Category: Daily Monitor

Thirty-one years ago, then Commander of the Reserve Force, Maj Gen Caleb Akandwanaho, alias Salim Saleh, declared that Maj Gen David Tinyefuza would be required to answer for supporting the Democratic Party (DP).

Gen Saleh, who is also President Museveni’s younger brother, made the comments while speaking at a press conference on June 14, 1995, to debunk newspaper reports that he had called for talks between the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) and Maj Herbert Itongwa.

At the time, Maj Itongwa, a veteran of the NRM/A Bush War, who had fallen out with his former bush war colleagues amid accusations of theft and indiscipline, had in 1994 formed a rebel outfit, the Uganda National Democratic Alliance (UNDA) and declared war on the government.

Maj Itongwa’s rebels were said to have attacked several police posts and killed some police officers before making off with some guns. They were also believed to have kidnapped the Minister of Health, Dr James Makumbi, and held him hostage for five days in 1995.

Maj Itongwa’s rebel outfit was, however, crushed, forcing him to flee into exile in Germany via Kenya. He subsequently died in exile.

Bad light

According to a copy of The Monitor newspaper’s edition of June 16, 1995, Gen Saleh told journalists who attended the press conference that the press had portrayed him as being opposed to President Museveni.

However, he said it was impossible for him to oppose his Commander-in-Chief. He added that any soldier who went against the army’s line would face disciplinary action or be dismissed.

‘Like I hear in the newspapers, Maj Gen Tinyefuza is supporting DP. Sooner or later, he’ll have to sort that out,’ he said.

Gen Saleh’s comments were precipitated by comments Maj Gen Tinyefuza, now Sejusa, had made in a June 13, 1995, interview with The Monitor newspaper and were carried in the edition of June 14, 1995.

Ssemogerere resignation

Gen Tinyefuza appeared to be supportive of Dr Paul Kawanga Ssemogerere, who resigned from government on June 13, 1995, citing ‘ideological grounds’.

Dr Ssemogerere, who was also the President General of DP, had served as Minister of Internal Affairs, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and later Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Service in the NRM government.

He announced his resignation during a press conference held at the party’s headquarters at City House in Kampala. He was flanked by DP’s Secretary General, Mr Robert Kitariko, and lawyer and party executive Henry Kayondo.

He said he would contest for the office of President in the next general election.

‘I have called you to inform you that I have tendered my resignation as a minister in the government. I have written to the President,’ he said before reading to the press the contents of his resignation letter.

‘Your Excellency, I am writing to tender my resignation with immediate effect as a minister from Cabinet for personal reasons, in particular because I have decided to contest as a candidate in the forthcoming presidential elections,’ the letter read in part.

On why it had taken him so long to resign, Dr Ssemogerere said: ‘I didn’t feel so before. [Now] is when I thought I had to leave. For instance, I want tomorrow to be in the CA unencumbered as a minister during the debate in the draft constitution, which affects the basic human rights of individuals.’

Tinyefuza’s position

After news of Dr Ssemogerere’s resignation broke, Gen Tinyefuza said there was a lot of division in the country. He added that if no candidate capable of uniting the people emerged in the forthcoming elections, he would not rule out the possibility of contesting for the presidency himself.

‘I am, however, satisfied with the timely action of Dr Ssemogerere and my view as Tinyefuza is that Uganda today needs a non-confrontational and long-standing democrat, and I view Ssemogerere as that, and I have no problem with his candidature,’ he said.

He, however, stressed that the remarks reflected his personal views and not the official position of the army. At the time, the outspoken General was well known in the Constituent Assembly (CA) for often breaking ranks with the Movement side and fellow National Resistance Army (NRA) delegates.

He frequently took independent and sometimes controversial positions on issues where his superiors were expected to hold a different view.

Misunderstood

During the presser, Gen Saleh said the comments he made during that year’s Heroes Day celebrations in Mukono District were that since Itongwa was familiar with the NRA’s way of operating, he should surrender and face the law. He added that the army would guarantee him a fair hearing and trial.

