Category: Daily Monitor

Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) presidential candidate Nathan Nandala Mafabi yesterday took his campaign to Buvuma Islands, where he accused the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) government of neglecting the area for years, land injustices, and failure to deliver public services. Addressing supporters at Kirongo Landing Site, Mr Mafabi condemned what he called ‘decades of silence’ on issues affecting islanders.

During a visit to St Mary’s Buvuma Primary School, he expressed shock at the state of the facilities.

‘It is heartbreaking to see children learning in such a filthy environment. This is not the future we should be building for Uganda,’ he said.

‘For more than 30 years, NRM has ruled this country, and our children in Buvuma are still studying in mud-and-wattle classrooms,’ he added. ‘The roads are impassable, the health services are non-existent, and land rights have been trampled on.’

Local residents echoed his concerns. Ms Olivia Nasuuna complained that land had been grabbed for palm oil plantations, leaving many families landless. ‘Our land was taken without proper compensation. Some of us were paid peanuts, others got nothing. Now we are even being chased from the lake,’ she said. Mr Jonathan Ebwaru, MP for Soroti West Division, said islanders had been neglected to the point of desperation. ‘Many have been reduced to beggars,’ he said. Mr Mafabi pledged sweeping land reforms if elected president.

‘People must be paid fair compensation, and in fact, they deserve a share of the profits from oil palm products too,’ he said. He urged islanders to vote for leaders who would listen and act. ‘You deserve better. Buvuma deserves better. Let’s build a new Uganda that works for the people, not one that sells off their future,’ he said. Mr Mafabi is today expected to cross to Busoga Sub-region, where he will hold rallies in Iganga District.

Issues in Buvuma

* Dilapidated schools: Children studying in mud-and-wattle classrooms with poor sanitation.

* Neglected infrastructure: Roads are largely impassable; health services are minimal.

* Land grabbing: Large tracts of land taken for palm oil plantations; residents inadequately compensated.

* Economic hardships: Many locals have been marginalised, some reduced to begging.

Timing is everything!

The administration of Kawempe Muslim Secondary School left it late but they chose the right time to recognise their girls’ school football team for their efforts over the last six years.

“Small tokens of appreciation look unpleasant to the eyes but they help motivate and build strong bonds,” the school headteacher Hajati Zulaika Kibirige said, borrowing from a Luganda proverb, as she rewarded the players – particularly those that represented the school and finished second in girls’ football at the 2025 Federation of East Africa Secondary School Sports Association (Feasssa) Games in Kakamega in August – with Hisense 32 inch LED television screens.

This was during a function held at the campus and presided over by titular head of Muslims in Uganda Prince Kassim Nakibinge to bid farewell to old school board (2019-2025) and usher in the new one for the next five years. The debate team that includes school head prefect Hussein Kabogoza, Fahad Musasizi, and Janat Firidaus and is tutored by Ziriya Nakyejjwe was also recognized for winning the East Africa Schools Debating Championships in Arusha early last month.

In the period 2019-2025; Kawempe finished third at the 2024 Caf U-14 African Schools Championship in Zanzibar thereby winning $150,000 (about Shs550m) and topped the Cecafa zonal qualifiers for the aforementioned tournament in 2023 thereby winning $100,000 (about Shs370m). They also won at the Feasssa Games in 2019 (Arusha) and 2023 (Huye). Kawempe will again represent Uganda in the Cecafa Schools tournament later in the year after winning the national qualifiers in Tororo in July.

Domestically, Kawempe also won the girls’ football titles at the Uganda Secondary Schools Sports Association (USSSA) Games in 2019 and 2024, Uganda Muslim Education Association (Umea) Games for the last four years consecutively, and many more.

Motivation for the league

Part of this school team also feeds into the renowned Kawempe Muslim side that plays in the Fufa Women Super League (FWSL) and won that national title in the 2023/24 season. Others play for the side that competes in the second tier Elite League (FWEL) and is attached to Uganda Revenue Authority.

The 2023/24 feat earned the Ayub Khalifa-coached side a place at the Caf Women’s Champions League qualifiers in Ethiopia in 2024, where they finished third.

The 2025/26 FWSL season kicks off on Friday and Khalifa admits that “a surprise appreciation package came in handy” for his side that is preparing to take on rivals and current champions Kampala Queens (KQ) in their league opener at home.

“We are happy to see that our efforts are appreciated. It is another reason to keep giving everything we have on pitch for the school team and club,” talisman Agnes Nabukenya, said.

Some of the players were joined at the function by their parents. Dorcus Kisakye’s mother Jane Nakaziba sells banana leaves in Owino and “cannot believe how far football has taken my daughter, travelling beyond my dreams, from one country to another.”

