervision must be both independent and strict. Security arrangements must be efficient and unbiased.
In that connection, I wonder if I might ask the noble Marquess, when he replies, whether he can give us any idea of the position with regard to the two companies of King's African Rifles in Uganda; whether he is satisfied that they are properly equipped and there in adequate numbers to deal with any troubles that may arise; and, if not, whether he will assure us that the Government will give them all the help they can. Much will depend upon the two tribes themselves. Any needling of one another, and, particularly, any acts of lawlessness, will tend to perpetuate an 1162 atmosphere in which a referendum is impossible. But we can only look on the bright side and hope that things will change considerably in the next few years.
My Lords, having said all that, and I hope I have not been too controversial, I should like to congratulate my right honourable friend now the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and also the noble Marquess, on the success of the Constitutional Conference. There were, as the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, pointed out, many difficult problems to be resolved other than that of the lost counties. That they were resolved was due not only to the skill and diplomacy of my right honourable friend, but also to the spirit of co-operation shown by the Uganda delegates. This augurs well for the new Sovereign State, for sit is only by a determination to build a united Uganda, in which the nation comes first and tribal loyalties second, that the people of that fascinating country can look forward to the happy and prosperous future they deserve.
§ 5.25 p.m.
§ LORD TWINING
My Lords, may I congratulate the noble Viscount, Lord Ward of Witley, on his maiden speech? It was a felicitous speech, and I listened to it with great pleasure. Although he dealt with this intractable problem of the lost counties, he was able to speak with sympathy and with authority. I am sure your Lordships will wish to hear the noble Viscount on many occasions in the future in your Lordships' House.
My Lords, it was my privilege to serve in Uganda from 1923 to 1938, first in the Army and then in the Administration. I know the country well, and I count among my friends many Uganda Africans from the most lowly to the highest in the land. As the noble Viscount has said, anyone who visits Uganda must be struck by the beauty of the smiling countryside which has been so wall endowed by nature. This is reflected by the happy look on the faces of those who live there. They are an intelligent and well-mannered people, who go about their business with a dignified poise suggesting a natural pride in their land and their way of life. If during the last few years there have been political stresses and strains, most of these have been resolved by the mature 1163 good sense of the people and the statesmanship of their leaders.
Uganda is notable for the strength of the monarchical system. The Kingdoms of Buganda, Bunyoro, Toro and Ankole cover a large part of the total area of the country. I have always thought that the British Administration tended; to underestimate how deeply rooted monarchy is in the minds and the loyalties of the people. In Buganda the Kabakaship is regarded as being sacrosanct. It is the outward and visible sign of their history and of their sense of nationhood, while at the same time it carries with it a certain undefinable but, nevertheless, powerful mystique. I have known two Kabakas, and can testify to the devotion and loyalty shown by their subjects, both to their office and to their person. The same is true of the other Kingdoms. It is therefore not surprising, though it is none the less gratifying, that they accept our gracious Sovereign, not only as Head of the Commonwealth but as Queen of Uganda.
Uganda possesses a peculiar geographical feature, which I believe is to be found in only one other part of the world, in Central Asia. There are parts of the country, on its western extremities, which are situated 1,000 miles from the sea in every direction. I mention this to emphasise that the country suffers from the disadvantages of being both landlocked and remote. This makes the transportation of imports and exports a very costly business. Nevertheless, it has prospered, but it is dependent on a lifeline, which is the railway to the coast. This is a single-line mountain railway, climbing to over 10,000 feet above sea level before descending to the port of Mombasa. Uganda has contributed substantial sums to the development and equipment of the railway and the port. Both are extremely well equipped and efficiently operated.
Uganda has always been unenthusiastic about any proposals for a Federation of East Africa, or even for any form of closer union. Her people have feared domination by Nairobi. But, being sensible and realistic, they recognise that some form of association is essential to their wellbeing, and they are prepared to make the best bargain they can. They would, I believe, like to see the port of Mombasa neutralised, so that it would 1164 be under the control of no one East African Government. They have accepted the East African Common Services Organisation, and it is certainly in their best interests that this form of inter-territorial co-operation should continue.
But, my Lords, because of their remoteness we may expect to see, in the course of time, a development which could make Uganda one of the most prosperous countries in Africa, an industrial country serving the interests and exploiting the potentialities of the Lake Victoria basin. Within a radius of some 250 miles of Lake Victoria lies a huge area which rises from some 1,800 feet above sea level on the Uganda-Sudan border to over 10,000 feat in the Kenya Highlands. In this area almost any crops requiring tropical or temperate conditions can be grown. Within this area, too, is a large and rapidly-increasing population which provides a source of labour and a considerable and growing consumer market. Hydro-electric power is available at the source of the Nile at Jinja in almost unlimited quantity. There are natural communications provided by a great system of waterways which have been linked by man, by air, by railways and by a splendid road system. Here are the makings, my Lords, of a future common market in the centre of Africa.
Much has already been done by far-sighted British administrators, and I should like particularly to mention the names of Sir John Hathorn Hall, Sir Andrew Cohen and Sir Frederick Crawford. But future development will require an immense amount of capital and technical resources. I believe that Uganda and its six neighbouring countries can in time provide a sufficient number of efficient and well-qualified technicians, but large-scale financial aid and capital investment will be needed from outside. It is therefore of the greatest importance that independent Uganda should earn a good name for political stability, and as a safe place for capital investment. Given proper planning and the right conditions, this part of Africa could be transformed during the next 25 years. If, as is likely, Uganda turns to us for help, I hope that we shall not be backward in showing our confidence in this new member of the Commonwealth.
In the meantime, the short-term prospects seem to be favourable. The 1165 Government has shown already that it has a strong sense of responsibility and is facing up to its problems with moderation and a sense of purpose. The only cloud on the horizon is the problem of the "lost counties," which will require good statesmanship to solve, but I will not dwell on that as it has already been touched upon. I should like to pay a tribute to the work of the missions, as did the noble Marquess. To-day, Uganda is largely a Christian country. It is true that in the past there has been strong rivalry between the Protestants and the Roman Catholics, and even today this tradition persists to some extent in the political field. But a Christian spirit prevails which can continue to play a vital part in the life of the country. It is this spirit and the maturity of the people that give one confidence that the country's course is "set fair," and that it can exercise a stabilising influence in this part of Africa. I am sure that your Lordships will wish to join in an expression of sympathetic good will to this, the latest of our former colonial territories to gain independence and to become a member of the British Commonwealth of Nations.
§ 5.33 p.m.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU
My Lords, though I have not the unequalled experience of the noble Lord, Lord Twining, of Uganda, I am very fond of the country and know its people well. Therefore, I should just like to say how much I welcome this Bill, and to congratulate Her Majesty's Government, and the Uganda delegations, on the successful outcome of the Conference. The road to independence has not been altogether smooth, but it has been a great deal smoother than in the case of many of the other States in Africa which have found, or are about to find, independence. It has, in fact, escaped many of the unpleasant events which have occurred along its borders.
There is one fact, however, which is not always remembered about Uganda; that is, that when we arrived there were many political institutions which were then in existence, and had been for many years. We did not have to teach them the idea of a Parliament. Although their Parliament may have been more like this House than the other, it nevertheless existed. It was because these 1166 institutions existed that Her Majesty's Government chose to use them, and have used them, with indirect rule, for many years most successfully. That is perhaps why peace has, on the whole, reigned over the past years. When I was last in Uganda a great deal of concern was expressed that Her Majesty's Government might seek to destroy those institutions and put in their place a modern Constitution. They felt that this would be entirely contrary to what they would expect from the United Kingdom, whose traditions and whole way of life are based on existing institutions. Therefore, it seemed only right and proper to build on the existing institutions. To destroy them and impose a Westminster Constitution would have been entirely alien to the African world. In fact, it has not always worked in other parts of Africa, as we well know. If changes are to be made, let them be made by the Africans now, through their own institutions.
My Lords, I wanted merely to say, briefly, how pleased everybody is that the Conference succeeded so well. I am certain that, in the future, not only will Uganda be a shining example to those countries on their west, in the Congo, and also to their east, in East Africa, and in Tanganyika, but that it will also be a concrete example of our good intentions towards the independence of our colonial territories.
§ 5.36 p.m.
§ LORD MOLSON
My Lords, like every other speaker to-day, I welcome this Bill, and I hope that it will inaugurate a period of happiness and prosperity to Uganda when the country obtains its independence. I am also very happy to congratulate my noble friend Lord Ward of Witley upon his admirable maiden speech, which gave me special pleasure after the long and agreeable association that we had on the Commission.