‘This thing of opposing; you should oppose somebody that you are better than. And for me, I know that he [Museveni] is better than me,’ Gen Saleh said.

He, however, dismissed speculation that President Museveni had directed him to retract the Heroes Day statements.

‘I haven’t even talked about it with him yet,’ he told the press.

Gen Saleh said he only wanted to correct a mistake, for which many senior army officers were strongly criticising him.

‘Yesterday Col [Peter] Kerim was here, and two hours ago, Col Pecos [Kutesa] came here because of this report,’ Gen Saleh said.

Gen Saleh said he could only hold different views from the President if he kept them private and accepted the President’s decisions, since the President was his superior.

‘For example, on a family level, I think that my mother deserves a Benz from the State House, but he doesn’t,’ Gen Saleh pointed out.

He quoted other instances, including his wish for Uganda to attack Sudan when Sudanese fighter planes were bombing Ugandans.

He added that he had earlier wanted the NRA to hit back at Kenya for causing trouble at the common border in 1987, but that he had accepted the High Command’s decision not to do so.

He scoffed at politicians who thought they could exploit the inaccurate press reports of his speech to divide the NRA. He described all politicians as leopards in sheep’s skins and that recent events had shown that some of them were already taking off their false skins to show their real spots.

‘All of them. I think they are the same,’ he said when he was asked whether he included NRM politicians in his description. He, however, said despite his personal views about politicians and politics, a military man at his level had to be interested in the politics of his country.

NRM downplays resignation

Meanwhile, top officials in the NRM were quick to dismiss as ‘baseless’ the view that Dr Ssemogerere’s resignation from the NRM government would strengthen the multiparty camp in the CA.

The Deputy National Political Commissar and Director of Legal Affairs at the NRM Secretariat, Mr Jotham Tumwesigye, said: ‘I don’t think the balance of forces in the CA is going to change because of that. All CA delegates are mandated to support certain positions, and that is not going to change,’ Mr Tumwesigye said.

According to The Monitor’s edition of June 14, 1995, Mr Tumwesigye said despite Dr Ssemogerere’s resignation from the government, it remained broad-based.

‘It is not only Ssemogerere who was making the NRM current Cabinet, NRM still has many ministers who are representative of many shades of [political opinion],’ he said.

Others argued that the resignation would teach the NRM to accept compromises and stop making ‘fictitious’ claims of being broad-based.

Mr Kitariko said DP was approached in 1986 to nominate people who were later appointed ministers.

However, he said after some of them were removed from Cabinet, the party was never again asked to provide names to replace those who had been dropped.

‘So, what seemed to be a broad-based government ended in 1988,’ he said, adding that even then, UPC was never asked to nominate its people.

The Uganda Communications Commission (UCC) says it is preparing an official statement on the shutdown of Daily Monitor, NTV Uganda, Spark TV, and other Nation Media Group (NMG) outlets after a military deployment at their premises. The affected media houses were taken off air early Sunday morning after soldiers deployed at NMG offices in Namuwongo and Serena Hotel, where some of the outlets operate.

UCC spokesperson Ibrahim Bbosa declined to provide immediate details on the regulator’s position or the reasons behind the shutdown, saying a statement was being prepared.

‘We are going to issue a statement soon…in three hours time. Just wait a little bit,’ Bbosa told Uganda Radio Network in a telephone interview.

Under normal regulatory procedures, UCC is expected to issue notices and provide reasons for any sanctions against broadcasters over alleged breaches of licensing conditions or broadcasting standards. The abrupt nature of Sunday’s operation, which involved military deployment instead of a publicly announced regulatory process, has raised questions over the legal basis of the shutdown.

The action followed remarks by Chief of Defence Forces Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba, who said he had received approval from President Yoweri Museveni to close the outlets. He had earlier threatened the move in June after NMG platforms reported on the arrest of Kampala Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago and other issues involving him. By Sunday morning, Daily Monitor offices remained closed, while NTV Uganda and Spark TV were off air. Soldiers were also guarding access points at the Namuwongo premises and the Serena Hotel.