Zoena Kampi’s father Ali Waiswa, a lecturer at Kyambogo University, said “the new set will resolve quarrels for television at home” while Shadia Nabirye’s father, Meddie Musomerwa said “our story starts at Kawempe and I will die supporting it,” despite his older daughter Shakirah Nankwanga moving from the school to KQ in June 2024.

Task at hand

The outgoing board led by Hajji Hasib Takuba Kabuye celebrated sucesses from their five-year strategic plan that include; infrastructure development in terms of a new dormitory for the girls, completing the Science block and renovating the administration block, plus working with its alumni to modify the gate.

The school, which has maintained a great academic standard in Kampala’s top three and Uganda’s top 15, has also acquired neighbouring lands for expansion

“The memorable parts of our leaderships included the change of leadership (from former headteacher Hajji Bruhane Mugerwa), acquiring lands – about three to four acres to develop, and putting up a sports policy that allowed us to support the girls better (with scholarships and putting them in competitions at all possible levels).

“Now I am hoping that the school playground will be turned into a stadium. We have some money and also won some (from Caf) to do this,” Hajji Takuba said challenging the new board led by Makerere University educationist Muhammad Kiggungu Musoke.

The headteacher stressed that they indeed “plan to set up one of the best stadiums in Kawempe division and probably the country” but are “yet to receive the funds from Caf” and “are in constant communication with Fufa incase of any developments.”

Uganda has taken visible steps in advancing women’s representation. Today, the country boasts a female Vice President, a Prime Minister, and both a former and current Speaker of Parliament who are women. Affirmative action in universities has opened doors for thousands of young women. In government, academia, and the corporate world, women now hold positions that once felt unattainable. These milestones matter. They signal a society in transition, steadily challenging long-held assumptions.

And yet, when the Electoral Commission (EC) recently nominated eight presidential candidates, every single one of them was a man. The absence of women at this level is not new, but it remains telling. When women climb closer to the very top of political, corporate, or academic ladders, the story changes. The rules suddenly shift. A quiet but cruel message echoes: you may rise, but only so far. Whispers begin: ‘Who paved her way?’ For too many women, years of study, rigour, and leadership are dismissed as the product of connections or compromise rather than merit.

The scrutiny women face is also markedly harsher than that directed at men. While men are judged politically; by their policies, alliances, or even financial scandals; women are judged more personally. In politics, courageous figures such as Dr Miria Obote, Betty Kamya, Maureen Kyalya, and Nancy Kalembe dared to contest for national leadership. Their presence was significant, but their credibility was quickly undermined, often caricatured rather than celebrated.

In academia, an excellent professor was recently promoted to a high-ranking role; a position she earned after years of dedication, research, and discipline. She had built skills, networks, and a leadership style that commanded respect. Many of us applauded her rise as a triumph for women in academia and beyond. Yet it also reminded us that too often, society hesitates to fully honor women’s excellence, attaching shadows to their light instead of celebrating it for what it truly is.

This pattern is not unique to Uganda. Across Africa, women have risen to prominence despite barriers. These women remind the world that African women do not just belong in leadership; they redefine it.

Still, a sobering truth remains. Women are often ‘allowed’ to lead only within boundaries that men set. In some religious denominations, for instance, women may rise as deacons but are barred from heading congregations. In workplaces, they may chair committees, manage departments, or climb into middle management, but when they aim for the executive office, they are told they lack toughness; or face insinuations about how they got there. The irony is that women make up a large share of Uganda’s voting population, workforce, and academic community. Yet when it comes to rallying behind women leaders, solidarity often fails.

This raises difficult questions. Do women doubt their peers? Or are promising leaders broken down by structural obstacles long before they can build the charisma and networks required for broad support? Have we truly rejected capable women, or have we denied them the resources and space to grow into their full potential? The answer is complex. Patriarchy remains a powerful gatekeeper, imposing harsher moral codes, magnifying women’s missteps, and dragging their private lives into public judgment. At the same time, women’s own solidarity has not always been harnessed to its full potential. Numbers alone have not yet translated into power.

The way forward is not to cast blame but to strengthen systems. We need leadership pipelines that reward merit over tokenism, workplaces that honour skill above rumour or compromise, and political spaces that elevate vision rather than patronage. Women, too, must believe in one another’s capacity and stand together when suspicion threatens to erode hard-won progress. We must also salute the women who, despite these odds, continue to rise and lead. Their courage is not only personal triumph but a collective victory that lights the path for generations to come.

Four Sudanese nationals have been arrested in Busia district in a crackdown on illegal mining, Ugandan energy officials said Wednesday.

The suspects, Abdel Gadir Mohamed, Abdallah Bashir, Mubarak Muhmad and Ashraf Muhmad, were detained Tuesday evening in Mawero, Buteba Sub-county, after they were found operating unlicensed gold mines and a processing plant.

Agnes Alaba, the commissioner for mines in the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development, who led the operation, confirmed the arrests.

‘They are here illegally doing work which is supposed to be done by Ugandans,’ Alaba said, noting the group had no valid visas or work permits.