But, my Lords, I should not have risen to say those two things if I did not feel bound to make certain remarks about the settlement which has been imposed in the lost counties dispute. I do not intend to speak on the merits of our Report. I think that I am justified in saying that it has been accepted as fair and reasonable by everyone except the parties to the dispute. I share the 1167 disappointment that the appeal that we made in our Report to Buganda to make a generous move towards a settlement has not been accepted. As my noble friend has said, our proposal was that, of the six counties, two, Buyaga and Bugangazzi, where the Bunyoro were in a large majority and were obviously very much attached to the Omukama in sentiment, should be returned to that Kingdom, and that the other four should continue to remain with Buganda. My Lords, we did not recommend a referendum. We thought it unnecessary, and we thought that it was likely to be extremely dangerous, likely to inflame political opinion and likely to lead to intimidation and violence.
In view of the refusal of Buganda to accept these proposals, my right honourable friend who was then Secretary of State for the Colonies felt obliged to impose a compromise. I feel that this compromise is unduly favourable to Buganda, which is the more powerful of the disputants, and is unfair to Bunyoro. It is, of course, arguable that it is desirable that there should be a referendum in those two counties in order to ascertain what I think is already quite obvious—namely, that they wish to be returned to the Kingdom of Bunyoro. I cannot think, however, that it is reasonable to lay down that that referendum should not take place for two years, without any firm assurance that it will take place at any time.
My Lords, I will certainly heed what was urged by my noble friend Lord Lansdowne: that nothing I say should complicate the issue. Our desire was to act as peacemakers in this dispute, and I am still hoping that peace may come as a result of the compromise that has been imposed. My Lords, we said that it was most desirable that this dispute should be settled before independence. We foresaw that there was a great danger that under the 1961 constitution the Prime Minister of Uganda would be dependent upon a bloc of representatives from Buganda, and we said in paragraph 103 of our Report that the Federal status in an independent country, which Buganda is to enjoy from October 9, 1962, would make it relatively easy for the Kabaka's Government, if it so desired, to obstruct the implementation of a settlement. 1168 And we said in paragraph 105 that if a Prime Minister of an independent Uganda were dependent upon the Buganda bloc for staying in office, he would find it difficult to support any concession to the Bunyoro. My Lords, that is exactly what has happened. The 21 representatives of Buganda are all nationalists, and Mr. Obote is dependent upon their support for remaining in office. It therefore appears to me to be important that the demands which were made by both Parties in another place should be heard, and that an assurance should be given by the present Government of Uganda that the referendum will be carried out at a reasonably early time. I share the doubts expressed by my noble friend Lord Ward of Witley, that the passage of time may not necessarily lead to an assuaging of these passions, but that in fact the feelings may become more inflamed as time passes. I am quite sure, therefore, that the next thing which should happen to make a settlement likely would be that some assurance should be given that the referendum will in fact be held.
The noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, was not quite correct when he said that Buganda had accepted this compromise. It is said in paragraph 69 of the White Paper that, at the final plenary session, the Buganda delegation stated that the decision of the Secretary of State was wholly unacceptable to them.
§ LORD OGMORE
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for that correction, but if I said "Buganda", it was a mistake, a slip of the tongue. I meant to say that the Uganda Government accepted it, not the Buganda Government. I was there at the time and I knew very well that Buganda had not. I apologise if I made a slip of the tongue.
§ LORD MOLSON
My Lords, I am much obliged. The slight difference between the words "Buganda" and "Uganda", however familiar one is with them and their etymological origin, sometimes makes it difficult to hear which is actually said. But the fact that, up to the end, this compromise was not acceptable to the Government of Buganda, makes it all the more desirable that an assurance should be given by the the Government of Uganda that this 1169 referendum will be carried out at a reasonably early date. My Lords, there is a great opportunity open to Mr. Obote and to his Government. Whatever I may have said in criticism of Her Majesty's Government for this compromise, it has this outstanding merit: that it leaves open to the Government of Uganda, and to Mr Obote in particular, a great opportunity even now of settling this matter, and of making sure that the independence of Uganda brings about a settlement of this ancient and distressing dispute.
§ 5.45 p.m.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE
My Lords, although, perhaps, the speeches which have been made in your Lordships' House this afternoon will not be so closely scrutinised in this country in view of other speeches which are being made at the same time to-day, it is quite certain that they will be very closely scrutinised in Uganda. It is for that reason that I should like to thank all noble Lords who have taken part in this Second Reading debate for the Wholehearted welcome that they have given to the approaching independence of Uganda; and, furthermore, I should like to thank them for the thoroughly justified praise, if I may say so, that they gave to all members of the Uganda delegation in London, and, in particular, to Mr. Obote, the Prime Minister.
The noble Lord, Lord Malson, speaks with the weight of great authority and experience, and, of course, it is natural that he was, as indeed all of us were, disappointed that the solution which he and his Commission thought out so carefully was, in the event, beyond application. I am not going to go into the details of the negotiations which led my right honourable friend the previous Colonial Secretary to reach the decision to which he came. But I can tell your Lordships this: he did not reach this decision without the most careful consideration, and without long and patient discussion with the panties concerned. I have taken note, of course, of what noble Lords have said about the question of an assurance that the referendum should be held.
May I be allowed to add my very sincere congratulations also to the noble Viscount, Lord Ward of Witley, on his speech? I was interested to hear how he 1170 had considered the question of the minimum and the maximum periods, and, in the end, had decided to reject the idea of a maximum period. The noble Lord, Lord Molson, although he criticised the decision to which Her Majesty's Government have come, said this—I hope I shall not misquote him: it does leave it open to the Government of Uganda to make this great contribution itself towards the future peace and prosperity of its country. My Lords, I suppose it must truly be said that we in fact failed to reach the answer. We tried, but it appeared to be beyond our reach; and, after all, politics is the art of the possible. We had to think very seriously whether we might not, by a solution to which we were very much drawn, in fact inflict upon Uganda a dreadful wound. And so it was that my right honourable friend reached the decision to which there has been reference this afternoon.
It is, of course, the earnest desire of us all—those of the Commission and all of us in this House—that this decision will, in the end, be proved to be right. I, for my part, have a very considerable degree of optimism that it will so turn out, for the reasons which have been so admirably stated by other speakers in this debate this afternoon: that there is among the people of Uganda a clear sense of nationhood; a realisation that if their country is to continue to be, as I think the noble Earl, Lord Lucan, described it, an oasis of calm and stability, it will be necessary for them to work together in a spirit of compromise. The noble Lord, Lord Twining, with his great knowledge of the country, referred to the necessity for political stability in order to attract the necessary development capital. Here again it has been our hope that the actions of Her Majesty's Government will indeed ensure the political stability which is so necessary for the attraction of investment capital to Uganda.
The noble Viscount, Lord Ward of Witley, asked me a specific question about the King's African Rifles in Uganda. I am informed What the 4th Battalion of the King's African Rifles, consisting of three rifle companies and a headquarters, will become the nucleus of the Uganda Army on October 9. Britain has undertaken to meet the cost 1171 of this force from then—that is, the date of independence—until March 31, 1963. This would be at the cost of about £200,000. We are doing our best to ensure that the weapons and equipment of the Battalion are handed over in good condition and complete to the regular scale.
I must apologise to the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, for having inadvertently the other day, when we were discussing Jamaica, described him as the legal adviser of Toro. Of course, this was a slip of the tongue. I knew perfectly well that he was advising the territory of Busoga. I should also like to thank him for his kind remarks about my chairmanship of the Constitutional Committee of the Conference, and to apologise to him for the effect of my patience upon him.
There was a point that the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, raised, with which I think I must clearly state that I disagree; it was on the subject of overseas officers. In fact, we do not bribe the overseas officers to leave these territories at the moment when they can render such useful service. The Overseas Service Aid Scheme, to which I referred and upon which the noble Lord is well informed, is specifically designed to encourage our overseas civil servants to remain in these territories, and I am happy to say that it is having its effect. The latest reports available show that slightly more than one-third of those concerned in the territory of Uganda have given their notice. I should like to point out that they receive compensation, whether they stay on or not. Of course, there is a small advantage if they stay on—and that is the purpose of this scheme: they can commute an additional one-sixteenth of their pension every year. I think that it is true to say that this Overseas Service Aid Scheme is being effective and is encouraging our valuable overseas officers to continue in their work.
I have no doubt that the good wishes of the noble Lord, Lord Montagu of Beaulieu, who knows the country well, will be well received when they are read in Uganda. In conclusion, I should like to add my own words in praise of Mr. Obote. The solution which Her Majesty's Government have decided upon was a great test of Mr. Obote's 1172 courage. Other noble Lords have referred to this. It will require courage for him to carry out the responsibility which he has assumed, the responsibility of the administration of the two lost counties. At this very time he is engaged in conversations on the practical application of the decisions of the Conference, as I said in my opening remarks. We have drawn his attention to the anxieties which have been expressed in another place, and I will see to it that he will also be informed of the anxieties which have been expressed in your Lordships' House this afternoon. I do not think there is anything further that I would wish to add, except once again to thank noble Lords for their generous attitude and to add my sincere good wishes to the people of Uganda and to the new Central Government.
§ On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