The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) condemned the shutdown, saying it was seeking clarification on the circumstances surrounding the action.

‘We are deeply concerned about this action and its impact on the media ecosystem, and the rights enshrined under the 1995 Constitution of the Republic of Uganda,’ NAB said in a statement.

NAB said it had taken note of statements on the X account associated with Gen Muhoozi, indicating that the affected media houses would not resume operations without his permission. The association said it was engaging the Ministry of ICT and National Guidance, UCC, and the Chief of Defence Forces to establish the facts and seek a resolution.

The Institute for Justice and Accountability Uganda (IJAU) also condemned the military deployment, describing it as a threat to press freedom.

The institute, led by exiled Ugandan writer and activist Kakwenza Rukirabashaija, said the presence of armed personnel at the media premises violated constitutional protections on freedom of the press and access to information. It called on state institutions to address what it described as interference with media operations.

Uganda’s fragile democratic experiment is once again under siege. The proposed amendment to Section 8 of the Administration of Parliament Act-championed by Buyaga West County Member of Parliament (MP) Dennis Namara-threatens to dismantle the very architecture that has kept the Opposition relevant in Parliament.

Critics say by shifting the power to appoint the Leader of the Opposition in Parliament (LoP) from the largest Opposition party to a vote among all Opposition MPs and Independents, Mr Namara’s Bill risks turning the Opposition aisle into a fragmented marketplace of competing interests. What looks like reform may in fact be, they add, the quiet removal of the last institutional guardrail against illiberal democracy.

For decades, the position of LoP has been more than symbolic. It has provided coherence, accountability, and a focal point for dissent in a system otherwise dominated by the ruling party. The current arrangement ensures that the largest Opposition party-often the only one with the organisational capacity to challenge government excesses-can speak with authority. Mr Namara’s proposal would upend this logic, replacing clarity with contestation.

Supporters of the amendment argue that it democratises Opposition politics. By allowing Independents and smaller parties to participate in the selection of the LoP, they claim, it breaks the monopoly of entrenched Opposition parties and creates space for new voices. In theory, this could empower marginalised groups and foster a more inclusive Opposition. Yet the practical effect may be quite different.

Mr Job Kiija, the associate director at Innovations for Democratic Engagement and Action (IDEA), warns that the proposed amendment to Section 8 of the Administration of Parliament Act fundamentally twists the meaning of political inclusivity.

‘What Dennis Namara and his Patriotic League of Uganda (PLU) colleagues present as reform-allowing all Opposition and Independent MPs to elect the LoP-is, in reality, a pretext to dilute party mandates. It disenfranchises voters who deliberately chose the largest Opposition party, currently the National Unity Platform, to lead the alternative government. In a multiparty system, true representation rests on the principle that electoral strength translates directly into legislative leadership,’ Mr Kiija said.

He added: ‘This manoeuvre is not new. It mirrors the destructive precedent set by Mityana South MP Richard Lumu’s earlier legislative push-an opportunistic agenda that destabilised Speaker Anita Among’s leadership. Forcing an election across a fragmented Opposition floor will not foster inclusivity; it will manufacture a compromised leader lacking a genuine mandate from the anti government electorate.’

Transactional politics

Mr Kiija said from a governance perspective, the proposal acts as a structural wedge designed to fracture Opposition unity. A robust, autonomous Opposition is not a constitutional luxury but a democratic necessity.

‘Transforming the LoP into an electoral prize contested among rival factions and Independents institutionalises internal competition at the expense of national oversight. Instead of consolidating energy to hold the ruling National Resistance Movement accountable, Opposition parties will be forced inward-engaging in transactional politics and state influenced horse trading. The result is a crippled opposition, unable to mount disciplined checks on government policy or committee oversight,’ he said.

Mr Kiija further noted that the PLU backed push tilts power away from independent parties and into the hands of external political military movements aligned with the ruling establishment.

‘With the NRM’s commanding majority and influence over independents, any ‘opposition election’ will be vulnerable to manipulation. Allowing the governing establishment to dictate how minority benches choose their leadership strips the leading opposition party of autonomy. It sets a perilous precedent where the state effectively chooses its own opponent, reducing oversight to mere theatre,’ he said.