The men are employees of Alsakhoor Trading and Services Limited, a Sudanese-owned company accused of carrying out gold mining and processing in Tiira Town Council and Mawero without approval.

Documents seen by Monitor show the company is licensed only as a mineral dealer. Its license, issued by the ministry on July 30, 2025 under number MDL 20250578, expires on December 31.

The permit allows trading in gold and other minerals but does not cover mining or processing.

Alaba said the arrests form part of a wider nationwide operation to enforce compliance in the mining sector.

‘We have been to Tiira gold mining area and established serious concerns where some miners are operating without licenses, encroaching on gazetted wetlands and leaving abandoned pits,’ she said.

The four suspects were handed to Busia police station as investigations continue. They face multiple charges under Uganda’s mining laws.

During the same operation, ministry officials visited Tiira mining sites where they found extensive environmental degradation. Local miners acknowledged the challenges.

Stephen Engido, a miner, told NTVUganda that they were ‘aware of the degradation of the environment’ but insisted they were putting in place mitigation measures.

‘We are required to undertake all this mitigation in order to be given the environment impact assessment report from NEMA,’ Engido said.

Another artisanal miner, Paul Angesu, chairperson of the Tiira Landlords Mining Association, admitted mining was impossible without some damage but said backfilling had begun.

‘We have embarked on backfilling some of these pits because it is one of the requirements by the Ministry of Energy and NEMA,’ Angesu said.

Alaba warned that miners have three months to comply with environmental standards, acquire valid documents, and regularize their activities, or face closure.

By the end of presidential nominations for the 2026 elections, no female candidate had made it to the contest. Despite interests, the bar seemed to have been too high for those who attempted to enter the race. Some people have made this a big deal. One prospective candidate was bold enough to accuse the Electoral Commission of discrimination, insisting that they do not want women. Key questions remain: What are the possibilities that female candidates would have done well in the elections? What are the lessons from the previous female candidates? What do women lose by not participating directly?

In 2006, when Miria Obote was presented by the Uganda People’s Congress (UPC) to contest for President, it seemed exciting for some that history had been made. Finally, we were in the books of history for having scaled the gender barriers, breaking the highest ceiling. The first female presidential candidate in our history sounds good. It inspires the next generation, it appears. For the subsequent three years, Beti Kamya 2011, Maureen Kyalya in 2016, and Nancy Kalembe in 2021, all managed to make their mark by managing to get nominated and campaign. Their performance in each election is a story for another day, and I dare not discourage the next generation of aspirants.

While after the elections, for some, we forgot, there seems to have been created an expectation that female candidates are a norm for a presidential election. Sometimes that is the most significant win. The normalisation of a practice, even when the outcome would not change. Why does it matter that we should have female candidates? The law, when dreaming up affirmative action for women in politics, considered the Local Council levels and Parliament for such, but remained gender neutral for the presidential race. Was that a tactful way to lock out the women? What incentives were put in place to encourage the participation of women in presidential elections as candidates?

It may seem that, suddenly, the constitutional acknowledgement that women suffered some historical and social injustices that impaired their participation in politics, for which affirmative action was needed, did not matter at the presidential level. Or perhaps, leaving out incentives for the participation of women at the presidential level was a quiet way to say women were not ready for that level. If it matters that women participate at that level, then we must ask how meaningful that participation might be. Would a 20-year-old, who expresses interest in running for the presidency, necessarily reflect understanding of the demands of the office and what is required for it?

Perhaps it demonstrates our lack of guidance on who is fit for such an office. Not that there is anything wrong with a 20-year-old running for the office, of course. But even as women, we should be able to ask, which women are able to run and lead rather than have women for the sake of it. The legal logic is that the office of the President is so serious that there should be no need to add incentives for women to participate. They either are capable or they are not. Yet, incentives such as levelling the playing field for participation, making politics less toxic and far from a war zone, and freeing space for political belonging are all crucial for an improved environment in which women are capable of meaningfully participating.

There are many ways that women’s participation is discouraged, without actually saying so. Women assess what they are dealing with. Still, women’s participation need not be in the race itself. Rather than wait to be invited to the kings’ table, where the manners are defined for them, they can claim some space in the electoral process and participate meaningfully. In the campaign process, women can mobilise voters and educate them about the importance of being active in the elections.

Women can also participate in making demands for a peaceful election because all who participate are their children. And lastly, women can be involved in the election process as observers, pacifiers, and discussants, raising critical issues for voters to assess and make demands on candidates. We must address ourselves to the nature of politics and participation needed. Women should not just be candidates in an election as trophies to be admired and thereafter sizzle out. They can add value in a variety of ways to the democratic process. It is those ways we have to keep engaging with, even outside the race.