Some History about the Owen Falls Dam

Owen Falls Dam

HC Deb 26 November 1956 vol 561 cc3-43
§3. Mr. Langford-Holt 
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what arrangements have been made with the Government of Egypt for the control by Egyptian engineers of the Owen Falls Dam although this dam is situated in British territory; and what communications have passed between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of Egypt on the subject in the last four months.
§Mr. Dodds-Parker 
The arrangements for the control by Egyptian engineers of the Owen Falls Dam are embodied in the Exchange of Notes between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of Egypt dated 30th May, 1949, to 20th March, 1950 (Cmd. 9642), particularly paragraph 4 of the first Note. The answer to the second part of my hon. Friend's Question is that no communications have passed between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of Egypt on the subject in the last four months.
4
§Mr. Langford-Holt 
As the Egyptian Government now believe that it is incompatible with their sovereignty to have British nationals in their territory, would my hon. Friend now take steps to ask these gentlemen to leave our British territory immediately?
§Mr. Dodds-Parker 
No, Sir; Her Majesty's Government do not propose to interfere with the legitimate activities of the Egyptian engineers.
§Mr. Younger 
Is the Joint Under-Secretary aware that the House will, I am sure, be broadly in agreement with what he has just said? In this connection, does he not think that it was rather unworthy of his right hon. Friend the Minister of Defence the other day to appear to be boasting in public that we could have starved out the whole Egyptian people had we so wished?
§Mr. Dodds-Parker 
No, I cannot accept any such imputation on my right hon. Friend. As we have said in the past, the Owen Falls arrangements show that Her Majesty's Government are ready to recognise the rights of the users in such cases.

Tuesday, 9 August 2011

How UPC ‘rigged’ the 1980 elections

How UPC ‘rigged’ the 1980 elections Print
News
Written by JOHN KABAIREHO   
Wednesday, 10 December 2008 20:26
On December 10 and 11, 1980, Uganda held general elections, the country’s most controversial to date.
While Dr. Apollo Milton Obote’s UPC was declared winner, Dr. Paul K. Ssemogerere’s DP disputed the result, claiming victory. The top leadership of a third political party, Yoweri Museveni’s Uganda Patriotic Movement (UPM), decided to take the contest to the bush by starting a guerrilla war in Luwero. Twenty-eight years later, the question regarding whether the elections were rigged still attracts emotional reaction from all sides. JOHN KABAIREHO, 86, a former Prime Minister of the now defunct Ankole Kingdom, was a DP parliamentary candidate in Bushenyi West constituency, which was won by Edward Rurangaranga. He prepared a dossier on the election, excerpts of which we reproduce here: One-sided Electoral Commission
Before the appointment of members of the Electoral Commission, the Chairman of the Military Commission wrote to the political parties DP and UPC, seeking their comments on the names he proposed. DP put the names into three categories acceptable, unacceptable and totally rejected, for good reasons.
DP’s comments were ignored and surprisingly, the published list of members of the Electoral Commission contained names of persons on whom there had been no consultation at all. They turned out to be predominantly UPC supporters.
The Chairman of the newly appointed Electoral Commission, Mr. Kikira, had played a similar role in 1963 in respect of the election to the Ishengyero (Assembly) of the defunct Ankole Kingdom. That election was disputed as having been rigged and no wonder he was the UPC choice for this general election.
At an inter-Party meeting with the Military Commission on September 19 and 20, 1980, all the political parties, except UPC, asked for the appointment of three additional members so as to be represented because those already appointed were known to be UPC supporters. The Military Commission did not object to the request; but it was never implemented. This was the first step towards rigging in favour of UPC.

Registration of voters
O Most registration centres were supervised by UPC supporters who refused DP agents to compile their own registers against which they would have checked the official registers when they were displayed for examination. This made it difficult to check private registrations which were alleged to have taken place.
O Some Registration centres in some areas were shifted to other places without public notice so as to make it difficult for certain people to be registered; whereas, it was reported, UPC supporters were quietly informed of the changes. In fact, some registration centres became mobile, moving from place to place to make their location difficult to non-UPC supporters.
O Some registration books disappeared during the registration exercise. When and if, they reappeared they were found to have been used for unofficial and private registration of UPC supporters, mainly very young persons. From available reports, for example, 542 persons were thus registered in the Bitooma polling division of Bushenyi West Constituency.
O Names were either added or deleted after closure of the official registration period. This came to light when registers were displayed. For example, 693 holders of registration cards at polling station No.20 in Bushenyi West could not cast their votes because their names were not in the register! And these turned out to be DP supporters only.
O In some areas registers were displayed in places away from registration centres so as to make it difficult to raise objections.
O In other areas registers were not displayed so as to make it difficult to raise objections. For example in Kabale, registers had not been displayed by November 20, 1980, when display was to expire on November 22, 1980. In Bushenyi West, registers were displayed for one day only, November 28, 1980, long after the display period had ended!
O In yet other areas, Bushenyi South being a case in point, citizens were refused registration simply because, it was alleged, they were either suspected or known to be non-UPC supporters. The Electoral Commission examined the DP candidate’s complaint in respect of this matter and directed that those people should be registered but the returning offices stubbornly refused to do so.
O Some citizens’ names, it was reported, were incorrectly spelt in the registers so that they might be denied casting their votes on polling day.
O It was reported that in some cases series of registration numbers were either duplicated or mismatched so as to confuse non-UPC supporters on polling day.
O Registration in the West Nile districts of Arua, Nebbi and Moyo was incomplete due to the so-called invasion from Zaire and Sudan followed by UNLA reaction. This was, according to The Scotsman, a British newspaper, stage-managed to frustrate election in the area which is about 90% DP and where UPC did not expect any seat. It was reported that the limited registration was extended to non-citizens, Zaireans, believed to be UPC sympathisers.