The IDEA associate director said the proposal undermines Westminster traditions and Uganda’s constitutional foundation. Articles 71 and 72 guarantee multiparty autonomy, including the right of parties to designate their own parliamentary leadership.

‘The Westminster model dictates that the largest non governing party forms the official opposition as a coherent government in waiting. Bypassing this practice erodes party discipline and independence. It signals a dangerous slide toward a de facto single party state disguised as parliamentary majoritarianism,’ Mr Kiija said.

The expert said the PLU, which backs Mr Namara, stands to gain the most. Although not the largest Opposition party, PLU could leverage alliances with Independents to secure leadership positions. This would weaken the established Opposition and hand the ruling party a fractured adversary. A divided Opposition is easier to co opt, easier to silence, and far less capable of mounting a unified challenge to executive dominance.

Uganda’s political system has long relied on the Opposition as a counterweight to unchecked power. Removing the largest party’s prerogative to appoint the LoP risks turning Opposition leadership into a transactional contest, vulnerable to manipulation and patronage. What is presented as democratisation may instead be a Trojan horse: a reform that appears inclusive but ultimately dismantles meaningful dissent.

A seismic change

Mr Namara, backed by PLU-leaning MPs, has formally notified the Clerk of Parliament of his intention to introduce the Private Members’ Bill. The PLU, born out of the MK Movement, has steadily evolved from civic mobilisation into a political force. Its rhetoric of patriotism and anti corruption has attracted MPs numbering in their hundreds. Announcing its new office bearers this week, the pressure group showed that it has a strong presence not just in the ruling NRM but also among the Independents.

Renowned political analyst and researcher, Yusuf Serunkuma, argues that the PLU is gambling with how to take power, adding that the problem is that they are relying on small, fragmented initiatives.

‘There is no clear ideological direction, and instead, everyone appears to be following the random ambitions and power flexes of Gen Muhoozi Kainerugaba,’ he noted. ‘Whatever changes are made to [the election of the LoP] do not significantly alter the broader political landscape in Uganda.’

The academic emphasised that the LoP carries no real influence under an autocratic system. ‘We are not a democracy, and neither are we trying to build one.’

The Office of the LoP was established in Parliament at the inception of the 8th Parliament, pursuant to the constitutional provisions that restored multi-party politics in Uganda in 2005. The Office draws its existence from Article 82A of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995, and Part IIA of the Administration of Parliament (Amendment) Act, 2006. The position of the LoP is equivalent to that of a Cabinet minister in government and, as such, is entitled to similar benefits and privileges.

Mr Kakuba Sultan Juma, a senior lecturer and graduate coordinator in the Department of Political Science, Faculty of Social Sciences at Kyambogo University, told Weekend Monitor that changing the selection of the LoP presents both opportunities and risks. He said on one hand, such a reform could enhance democratic inclusivity by giving a broader range of Opposition legislators a direct voice in choosing their leader, thereby making the LoP more representative of the diversity within the Opposition.

Conversely, Mr Kakuba said with Uganda’s Opposition landscape already fragile, any change could intensify internal competition, weaken party cohesion, and undermine the ability of the Opposition to present a united and strong front against the NRM, which has been in power for decades.

‘The effectiveness of the LoP depends not only on democratic legitimacy but also on the capacity to coordinate and mobilise Opposition MPs around common objectives,’ Mr Kakuba said.

A rape of the law?

Mr Wandera Ogalo, a lawyer who was party of the Constituent Assembly that framed the 1995 Constitution, this week told NTV Uganda that Article 82A contains two key provisions: the first introduces the multiparty system, and the second prescribes how an LoP is chosen and how they cease to hold office. Mr Ogalo emphasised that one cannot interpret these provisions in isolation.

‘Since the first provision establishes a multiparty system, any law made under the second must align with that principle,’ Mr Ogalo said.

He said the official LoP is the leader of the Opposition party with the majority of MPs in Parliament.