Three years before the end of his second term in 2006, President Museveni moved to remove Article 105(2) of the 1995 Constitution, which limited presidents to two terms. Despite promising in 2001 that his 2001-2006 term would be his last, he sought a third term, or ‘kisanja.’

James Wapakhabulo, former Speaker and chair of the Constituent Assembly, warned Mr Museveni in a November 2003 letter about the plans to scrap term limits. Wapakhabulo, removed as Speaker in 1998 for his principled stance, died in March 2004. Museveni replied over a month after his burial, revealing his intentions to remove the term limits. Frederic Musisi brings you the President’s letter published in this newspaper on May 12, 2004.

I am writing in respect of a letter written to me by the late Hon. Wapakhabulo dated 19 November 2003 that was leaked to the Press by some individual we shall find out more about.

By the time this letter was published in the press, I had not seen it yet. Apart from what I read in the paper, I saw the original letter on 26th April 2004. One of my legal officers, Mr Kashilingi, summarised it on 24th March 2004, although the letter was written on 19th November 2003.

Hon. Wapakhabulo is now dead, and I cannot answer him. However, I am writing to all of you so that you know my views in connection with certain aspects of the irrational and desperate efforts by those who, it seems, have been scheming a long time to usurp the authority of the people and reverse the gains ushered in by the 26th of January 1986.

When I read the late Wapakhabulo’s letter, I find a lot of politically and, possibly, legally incorrect positions. On page three (8) of the letter, the author refers to his conversation with the Solicitor General who pointed out to him that ‘since the Article had ‘become contentious, it was only right at other provisions of the Constitution such as Clause one which provides that all power belongs to the people and Clause four (4) which provides for the right of the people to express their will and consent as to who shall govern them are called in to resolve the issue.

Surprisingly, the deceased dismisses this by saying that what is contentious is not the forum but the proposal itself. In fact both are contentious.

This is because, to some people, this matter is so important at it should be resolved by the ultimate authority in the land – People In my opinion, as a resistance fighter, there is nothing wrong (of course) with Parliament being empowered to amend a particular Article of the Constitution.

What is very wrong, however, is for somebody to argue, as I have seen people exhausting themselves in the press, that there are certain areas of the Constitution that are no-go areas for the people and only a monopoly of Parliament. This is amazing and outrageous.

This letter goes on say as follows: ‘The results of such a referendum held under that proposed law to determine the question of whether Article 105 (2) should be repealed, even if favourable, has propaganda value only but nothing else’ Really !!

This is amazing. To whom does the country belong – to the people or Parliament? MPs are servants of the people. How can someone equate them with the latter or even say that the former are higher than the latter.

My whole life, as you know, has been in the struggle for liberation of the masses from oppression and marginalisation. These arguments are part logic that seeks to usurp the hard-won authority the Movement gave to the People. Article 83 (1) (g), for instance, provides that, in case Uganda is under a multi-party system, a Member of Parliament elected on a ticket of a certain party cannot ‘cross the floor’ as they used to do in the 1960s and join another side in Parliament. He would lose his seat and go for fresh elections. This was an attempt to avoid the mistakes of 1960s leaders betraying the people who elected them. It is amazing, therefore, that certain circles in the Movement are trying to do the same in new ways.

There is no way the population can demand the right to pronounce themselves on any important issue and the Parliament of Uganda denies them that right. Worse still, there is no way a referendum can be held and the people pronounce themselves on an issue but that popular decision is only ‘of propaganda value’.

This would be a counter-revolution against the authority of the people and I cannot associate myself with such an act. What, then, would be the legitimacy of such a constitution. There was Apartheid Constitution in South Africa until 10 years ago, constructed and defended by Apartheid lawyers, such a constitution, however, had no legitimacy.

When a constitutional or legal arrangement pays more attention to philosophically irrational procedures rather than the basic, genuine aspirations of the people, it loses legitimacy in the eyes of the people; it loses legitimacy and then it is ignored.

When it is ignored by the masses, the legal gymnasticians are powerless to enforce their illegitimate arrangements. Have we not seen this with mob justice in our villages? Instead of having an easily understood procedure, if you construct an obscure procedure that excludes the aspirations of the people, you risk rendering that legal arrangement illegitimate.

The Resistance Movement that I have led for the last 34 years has a clear philosophy on this. It is: ‘All power belongs to the People’. The framers of the 1995 Constitution (where some of us were not) should have at every turn and corner, ensured this principle. If they did not, as the late Wapakhabulo seemed to be saying in his letter, that was their failure, to put it mildly.

Was this an attempt by the framers of the 1995 Constitution to usurp the power of the People or was it negligence? This is the more reason, therefore why we should now rectify those mistakes of the CA, if any. After all, this is a Constitutional review. These irrationalities shall be reviewed. The people’s authority must be unambiguously in the saddle of Uganda’s Stale affairs.