Electoral boundaries
An inter-party meeting agreed on 140 constituencies each of a population quota of 90,000, taking into account means of communication, geographical features and population density. Later, there was pressure for 126 constituencies on the grounds that 140 Members of Parliament would be too many and expensive to maintain; but surprisingly, after the fraudulent victory UPC nominated 20 members; 10 nominees of the President “and 10 representing the army”!  It became common knowledge that UPC had discovered that 140 constituencies would give DP an advantage.
In actual fact, it would appear, for no other purpose than gerrymandering, an arbitrary figure of a population quota of about 95,000 was adopted with an allowance of 25,000 either above or below this. This gave the Electoral Commission an allowance of 50,000 people to play about with in demarcating the constituencies. It made it possible to carry out a high degree of gerrymandering.
Consequently, illogical arrangement of constituencies became rampant so as to give UPC an advantage over other political parties.

UPC objection
At an inter-party meeting with the Military Commission, it was agreed to use only one ballot box at each polling station so as to prevent rigging. Later, UPC supported by the Military Commission backed out of the agreement because it would have deprived them of the fraudulent victory they could only achieve through rigging.
The Military Commission implemented the agreement regarding counting of votes on the spot after polling, at the last moment after DP had threatened to boycott the election and after pressure had been exerted by the Observer Group. The Military Commission Chairman refused to implement the other safeguards proposed by DP and agreed to by him in Dar-es-salaam.

Government jobs
Prior to the general election, chiefs suspected of having DP sympathies were dismissed and replaced by UPC supporters. The Government made sure that registration officers, polling assistants and returning officers and their assistants were UPC supporters. Those who had been appointed by the Electoral Commission and were suspected of having DP sympathies or being independent or non-partisan were replaced by UPC supporters. The 14 District Commissioners who were suspended and replaced by well-known UPC supporters are a case in point. Pricked by a guilty conscience, the Chairman of the Military Commission, on his own initiative, raised the question of the suspension of the District Commissioners at his first meeting with the Observer Group. He informed them that the suspension had been rendered necessary by the incompetence and dilatoriness of the officers concerned and their refusal to conduct the registration process in accordance with the law.
Later in the course of their travels, the Observers spoke to staff who had served under some of these DCs as well as to some of the DCs themselves. The Observers found that the DCs in question had enjoyed the confidence and respect of their staff and the public. The motive for their suspension was therefore to disengage them from the registration exercise and from acting as Returning Officers for the poll.

Rigging nomination

November 25 was nomination day. Four seats in Lango, 4 in Karamoja, 5 in Arua, 1 in Toro and 1 in Soroti were declared won by UPC, unopposed, because DP candidates could not present their nomination papers. They were arrested at road-blocks or scared away. Because of the security situation in the West Wile districts coupled with the absence of registers, the registration exercise had been brought to an abrupt halt within a day or two of its commencement, it was widely understood that there would be no election in the region on December 10, 1980. However, on November 20, 1980 five days before nomination, a radio announcement was made to the effect that there would in fact be an election.

There was thus not enough time to organise tax clearance and other legal requirements. Because of the short notice, the Electoral Commission agreed that production of tax clearance would be deferred and the Returning Officers were informed accordingly. Surprisingly, the Returning Officer refused to accept the DP candidates’ nomination papers because of the absence of tax clearance certificates! In the face of the electoral provision regarding registration, all the political parties would have been taken unawares by the radio announcement on November 20, but not UPC! All their candidates were nominated unopposed! This raises serious doubt as to whether, in fact, the UPC candidates fulfilled all the legal requirements. In any case there were no registers, an essential requirement before nomination and election can take place.
The Moyo DP candidate was arrested at a roadblock after his escort had been disarmed. He was released after the nomination period had expired! These tricks gave UPC 15 unopposed seats on nomination day!
In order to ensure that these malpractices were not frustrated, the Chairman of the Military Commission issued a decree on the December 9, 1980 making the nomination process in Arua and Moyo unchallengeable in court! By so doing, he delivered 6 seats to UPC for which it had not laboured.
In Kasese, a traditional DP stronghold, the three DP candidates’ papers were processed after all the UPC papers had been processed. Nevertheless nominations were accepted and were later fully gazetted.  However, on December 8, only 36 hours before polling, Radio Uganda announced that the Electoral Commission Chairman had declared nominations of all the three DP candidates null and void! This troubled the Observers deeply and on examining the papers, they noticed a clumsy attempt to alter the time in respect of the last DP candidate to be nominated from 11.58 a.m. to 10.05p.m.!

Nomination rigging in Kasese went to the extent of kidnapping and murdering. A DP candidate, Victor Muhindo, was kidnapped on the eve of nomination day. His body was later found in a shallow grave. After this murderous act, a DP replacement was presented and duly nominated.
By this type of rigging UPC got a total of 17 seats unopposed. Rejection of nominations was confined to DP, except in Masaka North West constituency where a UPC candidate was disqualified for lack of a tax clearance certificate. Nevertheless, a replacement who had not been nominated was allowed by the Electoral Commission to stand, 36 hours before election! He lost miserably.

Mass media
According to both inside and outside observers, The Uganda Times, a government newspaper, went flat out to campaign for UPC. It failed in its duty to provide impartial coverage of the campaigns. It went as far as distorting news to advance the cause of UPC. It suppressed the views of other parties and thus failed in its duty to provide the electorate with fair assessment of the issues facing them. The same observers noticed that Radio Uganda and Uganda Television Service did the same. They gave a disproportionate amount of time to the UPC almost to the complete exclusion of its opponents whose complaints fell on deaf ears.

D-day rigging

Polling was to start promptly at 8.00 a.m. on December 10, 1980 but at most polling stations it did not start until late in the morning, or even late in the afternoon. This was a deliberate move to bar DP supporters from casting their votes and to give UPC an advantage over the other political parties. This was possible because of the rigging tricks which had been devised and because of the UPC officials who would see that the tricks were effected.
From reports received, the following came to light:
(a) On polling day UPC supporters   were given priority.
(b) In some areas DP supporters   found on polling day that their   names were not in the register!
(c) In other areas polling officials   called out names of people in the  queues to go forward and cast   their votes and obviously these   were UPC supporters, which   means that with the late opening   of polling stations a number of   DP supporters went away with  out casting their votes.
(d) Some UPC officials were given   extra ballot papers which they   passed on to their supporters who  thus cast more than one vote into  the UPC ballot boxes.
(e) Polling officials, themselves UPC  supporters, cast extra ballot   papers into UPC boxes as they   were observed going into polling  booths from time to time, alone.
(f) A good number of polling stations  had insufficient ballot papers and  yet others found themselves with  more ballot papers than they   required. This was interpreted as  a plan to deprive DP areas of the  vote.
(g) There was a shortage of party   symbols for ballot boxes in some  areas, mainly DP.
(h) The administration of the election exercise was in many   cases poor as there was lack of   transport facilities to transport   election materials and lack of   secrecy in some of the polling   booths. With regard to the former,  UPC owners of motor vehicles   appeared to have been alerted as  they were seen to be providing   transport. This, it was deduced,   enabled UPC party functionaries  to perpetrate election malpractices.  As to the latter, reports indicated  that voters were forced by either  chiefs or gunmen to cast their   vote into UPC ballot boxes.
(i)  DP polling agents in many areas   were barred from playing the   role expected of them as they   were not allowed to be close to   the polling tables.