Mr Kakuba said regarding the motivations behind the PLU’s support for the amendment, interpretations will inevitably differ depending on one’s political perspective.

‘What is clear, however, is that the timing and context suggest strategic political interests, particularly given the prominence of NUP within the Opposition,’ he said.

In Mr Kakuba’s view, the intention is to weaken whichever party emerges as the leading Opposition force-currently NUP-so that its influence is diluted and no single party can be regarded as dominant.

Mr Joel Kuteesa Kalyamagwa, a lawyer, stated that the only circumstances under which someone can cease to be the LoP are if they resign voluntarily, lose their parliamentary seat, if the Opposition party with the largest number of MPs ceases to hold that majority, or if the LoP dies or resigns.

‘You don’t simply remove the LoP like that,’ he said. ‘That’s a rape of the law.’

The LoP office, currently occupied by the Nakawa West Member of Parliament, Joel Ssenyonyi, became operational in 2006. This was after pressure from donors forced Uganda to move from a single-party system, the Movement system, to a multi-party dispensation. Instituted under Article 82A of the 1995 Constitution, the office was introduced via the 2005 Constitutional Amendment, and operationalised by the Administration of Parliament Amendment Act, 2006.

As the law stands, Section 6B of the Administration of Parliament (Amendment) Act empowers the Opposition political party with the greatest numerical strength in Parliament to independently nominate the Leader of the Opposition. This explains why, from 2006 to 2016, when the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) was the largest opposition party, its various party presidents picked Morris Ogenga Latigo, Nathan Nandala Mafabi, Philip Wafula Ogutu, Winifred Kiiza, and Betty Aol Ochan to occupy the office in various years.

When NUP took over from FDC as the biggest Opposition party in 2021, its President Robert Kyagulanyi Ssentamu tipped, first, former Nyendo-Mukungwe legislator, Mr Mathias Mpuuga, and, later, Mr Ssenyonyi to occupy the office. Mr Ssenyonyi recently retained the position, with the blessing of his party’s higher-ups. Now, Mr Namara’s Bill appears intent on ending his return to the office.

Return to movement system?

Mr Namara, who represented Uganda at the East African Legislative Assembly (Eala) rationalised the need to have amendments, saying that the current system concentrates excessive authority in one political party. This, he added, undermines accountability within the multiparty political system.

‘The office of the Leader of the Opposition should be under the purview of Parliament in the execution of its mandate. At the moment, the Leader of the Opposition is effectively chosen at Kavule [NUP’s headquarters] by a few individuals without consultation with other opposition Members of Parliament,’ Mr Namara said this week.

Although Mr Namara claimed that PLU’s move is aimed at improving multiparty politics, political observers have insisted that by moving to decide on the LoP, the regime is reverting to the single-party system or the movement system.

‘I like the PLU move because from 2005, we have had this facade that we have a multiparty party system, yet we don’t have it. The PLU’s move to take over the office of the Leader of the opposition will help to remove the pretence,’ Dr Serunkuma explained, adding that Uganda will now be a full-fledged single-party system.

On paper, the movement system, officially known as the Movement Political System, which was adopted in the 1995 constitution, was marketed by President Museveni as a non-partisan, all-inclusive form of governance. Mr Museveni and his supporters claimed that, unlike political parties that were historically vehicles of division that mobilised along religious and ethnic lines, resulting in coups and political chaos, the movement system was all-inclusive.

Giovanne Carbone, a professor of political science, however, frames the movement system as something closer to a hegemonic party-state system. He says that it was neither a fully-fledged one-party state (or a situation of political monopoly) nor a three-party system (a pluralist political context), but a situation of political supremacy exercised by a single organisation, with smaller opposition groups not able, so far, to put up any significant challenge.

‘The evidence is persuasive that the Movement is a political partisan organisation driven by the aim of placing its people in positions of power, rather than, as its leaders claim, a political ‘system’ (i.e. a set of governmental institutions and relationships, including the terms of participation and competition to access such institutions,’ Carbone said.