I was surprised that the author tried to mix up political matters with judicial matters. On page two (2) of his letter, he talks of Article 126 (2) which talks about Judicial power deriving from the people. He asks as follows: ‘Can the people hold a referendum under Article 255 to ‘sideline the jurisdiction of any Court of law in the judicial system?’

Article 105 (2) talks about political issues, which arc a more direct responsibility of the people than the judiciary. The people are the one? Who elect the President, Members of Parliament (MPs), Local Councils (LCs), etc. They do not elect judges. The judges belong to the professional cadreship like doctors, accountants, etc. Nevertheless, even those are a concern and therefore responsibility of the people. If they so mismanaged their professional role and, some of them do quite often, the people, either indirectly or directly, could be called upon to resolve the impasse.

Article 126 (1) says that the judges will exercise their powers in accordance with norms and aspirations of the people. Nevertheless, it was no problem for one of the judges to decide that publishing of ‘false news’ is legal’! Among all the tribes of Uganda to tell a lie about somebody or something is an offence. You must kuhoonga-paying a fine to gain forgiveness. However, since elements of the judiciary are, in effect violating the Constitution with impunity, the situation may so negatively accumulate that a crisis between the people and those foreign-minded Courts develops. It will, obviously, be resolved in favour of the people. Nobody can stop this as long as the pro-people NRM leaders are in charge of the State. If they were not, a real crisis would develop. You all remember when people were being murdered in Kampala with impunity by criminals. Most of the killers were criminals who had been released from jails by the Courts! Using my authority as Commander-in-Chief of UPDF, I used a section of the Armed Forces Law [NRA Statute 1998 (UPDF ACT CAP 305)] to defend the people.

This law says that even if some-body is a civilian but is found with a piece of equipment ordinarily reserved for the army, he will be treated as if he was a soldier and could, therefore, be tried by Court Martial. That is how the people of Kampala were saved from criminal terrorism. I actually ‘sidelined’ part of the civilian Court system in order to save the people.

The purpose is to serve the people not to serve the Courts, the President or Parliament. Before i referred the criminals to the court martial, I had referred the concern to some lawyers who told me that such an arrangement would not be appropriate because ‘Somebody could not be a judge in his own cause’. ‘A judge in his own cause’!! The thieves were killing civilians mainly. How then would soldiers in a Court Martial be ‘judges in their own cause’? I held off for two years and the situation continued to deteriorate for the Kampala dweller.

When I thought more about the issue, I ignored the advice of lawyers: I authorised Wembley and the trying of the criminals equipped with firearms by a Court Martial. There were some whimpers among the legal gymnasticians. Since those whimpers had no legitimacy among the people anymore, they were ignored.

The law here is about democratic legitimacy in fulfillment of the wishes and aspiration of the masses. Nevertheless, I do not believe that the present Constitution is fundamentally anti-people. Otherwise, we should have mounted, long ago, a political resistance against those anti-people provisions.

It seems that the main problems lie with the biased interpretations by the prejudiced lawyers and judges. The most beautiful Article of this Constitution is Article 1 (1): ‘All power belongs to the people’. This was the whole purpose of our carrying the gun for 13 years (1971-1979. 1981-1986).

In fact, this is why some of us have been enthusiastic supporters of this Constitution. There is no other Article of this Constitution, which says anything similar to this.

There is no Article, which says: ‘All powder belongs to Parliament; or All power belongs to the President; or All power belongs to the Judiciary.’ Article 99 (1) says that ‘all Executive power belongs to the President.’ It does not say. ‘All power belongs to the President’. It only confines itself to the ‘Executive power’.

Therefore, the problem is caused by the biased judges and lawyers who do not have a scale of legitimacy in their heads. Who has got the most legitimate authority in the land? Obviously, the people! All other authorities in the country (President; Parliament and Judiciary) derive their authority from the people (Article 1 (3).

I, however, heard that one of the Judges (or was it a cluster of them) ruled that all Articles of the Constitution are equal. This is incorrect. Article 1, (1) is above all the other Articles. If this has not been clear to the various Authorities, then this Constitutional Review process must clarify that. If there were no cloudy spectacles worn by those who interpret the present Constitution in a manner designed to dilute or eliminate the people’s authority, even this Constitution would be adequate. Given the propensity towards diluting ‘or even usurping people’s authority, the season for clarification, once and for all time, has arrived.

Yoweri K. Museveni

PRESIDENT

cc: Honourable Cabinet Ministers.

cc: Honourable Ministers of State

A disturbing video clip has resurfaced online and gone viral. In it, Congolese independence hero and first Prime Minister Patrice Émery Lumumba is shown in his final moments in January 1961, stumbling through an open field, his tormentors chasing, slapping, and beating him with rifle butts as though he were a common street thief.

Lumumba’s last days remain among the darkest chapters of Africa’s independence era. Ousted in a September 1960 coup led by Colonel Joseph Mobutu (later Mobutu Sese Seko), Lumumba was arrested near Port Francqui (today Ilebo) in Kasai Province on December 1, 1960, and flown under guard to Leopoldville (now Kinshasa).