Role of UNLA
During the election campaigns, Dr. Obote was heard boasting about the liberation war. He claimed it was UPC which had liberated Uganda from Idi Amin’s reign of terror. 
He also claimed that such men as General Tito Okello and Colonel Bazilio Okello were his commanders. He challenged Paul Ssemogerere to produce his own commanders, if he had any. This was interpreted to mean that if he didn’t win the election through the ballot, he would take over power by force.
Speaking about the heavy gunfire in Kampala during the night of December 11, 1980, people said – Ah you see! What would have happened if DP had been declared the winner! Reports revealed that during the campaigns, soldiers in many areas harassed DP supporters and that during the election soldiers were posted at polling stations in some districts like Bushenyi, Gulu, Kitgum and Kapchorwa where they intimidated voters and in some instances forced them to vote for UPC.

The count, results
By 8.00 p.m. on December 11, 1980, the count had gone on smoothly and from reliable sources DP victory had been ensured. In panic, a proclamation was issued over Radio Uganda followed by a retroactive decree prohibiting Returning Officers from announcing results but instead to send them direct to the Military Commission Chairman and not to the Electoral Commission. He alone was to decide whether the poll in each constituency had been fair and free. He could declare results null and void and order the holding of fresh polls. He thus, for obvious reasons, usurped the powers of the Electoral Commission.

His move was unconstitutional and illegal. For the next 18 hours until 2.00 p.m. on December 12, 1980, the Chairman of the Military Commission, it is alleged with prominent UPC politicians, was sequestered with the results as they came in from returning officers around the country. During that period, it was believed that election results were switched and changed to put UPC in power.
The Observer Group tried in vain to contact the Chairman of the Military Commission and only managed to do so 12 hours after the Decree had been in effect.
By the time the Chairman handed back to the Electoral Commission the power to announce election results only, retaining the other powers, on the afternoon of December 12, three of the seven Electoral Commissioners had disappeared from their offices, leaving behind four who were strong UPC supporters. Mr. Vincent Ssekkono, the Electoral Commission’s Administrative Secretary, disappeared during the polling process, it was alleged after he had refused to succumb to rigging directives and after his life had been threatened. It should also be noted that his personal secretary had been shot dead at his home by armed men 10 days before Election Day.

Officially announced results:
UPC            72
DP              51
UPM            1
CP              -
undeclared   2
               126
   ===
Scotsman Newspaper and Africa Now Magazine results
DP       72
UPC     52
UPM      2
CP     -
         126
   ===
A close look at the rigging episodes during the election process reveals the following situation or picture with regard to the DP election results.
Officially announced results 51
Unopposed seats known to be sure  DP seats 9  (Kasese 3; Arua 5; Moyo 1)
Results altered in favour of UPC 4 (Kigezi Central; Mubende North East; Iganga North East; Iganga East). Sub-total 64
Note that a party needed 60 seats in order to form a government.
Add seats allocated to UPC by the Chairman of the Military Commission during the 18 hours of sequesteration with the election results after his notorious proclamation (according to the findings of The New Scotsman and Africa Now, 15 to 20 seats were switched from DP to UPC).
The results shown above leave no one in doubt as to the DP’s victory in the 1980 general election. In this connection the killing of the Personal Secretary to the Electoral Commission and the fleeing of the Administrative Secretary to the Electoral Commission, before the final result was out must be viewed as very significant. Besides, it became common knowledge that a Shadow Electoral Commission to the Official Commission operated in Nile Mansions for rigging purposes.
This was the reason for a member of the Electoral Commission walking out in protest because, firstly whereas the Electoral Commission had proceeded to demarcate 140 constituencies, a decision from somewhere ordered that they should demarcate 126. Secondly, another decision deprived the Central Region of about two constituencies and gave them to the Northern Region. The protesting member was persuaded back lest the country and the world would be alarmed that the election was being rigged. He was advised to make a minority report which unfortunately was never published.

Post-poll rigging
Rigging continued even after the election was completed. For example, in Mubende North East, the winner was announced as the DP candidate. Two weeks later, the results were reversed to the effect that the UPC had won the seat! So Dr. Sebuliba, the DP candidate, was deprived of his seat which was allocated to Mr. Mugwisa, who became Minister of Agriculture.
The DP candidate for Iganga North East fled to Kenya on December 11, 1980 after seven soldiers had tried to arrest him. At that time he was leading with 28,000 votes to the UPC’s 11,000. These were results from 38 polling stations out of 40. The result was declared in mid-January on Radio Uganda! Kirunda of UPC was given 23,144 votes and Wangola of DP 18,345! This despite the fact that having visited the area, the Commission had verified that Wangola had won!
To show a concrete case of rigging, at Kashenyi polling station [in Kabale West], counting showed:
DP        25
UPC      79
UPM      02
Total   106
   ===
But at the DC’s office the UPC ballot box was found to contain 330 ballot papers; 251 extra ballot papers had been added. Nevertheless after DP had lodged a complaint with the Electoral Commission, the Commission visited the area and found that Robert Kitariko the DP candidate had won and the Returning Officer was directed to so declare. But the Chairman intervened and said that this should be done after consulting the Attorney General’s Chambers! Later, Katama the UPC candidate was declared the winner!

Mbarara West
While leaking his electoral wounds at a lodge in Mbarara, after the poll and count, the UPC candidate for Mbarara West Abaas Balinda was heard lamenting that it had been a close fight because he had lost to the DP candidate Francis Mwebesa by about 3,000 votes. The next day he, the UPC candidate, was announced the winner!

Observer report
The Commonwealth Observer Group itself was not happy with the conduct of the election as can be evidenced from their report. In the light of the grave concern they expressed in respect of the various aspects of the election process, their conclusion that the people of Uganda carried the electoral process to a “worthy and valid conclusion”, is amazing! In their conclusion, they expressed reservations about nominations and unopposed returns which they said could be redressed by the courts, although they knew this would be difficult and had expressed concern at the removal of the Chief Justice only days before the poll. The group remained silent on the disastrous effect of Muwanga’s proclamation on the election results. All in all, the Observers’ conclusion was not in tune with their anxiety and concern expressed in respect of various stages of the electoral process. In fact, they concluded like a doctor who diagnoses cancer and pronounces malaria as the ailment!

Nominations
The Observer Group states that it was convinced that in some cases the law on nominations was applied incorrectly. This cost DP 9 sure seats. They further state that with regard to Kasese, they had no option but to conclude that the action taken by the Electoral Commission in declaring the nominations to be null and void was contrary to the law and had no basis in fact. The Group Chairman had to write to the Military Commission Chairman pointing out this serious irregularity and urging him to have the matter put right.

In concluding his letter, he had this to say: “I can only urge in the interest of the credibility of the entire election process that the position regarding these candidates be reconsidered as a matter of the utmost urgency”.
This request was not heeded and yet the Group having seen it as putting the credibility of the entire electoral process in doubt concluded in their report that the electoral process was carried to a worthy and valid conclusion!

Results proclamation
 In reacting to the Chairman’s proclamation on the announcement of election results, the Observer Group Chairman had this to say to him:
“We cannot hide our dismay at the possibility that this entire noble enterprise may now miscarry”.
“In view of last night’s proclamation and the fact that we have now been denied access to the Electoral Commission, we are now considering whether we can serve any useful purpose by remaining here. By our mandate we must work within the laws of Uganda, and these have now been altered so as to make continuation of our task impossible”.
“Even at this late stage it is our urgent plea that for the good of Uganda, the position be reconsidered and the verdict of the people be believed, the final stages of the count must be carried out in an open manner, and the normal channels of the courts kept open”. 
“We urge you, with all the conviction at our command and with the best interests of the people of Uganda at heart, to permit us to resume our task and to ensure that the incoming Government will be accorded an honoured place amongst nations committed to the democratic process”.
E. M. Debrah, Chairman,
Observers Group With such misgivings, concerns and protests by the Observer Group, one is led to conclude that their endorsement of the election result was made for convenience’s sake.

Harassment

Following the rigged election there ensued harassment of DP and other non-UPC leaders and supporters. Arrests and unlawful detentions in all sorts of places became the order of the day.  Beatings and torture were not uncommon. Houses and properties of DP leaders and supporters became targets of destruction and looting. DP offices were closed and reallocated, party flags were hauled down and torn to pieces or burnt. DP meetings and rallies became taboo. Many DP supporters were denied trading licences and sometimes threatened out of trading centres. Many DP leaders lost their lives.

Paulo Muwanga’s post-election proclamation
“WHEREAS one hundred and twenty-six write under the National Assembly (Elections) Act were issued for general elections as members of the National Assembly;
AND WHEREAS seventeen such write were returned with an endorsement that candidates in respect thereof had been returned unopposed;
AND WHEREAS elections were scheduled to be held on 10th day of December, 1980 in the remaining one-hundred-and-nine of the Parliamentary Constituencies for such elections where more than one candidate was duly nominated;
AND WHEREAS the Electoral  Commission advised late on the  mid-day of December 10, 1980 that  the  said elections could not  be held as  scheduled for reasons, inter alia, of the  breakdown in the machinery of the Electoral  Commission;
AND WHEREAS The Electoral Commission requested that day and time for polling be generally extended to the llth of December, 1980 in all the constituencies;
AND WHEREAS  some Returning Officers ignorant of the extension of the  polling time  and day, commenced counting of the votes cast on the 10th December, 1980 on the close of the poll on that day and such counting of votes was completed in some constituencies and partially completed in others;
AND WHEREAS on such complete or partial count of votes, the Returning Officers and/or  the presiding officers permitted votes to  be further cast at such polling stations on the llth of December, 1980 also;
NOW THEREFORE in exercise of the powers vested in the Military Commission, we do hereby proclaim as follows:
1. Notwithstanding the Provision of   Section  21 (2) (a) of  the National  Assembly (Elections) Act and the  notice of the day and time of poll  already published, the poll at all   constituencies shall  also be held   on the llth day of December, 1980  between the hours of  7:00 a.m.   and 2.00 p.m.
2. Notwithstanding the provisions   of sections 44 and 45 of the   National Assembly   (Elections) Act,
(a) counting of votes on close of  poll  on 10th December,1980 and sub-  sequent  further poll at such   polling  stations on llth    December,1980 shall not invali-  date the poll or results duly   declared in respect thereof;
(b) Where  a Returning Officer   and/or presiding officer completed  count of poll on close of poll on   10th December, 1980 and duly    ascertained result in respect   therefore, such ascertaining of   the result, subject to Article 3   hereof, shall be valid and binding; and
(c) The counting of votes at the     various polling stations in a con  stituency instead of at a single   central point in such constituency  shall be valid.
3. For the purpose of the 1980             elections to the National    Assembly, Section 4-7 of the   National Assembly (Elections)   Act shall be substituted by the   following: “47A (a) when the   result of the poll of a constituency  has been ascertained the    Returning Officer shall make no   public declaration of the finding   but forthwith communicate it to   the Chairman of the Military   Commission with a confidential   report on various aspects of the   conduct of the election;
(b)  On receipt of the said result and   the report and information other-  wise, the Chairman of the    Military Commission shall ascer-  tain whether the election has   been fair and free of any irregu-  larity or violence and therefore   either
(i) declare elected the candidate to   whom the majority of votes have  been given and so endorse the   writ; or
(ii) declare the election void, which   declaration shall not be open to   challenge at a Court of Law, and   order a fresh election to be held   at a date to be notified in due   course.
(c) Any result declared otherwise   than in compliance with the pro  visions herein shall not be valid   or binding and any publication of  such purported result by any   means of whatsoever whether in  writing, print, communication or  by word of mouth howsoever   shall be a penal offence punish  able by a fine of up to shillings   half a million and or imprison-  ment of up to five years”.
4. This proclamation shall be   deemed to have come into force   on the l0th day of December, 1980.
Paulo Muwanga, Chairman,
Military Commission.

Online Security in the Middle East and North Africa: A Survey of Perceptions, Knowledge and Practice

Digital communication has become a more perilous activity, particularly for activists, political dissidents, and independent media. The recent surge in digital activism that has helped to shape the Arab spring has been met with stiff resistance by governments in the region intent on reducing the impact of digital organizing and independent media. No longer content with Internet filtering, many governments in the Middle East and around the world are using a variety of technological and offline strategies to go after online media and digital activists.

In this report we describe the results of a survey of 98 bloggers in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) carried out in May 2011 in order to study bloggers’ perceptions of online risk and the actions they take to address digital communications security, including both Internet and cell phone use. The survey was implemented in the wake of the Arab spring and documents a proliferation of online security problems among the respondents. In the survey, we address the respondents’ perceptions of online risk, their knowledge of digital security practices, and their reported online security practices. The survey results indicate that there is much room for improving online security practices, even among this sample of respondents who are likely to have relatively high technical knowledge and experience.
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/sites/cyber.law.harvard.edu/files/OnlineSecurityintheMiddleEastandNorthAfrica_August2011.pdf 

Wednesday, 3 August 2011

Ugandan Accused Of Transmitting HIV In Canada Gets Life In Prison


Johnson Aziga
A Ugandan man convicted of murder in Canada in 2009 for knowingly transmitting HIV to women was on Tuesday sentenced to life in prison.

Johnson Aziga in his 50’s, was in April 2009 found guilty of two counts of premeditated murder, and 10 counts of aggravated sexual assault for spreading the AIDS virus to his lovers.

Seven women were infected, and two have since died of AIDS-related complications. Aziga a “dangerous criminal,” meaning a commission will decide whether parole can be granted.
Aziga, a former employee of the provincial justice ministry, told the court he never intended to transmit the virus to the women, and that he had not revealed his status due to cultural and religious taboos in his homeland.

He said he wished to renounce his Canadian citizenship and serve out his sentence in Uganda or Kenya because he believed he had not received a fair trial in Canada, according to CBC public television. Prosecutors argued Aziga was at heightened risk of infecting other women if eventually released.
But his defense lawyers countered that during the eight years in prison since his 2003 arrest, Aziga had changed, learned of the health risks posed by his condition and would not repeat the same behavior. Agencies

Unemployment in Africa - What is the Way Forward?