After weeks of humiliation, he was transferred to Katanga on January 17, 1961, where treacherous Moïse Tshombe’s secessionist regime and Belgian officers awaited him. That evening, Lumumba and two allies-Maurice Mpolo and Joseph Okito-were driven to a clearing outside Élisabethville (now Lubumbashi). They were beaten, mocked, and tied “kandoya” style (their arms twisted behind their backs). Strapped to trees, they were shot dead by a Katangan firing squad supervised by Belgian officers.

Their bodies were hacked to pieces and dissolved in sulphuric acid. A Belgian officer kept teeth and bone fragments as macabre souvenirs-returned to Congo only in 2022. It was an attempted erasure, a determination to deny him even a grave. Instead, it immortalised him. The image of Lumumba bound, defiant, and executed in that Katangan night has remained etched into Africa’s collective memory. The clip-now circulating widely on X (Twitter)-has reignited debate about Lumumba’s legacy. The iconography of this legacy is immense. In Uganda, there is Lumumba Hall at Makerere University, as well as Lumumba Avenue in Kololo. Children are still being named after him.

Across Africa, from Cairo and Algiers, through Central Africa and everywhere in the southern African swathe, his name runs through streets and institutions. Then there are countless books, T-shirts, murals, and stickers. In just a few months of leadership, Lumumba captured the hopes of a continent breaking its colonial chains. His fiery Independence Day speech on June 30, 1960, denouncing Belgian exploitation and affirming dignity for all Congolese, set him apart from more cautious contemporaries.

He stood for Pan-African unity, refusing to let foreign capitals or reactionary local elites dictate the future of Congo. Unlike many leaders of his generation, he resisted tribal temptations. He refused to be a regional boss or an ethnic warlord, insisting instead on a unified Congolese nation. But if all we do is weep over Lumumba’s torment and exalt his martyrdom, we risk missing the real lessons. His brief and turbulent reign as Congo’s first prime minister, from June 24 to September 5, 1960, was marked by brilliance, yes, but also grave miscalculations.

His most damaging error was his refusal to build broad coalitions. From the moment Congo became independent, he treated rivals, including President Joseph Kasavubu, Katanga’s Tshombe, and South Kasai’s Albert Kalonji, as enemies to be crushed rather than bargained with. Within weeks, Katanga seceded on July 11, 1960, followed by South Kasai on August 9, and the country began to splinter. His insistence on a rigidly centralised unitary state was equally self-defeating. A country bigger than Argentina and South Africa combined, with over 200 ethnic groups, was never going to be ruled by decree from Leopoldville. His push for central control fanned rebellion instead of suppressing it.

The army was another disaster. On July 5, 1960, he authorised the “Africanisation” of the Force Publique, sacking European officers overnight; fine, but without preparing Congolese replacements. The army mutinied within days, looting towns and terrorising civilians. Belgium sent in paratroopers on July 9 to “protect its citizens”, tightening its grip on Congo. Economically, Lumumba denounced monopolies and foreign strangleholds but offered no serious plan for mines, banks, or transport. Investors fled-technical staff packed up. Shortages worsened.

His June 30 independence speech, while a much-loved African thunderbolt of truth, humiliated Kasavubu and alienated moderates. Lumumba mistook mass adulation for political consensus. To sanctify Lumumba without reckoning with his errors is to risk repeating them. These are warnings to every African leader who thinks charisma can replace institutions or that slogans can substitute for actionable policy. His biggest tactical blunder was alienating both local and external centres of power at once.

He quickly lost support from Western powers, the United Nations, and powerful Congolese factions, leaving him exposed. Leaders today who burn bridges simultaneously-without building durable local coalitions or independent economic bases-risk the same isolation. And for the Ugandan Opposition, a lesson too. Now, with the race for next January’s elections on, and the arrests, abductions, and torture of Opposition members mounting, they too need a tactical reflection. Bobi Wine and his National Unity Platform have captured mass enthusiasm. Still, they must learn from both the brilliance and the mistakes of Africa’s heroes, or risk being trapped forever in cycles of martyrdom without victory.

Foreign banks are pulling out of Africa after decades of operations, saddled by declining profits and rising operational costs. This reflects the continent’s changing investment landscape and the diminishing appeal of the financial services sector.

Ongoing exits are largely linked to increasing competition from telecoms and financial technology (fintech) firms. Mobile and digital financial services offerings have weakened the dominance of global banks, worsened by weakening currencies, political instability in several countries, and rising cases of terrorism.

A new study by global rating agency, Moody’s, spotlights recent exits, noting that a tough operating environment has seen top global lenders, which have operated on the continent for years, scale down operations or exit completely. Some have sold their African businesses to local banking operators.