Unemployment in Africa - What is the Way Forward?

Mike Mukula 1 August 2011

The African continent is day by day sliding into unemployment and poverty, especially of the youth. If leaders do not make long-term strategic plans, Africa will certainly be plunged into another cycle of subjugation and violence. The high fertility rate among our females and population growth in most countries, speaks volumes! This is because 50 per cent of people in most countries are below the age of 30. The spiralling rate of urbanisation exacerbates this threat. And yet, the said rate is not in consonance with job-creation!

http://allafrica.com/stories/201108010916.html


International Migration Outlook 2011

This publication provides an analysis of recent developments in migration movements and policies in OECD countries and two analytical chapters, covering migrant entrepreneurship and international migration to Israel.
http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/international-migration-outlook-2011_migr_outlook-2011-en 

Why Africana History?


by Dr. John Henrik Clarke

Africa and its people are the most written about and the least
understood of all of the world's people. This condition started in the
15th and the 16th centuries with the beginning of the slave trade
system. The Europeans not only colonialized most of the world, they
began to colonialize information about the world and its people. In
order to do this, they had to forget, or pretend to forget, all they
had previously known abut the Africans. They were not meeting them for
the first time; there had been another meeting during Greek and Roman
times. At that time they complemented each other. The African, Clitus
Niger, King of Bactria, was also a cavalry commander for Alexander the
Great. Most of the Greeks' thinking was influenced by this contact
with the Africans. The people and the cultures of what is known as
Africa are older than the word "Africa." According to most records,
old and new, Africans are the oldest people on the face of the earth.
The people now called Africans not only influenced the Greeks and the
Romans, they influenced the early world before there was a place
called Europe.

When the early Europeans first met Africans, at the crossroads of
history, it was a respectful meeting and the Africans were not slaves.
Their nations were old before Europe was born. In this period of
history, what was to be later known as "Africa" was an unknown place
to the people who would someday be called, "Europeans." Only the
people of some of the Mediterranean Islands and a few states of what
would become the Greek and Roman areas knew of parts of North Africa,
and that was a land of mystery. After the rise and decline of Greek
civilization and the Roman destruction of the city of Carthage, they
made the conquered territories into a province which they called
Africa, a word derived from "afri" and the name of a group of people
about whom little is known. At first the word applied only to the
Roman colonies in North Africa. There was a time when all dark-skinned
people were called Ethiopians, for the Greeks referred to Africa as,
"The Land Of The Burnt-Face People."

If Africa, in general, is a man-made mystery, Egypt, in particular, is
a bigger one. There has long been an attempt on the part of some
European "scholars" to deny that Egypt was a part of Africa. To do
this they had to ignore the great masterpieces on Egyptian history
written by European writers such as, Ancient Egypt. Light of the
World, Vols. I & II, and a whole school of European thought that
placed Egypt in proper focus in relationship to the rest of Africa.

The distorters of African history also had to ignore the fact that the
people of the ancient land which would later be called Egypt, never
called their country by that name. It was called, Ta-Merry or Kampt
and sometimes Kemet or Sais. The ancient Hebrews called it Mizrain.
Later the Moslem Arabs used the same term but later discarded it. Both
the Greeks and the Romans referred to the country as the "Pearl Of The
Nile." The Greeks gave it the simple name, Aegyptcus. Thus the word we
know as Egypt is of Greek Origin. Until recent times most Western
scholars have been reluctant to call attention to the fact that the
Nile River is 4,000 miles long. It starts in the south, in the heart
of Africa, and flows to the north. It was the world's first cultural
highway. Thus Egypt was a composite of many African cultures. In his
article, "The Lost Pharaohs of Nubia," Professor Bruce Williams infers
that the nations in the South could be older than Egypt. This
information is not new. When rebel European scholars were saying this
100 years ago, and proving it, they were not taken seriously.

It is unfortunate that so much of the history of Africa has been
written by conquerors, foreigners, missionaries and adventurers. The
Egyptians left the best record of their history written by local
writers. It was not until near the end of the 18th century when a few
European scholars learned to decipher their writing that this was
understood.

The Greek traveler, Herodotus, was in Africa about 450 B.C. His
eyewitness account is still a revelation. He witnessed African
civilization in decline and partly in ruins, after many invasions.

However, he could still see the indications of the greatness that it
had been. In this period in history, the Nile Valley civilization of
Africa had already brought forth two "Golden Ages" of achievement and
had left its mark for all the world to see.

Slavery and colonialism strained, but did not completely break, the
cultural umbilical cord between the Africans in Africa and those who,
by forced migration, now live in what is called the Western World. A
small group of African-American and Caribbean writers, teachers and
preachers, collectively developed the basis of what would be an
African Consciousness movement over 100 years ago. Their concern was
with African, in general, Egypt and Ethiopia, and what we now call the
Nile Valley.

In approaching this subject, I have given preference to writers of
African descent who are generally neglected. I maintain that the
African is the final authority on Africa. In this regard I have
reconsidered the writings of W.E.B. DuBois, George Washington
Williams, Drusilla Dungee Houston, Carter G. Woodson, Willis N.
Huggins, and his most outstanding living student, John G. Jackson. I
have also re-read the manuscripts of some of the unpublished books of
Charles C. Seifert, especially manuscripts of his last completed book,
Who Are The Ethiopians? Among Caribbean scholars, like Charles C.
Seifert, J.A. Rogers (from Jamaica) is the best known and the most
prolific. Over 50 years of his life was devoted to documenting the
role of African personalities in world history. His two-volume work,
World's Great Men of Color, is a pioneer work in the field.

Among the present-day scholars writing about African history, culture
and politics, Dr. Yosef ben-Jochannan's books are the most
challenging. I have drawn heavily on his research in the preparation
of this article. He belongs to the main cultural branch of the African
world, having been born in Ethiopia, growing to early manhood in the
Caribbean Islands and having lived in the African-American community
of the United States for over 20 years. His major books on African
history are: Black Man of the Nile, 1979, Africa: Mother of Western
Civilization, 1976, and The African Origins of Major Western
Religions, 1970.

Our own great historian, W.E.B. DuBois tells us,

"Always Africa is giving us something new . . . On its black bosom
arose one of the earliest, if not the earliest, of self-protecting
civilizations, and grew so mightily that it still furnishes
superlatives to thinking and speaking men. Out of its darker and more
remote forest vastness came, if we may credit many recent scientists,
the first welding of iron, and we know that agriculture and trade
flourished there when Europe was a wilderness."

Dr. DuBois tells us further that,

"Nearly every human empire that has arisen in the world, material and
spiritual, has found some of its greatest crises on this continent of
Africa. It was through Africa that Christianity became the religion of
the world . . . It was through Africa that Islam came to play its
great role of conqueror and civilizer."

Egypt and the nations of the Nile Valley were, figuratively, the
beating heart of Africa and the incubator for its greatness for more
than a thousand years. Egypt gave birth to what later would become
known as "Western Civilization," long before the greatness of Greece
and Rome.

This is a part of the African story, and in the distance it is a part
of the African-American story. It is difficult for depressed African-
Americans to know that they are a part of the larger story of the
history of the world. The history of the modern world was made, in the
main, by what was taken from African people. Europeans emerged from
what they call their "Middle-Ages," people-poor, land-poor and
resources-poor. And to a great extent, culture-poor. They raided and
raped the cultures of the world, mostly Africa, and filled their homes
and museums with treasures, then they called the people primitive. The
Europeans did not understand the cultures of non-Western people then;
they do not understand them now.