‘Africa was long regarded as one of the next frontiers for global banking expansion. But the perception of many Western (foreign) banks has shifted over the last decade owing to disappointing profitability and rising operational challenges,’ Moody’s says.

The report notes that Western banking groups, some of which have been in Africa for more than a century, are increasingly leaving the continent, and as they reassess their strategies in Africa, a growing number are choosing to scale back or exit entirely from certain markets.

Since 2019, at least seven major foreign lenders have announced plans to either scale back or leave Africa completely. They include some large British and French banking groups, such as Barclays, Standard Chartered, BNP Paribas, Credit Agricole, Groupe BPCE, HSBC, and Société Générale.

The report notes that Africa’s retail banking in particular has fallen short of expectations for some foreign banks, with increasing competition from mobile and digital competitors challenging traditional banks’ market shares and profitability.

For African countries lacking comprehensive banking networks, Moody’s notes, mobile banking has become an easy alternative for money transfers and an important vehicle for increasing banking penetration.

But fintech startups and mobile money operators such as ‘Safaricom’s M-Pesa, Orange Money, and MTN Mobile Money have also expanded rapidly, offering a wide range of financial services to underserved individuals and new markets like the microcredit segment.’

Competition between traditional banks, fintech startups, and mobile money operators is intense, and traditional banks are working hard to defend market shares while preserving profitability, the report notes.

But rising interest rates at the tail end of the Covid- 19 have also dulled the attractiveness of African markets for some foreign banks, causing them to single out African operations as being higher risk but less profitable than other regions.

In addition, weakening in the value of some local currencies against the dollar or European units has cut the contribution of African operations to foreign banks’ revenues and profitability.

Recent economic shocks, such as Covid-10 in 2020 and the commodity crunch that followed, hit emerging African middle classes, adding further pressure.

‘Several countries are still bearing the scars of the pandemic in the form of higher debt and increased poverty,’ Moody’s says.

Moreover, political instability in several African countries has fuelled uncertainty and, in some cases, led to economic sanctions, constraining banks’ ability to conduct their business and repatriate profits.

There have been a series of coups in sub-Saharan countries in recent years, including Mali, Guinea, Burkina Faso, Niger, and Gabon.

The emergence of terrorist organisations in a few countries has also put African operations in the spotlight.

Tightened regulations on Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing have added greater complexity to banking operations, increasing the regulatory burden and magnifying reputational risk.

As of June 2025, 12 out of the 24 countries on the Financial Action Task Force’s grey list of jurisdictions under scrutiny for money laundering and terrorist financing were in Africa.

According to Moody’s US sanctions currently imposed on nine African countries add another layer of risk, and as a result, foreign banks, some of which have been in Africa for more than a century, are increasingly leaving the continent.

Britain’s Standard Chartered, which has operated in Africa for around 150 years, is progressively reducing its footprint.

The lender in 2022 announced plans to leave five African countries, Angola, Cameroon, Gambia, Sierra Leone, and Zimbabwe, and exit the Consumer, Private, and Business Banking segments in Tanzania and Cote d’Ivoire, given the complexity and high cost-to-income ratio of operating in these markets.

Its shareholding in these subsidiaries were finally sold to Access Bank in July 2023.

The bank has also announced plans to divest from its wealth and retail banking businesses in Uganda, Botswana, and Zambia.

Standard Chartered made a $217 million loss on the sale of its business in Zimbabwe, Angola, and Sierra Leone, largely due to forex translation.

Barclays, whose operations on the continent span more than 100 years, marked its complete exit from the region in December 2017 by reducing its shareholding in South Africa’s Barclays Africa Group from 62.3 percent to a non-controlling stake of 14.9 percent.

The lender sold off business units it did not consider core operations and shifted attention to consumer, corporate, and investment banking in Europe and US.

UK’s financial conglomerate Atlas Mara, which had acquired banks in seven African countries, has already exited the continent, terming its African investments ‘risky’ and the sub-Saharan African macroeconomic environment as ‘challenging’, exacerbated by Covid-19.

Consequently, from September 2020 to date, Atlas Mara has completely divested from Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, Botswana, and Zambia.

In June 2023, French bank Société Générale announced the sale of its stakes in several African subsidiaries.

It sold its holdings in Mozambique (65 percent) and Burkina Faso (52.6 percent) to Vista Group, and its stake in Chad (67.8 percent) to Coris Bank.

Last month (August 2025), it also sold its 95.5 percent stake in Mauritania to Enko Capital.

In Cameroon and the Republic of Congo, the bank’s participations were ultimately acquired by the respective local governments, which exercised their right of first refusal.

Société Générale also announced that it had signed an agreement to sell its 57.2 percent stake in its Equatorial Guinea subsidiary to Vista Group.

However, since the announcement, there has been no official confirmation that the transaction has been completed.

As of June 2025, disposal processes are also underway in Guinea Conakry and Benin.