History, I have often said, is a clock that people use to tell their
political time of day. It is also a compass that people use to find
themselves on the map of human geography. History tells a people where
they have been and what they have been. It also tells a people where
they are and what they are. Most importantly, history tells a people
where they still must go and what they still must be.

There is no way to go directly to the history of African-Americans
without taking a broader view of African world history. In his book,
Tom-Tom, the writer John W. Vandercook makes this meaningful
statement: A race is like a man.

Until it uses its own talents, takes pride in its own history, and
loves its own memories, it can never fulfill itself completely. This,
in essence, is what African-American history and what African-American
History Month is about. The phrase African-American or African-
American History Month, taken at face value and without serious
thought, appears to be incongruous.

Why is there a need for an African-American History Month when there
is no similar month for the other minority groups in the United
States. The history of the United States, in total, consists of the
collective histories of minority groups. What we call 'American
civilization' is no more than the sum of their contributions. The
African- Americans are the least integrated and the most neglected of
these groups in the historical interpretation of the American
experience.

This neglect has made African-American History Month a necessity.

Most of the large ethnic groups in the United States have had, and
still have, their historical associations. Some of these associations
predate the founding of the Association For The Study of Negro Life
and History (1915). Dr. Charles H. Wesley tells us that, "Historical
societies were organized in the United States with the special purpose
in view of preserving and maintaining the heritage of the American
nation."

Within the framework of these historical societies, many ethnic
groups, Black as well as white, engaged in those endeavors that would
keep alive their beliefs in themselves and their past as a part of
their hopes for the future. For African-Americans, Carter G. Woodson
led the way and used what was then called, Negro History Week, to call
attention to his people's contribution to every aspect of world
history. Dr. Woodson, then Director of the Association For the Study
of Negro Life and History, conceived this special week as a time when
public attention should be focused on the achievements of America's
citizens of African descent.

The acceptance of the facts of African-American history and the
African-American historian as a legitimate part of the academic
community did not come easily. Slavery ended and left its false images
of Black people intact. In his article, "What the Historian Owes the
Negro," the noted African-American historian, Dr. Benjamin Quarles,
says:

"The Founding Fathers, revered by historians for over a century and a
half, did not conceive of the Negro as part of the body of politics.
Theoretically, these men found it hard to imagine a society where
Negroes were of equal status to whites. Thomas Jefferson, third
President of the United States, who was far more liberal than the run
of his contemporaries, was never the less certain that "the two races,
equally free, cannot live in the same government."

I have been referring to the African origin of African-American
literature and history. This preface is essential to every meaningful
discussion of the role of the African-American in every aspect of
American life, past and present. I want to make it clear that the
Black race did not come to the United States culturally empty-handed.
The role and importance of ethnic history is in how well it teaches a
people to use their own talents, take pride in their own history and
love their own memories. In order to fulfill themselves completely, in
all of their honorable endeavors it is important that the teacher of
history of the Black race find a definition of the subject, and a
frame of reference that can be understood by students who have no
prior knowledge of the subject. The following definition is
paraphrased from a speech entitled, "The Negro Writer and His Relation
To His Roots," by Saunders Redding, (1960): Heritage, in essence, is
how a people have used their talent to created a history that gives
them memories that they can respect, and use to command the respect of
other people. The ultimate purpose of history and history teaching is
to use a people's talent to develop an awareness and a pride in
themselves so that they can create better instruments for living
together with other people.

This sense of identity is the stimulation for all of a people's honest
and creative efforts. A people's relationship to their heritage is the
same as the relationship of a child to its mother. I repeat: History
is a clock that people use to tell their time of day. It is a compass
that they use to find themselves on the map of human geography. It
also tells them where they are, and what they are. Most importantly,
an understanding of history tells a people where they still must go,
and what they still must be.

Early white American historians did not accord African people anywhere
a respectful place in their commentaries on the history of man. In the
closing years of the nineteenth century, African- American historians
began to look at their people's history from their vantage point and
their point of view. Dr. Benjamin Quarks observed that "as early as
1883 this desire to bring to public attention the untapped material on
the Negro prompted George Washington Williams to publish his two-
volume History of The Negro Race in America from 1619 to 1880. The
first formally trained African-American historian was W.E.B. DuBois,
whose doctoral dissertation, published in 1895, The Suppression Of The
African Slave Trade To The United States, 1638-1870, became the first
title to be published in the Harvard Historical Studies. It was with
Carter G. Woodson, another Ph.D., that African world history took a
great leap forward and found a defender who could document his claims.
Woodson was convinced that unless something was done to rescue the
Black man from history's oversight, he would become a "negligible
factor in the thought of the world. " Woodson, in 1915, founded the
Association for the Study of Negro Life and History. Woodson believed
that there was no such thing as, "Negro History. " He said what was
called "Negro History" was only a missing segment of world history. He
devoted the greater portion of his life to restoring this segment.

Africa came into the Mediterranean world, mainly through Greece, which
had been under African influence, and then Africa was cut off from the
melting pot by the turmoil among the Europeans and the religious
conquests incident to the rise of Islam. Africa, prior to these
events, had developed its history and civilization, indigenous to its
people and lands. Africa came back into the general picture of history
through the penetration of North Africa, West Africa and the Sudan by
the Arabs. European and American slave traders next ravaged the
continent. The imperialist colonizers and missionaries finally entered
the scene and prevailed until the recent re-emergence of independent
African nations.

Africans are, of course, closely connected to the history of both
North and South America. The African-American's role in the social,
economic and political development of the American states is an
important foundation upon which to build racial understanding,
especially in areas in which false generalization and stereotypes have
been developed to separate peoples rather than to unite them. Contrary
to a misconception which still prevails, the Africans were familiar
with literature and art for many years before their contact with the
Western World. Before the breaking-up of the social structure of the
West African states of Ghana, Mali and Songhay and the internal strife
and chaos that made the slave trade possible, the forefathers of the
Africans who eventually became slaves in the United States, lived in a
society where university life was fairly common and scholars were held
in reverence.

To understand fully any aspect of African-American life, one must
realize that the African-American is not without a cultural past,
though he was many generations removed from it before his achievements
in American literature and art commanded any appreciable attention.
Africana, or Black History, should be taught every day, not only in
the schools, but also in the home. African History Month should be
every month. We need to learn about all the African people of the
world, including those who live in Asia and the islands of the
Pacific.
In the twenty-first century there will be over one billion African
people in the world. We are tomorrow's people. But, of course, we were
yesterday's people, too. With an understanding of our new importance
we can change the world, if first we change ourselves.

The late Dr. John Henrik Clarke, a pre-eminent African-American
historian, author of several volumes on the history of Africa and the
Diaspora, taught inthe Department of Black and Puerto Rican Studies at
Hunter College of the City University of New York.

Originally published in THE BLACK COLLEGIAN Magazine (1997).


--
Rehema
Patriot in Kampala,East Africa

When the boot of government is on your neck,it doesn't matter if it's left or right. Today is Buganda and Besigye, tomorrow is some one else.

DRAFT FEDERAL CONSTITUTION FOR UNITED STATES OF AFRICA RELEASED

 

AfricanConstitution.org
 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2011 August 2


Proposed Constitution for the United States of Africa

AfricanConstitution.org has released the Proposed Constitution for the United States of Africa. 

This is the most comprehensive, democratic and serious plan for a progressive United States of Africa that has been placed on the table in the entire history of African unification. 

The proposals in the newly released document came directly from Africans. The draft is the first bottom-up step toward a citizen-founded United States of Africa in 2017.

The full details of the draft are in the Roadmap for the United States of Africa.