The bank cited a lack of critical mass and limited synergies with the rest of the group as key reasons for its exit, aiming for a more efficient allocation of capital.

Uganda and Kenya have agreed to develop a joint tourism marketing plan that showcases their complementary attractions to regional and international travelers.

The decision was made during a meeting between the Uganda Tourism Board (UTB) and Kenya Tourism Board (KTB) held on the sidelines of the ongoing Magical Kenya Travel Expo in Nairobi.

The three-day expo has attracted over 6,500 delegates from more than 40 countries, including 400 exhibitors and about 5,000 travel professionals. UTB Chairperson, Ms Pearl Hoareau Kakooza, emphasised the importance of collaboration rather than competition, given that Ugandans are the second-largest source of visitors to Kenya, while Kenyans top Uganda’s arrivals list.

“The only way to grow these numbers is through active collaboration, joint marketing, and private-public partnerships,” she said. “Uganda’s gorillas and River Nile, alongside Kenya’s Masai Mara and coastal beaches, can be marketed as complementary products.”

As part of the cooperation, the boards are considering joint roadshows, regional events, and familiarisation trips for tour operators. Kenya has already hosted Ugandan operators at its expos, while KTB has sent travel agents to sample Ugandan tourism products.

KTB Acting Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Allan Njoroge, said Kenya is determined to double the number of Ugandans visiting annually from the current 225,000, making Uganda its top source market ahead of the United States. “Tourists want multi-country experiences, not just one destination. So we must sell each other,” he said.

Uganda has standardised park entry rates for East Africans to match those paid by Ugandan citizens, a move designed to encourage regional travel. The partnership is also expected to feed into preparations for the 2027 Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON), which will be co-hosted by Uganda, Kenya, and Tanzania.

Both boards believe AFCON presents a major opportunity to boost sports tourism by bundling football with wildlife and cultural experiences. Mr Njoroge emphasised that the two countries are not competing but complementing each other’s strengths.

Fishermen on Lake Victoria have called for the reinstatement of Beach Management Units (BMUs) at landing sites, claiming that their absence has facilitated illegal fishing practices and weakened community control over the lake.

BMUs, introduced in the early 2000s, were community-based groups tasked with co-managing the fisheries sub-sector in fishing villages by registering boats, enforcing fishing regulations, and monitoring illegal gear at landing sites in collaboration with the fisheries departments in districts. But in 2017, President Museveni disbanded them and handed the responsibility of fisheries enforcement to the military-led Fish Protection Unit (FPU), citing corruption in BMUs.

Now, local fishermen say the vacuum has caused more harm than good.

‘BMU members could know every fisherman operating on the lake and those possessing illegal fishing gear at every fishing village. The soldiers we have today do not operate at the village level, so by the time they arrive at any landing site for an operation, illegal fishers will have hidden their nets or already done the damage,’ Mr Sunday Gerald Kayita, a fisherman in Mazinga said during an interview yesterday. Mr Godfrey Ssenyonga Kambugu, another fisherman and head of the Association of Lake Fishermen and Lake Users of Uganda (AFALU), said the enforcement of regulations on the lake without involving local structures is ‘next to impossible.’

‘Since BMUs were scrapped, there have been no landing site management committees. FPU tried to fill the gap by appointing committees, but those have only created more problems and divisions among us,’ he said. He added that some of the interim committees have been accused of corruption and favouritism, leading to widespread mistrust. ‘The fisheries ministry should redesign BMUs, involve genuine fishermen, and fill the leadership vacuum,’ he added. However, the FPU spokesperson, Lt Lauben Ndifula, defended the army’s role on Uganda’s water bodies.

‘In the past, local leaders at various landing sites worked tirelessly to protect the lake. But today, many fishermen don’t care. They fish right on the shoreline, use pesticides, or build beaches that destroy breeding grounds,’ he said. Lt Ndifula said Lake Victoria is under immense pressure. On Uganda’s side alone, the lake spans more than 13,000 square kilometres, with 6,000 landing sites, each hosting 300 to 500 people. He said more than 1.7 million people now depend on Lake Victoria, compared to a much smaller population decades ago.

He added that increasing population growth, coupled with illegal gear, has strained fish stocks in the lake.

‘Some landing sites that were planned for only 60 boats now have more than 100. Others were planned for 70 boats, but currently have 300 boats. Regulations allow only 50 fishing nets per boat, but some carry over 150 nets,’ he said. Lt Ndifula admitted that BMUs did valuable work during their time, but insisted they were not free from corruption. ‘Some members of BMUs used to work with illegal operators. Those calling for them now are genuine fishermen who love the lake, but we also know others want them back to resume illegal practices,’ he said.

He revealed that FPU is currently having discussions with the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry, and Fisheries to review co-management regulations and explore how BMUs could be reinstated in a stronger, more transparent form.