Authoritarianism

Yet in his paper entitled New Wine or New Bottles? Movement Politics and One-Partyism Prof Joe Oloka-Onyango insists that the Movement system, claimed to be an innovative, inclusive, and ‘no-party’ form of democracy, was simply the authoritarian, one-party systems of Africa’s post-independence past repackaged.

Prof Oloka-Onyango, a former law don at Makerere University, argues that the Movement system fundamentally suppressed democratic diversity and dissent. Though the movement system claimed to operate on individual merit rather than sectarian party lines, Oloka-Onyango argues this was a facade allowing the state to operate as a de facto single-party regime, co-opting or banning all real political opposition under the guise of “national unity.’

He said it is under the movement system that the NRM effectively merged state apparatuses (like the military, police, and local councils) with the ruling organisation, making it impossible for Opposition entities to compete on a level playing field.

For Prof Oloka-Onyango, the movement system became a tool to co-opt individual members of historical parties, like the Uganda People’s Congress (UPC) and Democratic Party (DP), while neutralising their institutional power.

Just like the Movement system, the PLU has framed the idea of choosing the LoP as part of its endeavours to ensure inclusivity of all parties in Uganda.

‘A Leader of Opposition in and parliamentary Commissioners decide the welfare of the MPs, Parliamentary staff, and offer strategic leadership for Parliament. Whereas other Members of the Commission, like Speaker and Deputy Speaker, are voted by MPs and whereas other members of the Commission, like Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, are vetted by Parliament, you have a[n] LoP who is self-accounting. This business of a few individuals sitting in Kavule or Najjanankumbi to decide on how parliament is governed must stop,’ Mr Namara said, adding that if parliament removes a president and all Ministers and the speaker of parliament why should it be impossible for parliament to remove a Leader of Opposition?

‘Because if you have leaders who can’t be checked, it breeds impunity,’ Mr Namara responded to his question.

Legal question

Legal analysts haven’t doubted PLU’s ability to push this amendment quickly through Parliament, if anything, because the House Speaker, Jacob Marksons Oboth, alias Oboth-Oboth and Deputy Speaker Thomas Tayebwa are all in their positions because of the entity. The questions that have emerged are around whether the law will work retrospectively, such that they remove Mr Ssenyonyi from office.

In principle, laws fundamentally operate prospectively, meaning they apply only to actions and events that occur after the legislation goes into effect.

‘The suggested PLU bill is a fool’s errand, a wild goose chase. The right to freedom of association-the basis of multiparty democracy-includes the right not to associate. Ugandan parliament has no power to direct a merger of opposition political parties or independents,’ said Uganda Law Society President, Isaac Kimaze Ssemakadde.

Yet the notion of bringing every Ugandan under the framework of PLU has been made clear. During the handover party of PLU’s leadership from Daudi Kabanda to Tingey county legislator, Fadil Twalla, Speaker Oboth-Oboth made this vision clear.

‘I believe every Ugandan should belong to PLU,’ Mr Oboth-Oboth, who was the chief guest at the function, said.

Speaker Oboth-Oboth appears to have been taking a leaf from Gen Muhoozi, who has made it clear that there is a military operation to get rid of those opposed to the regime.

‘Our operations against the Opposition last week are a reassurance to the great Ugandan people by the security forces that Uganda will never be led or controlled by a foreign-sponsored political organisation,’ Gen Muhoozi said.

Back to the future

Yet it is not just under the NRM where Uganda has been ruled in a single-party format, because in 1964, the Uganda Peoples Congress (UPC) declared Uganda a single-party state during the leadership of Apollo Milton Obote. In the initial announcement of 1964, Obote declared the UPC’s intention to create a one-party socialist state. Nevertheless, Obote escalated matters in 1969 by banning all Opposition political parties following an assassination attempt on his life.

When Idi Amin ousted Obote in a coup, he reinforced this ban on political parties and parliament through a decree. Just like Museveni argued against political parties, Amin rationalised his move to kick out political parties, claiming that they were inherently rooted in ethnic division and religious sectarianism, which he blamed for the violence and instability that plagued post-independence Uganda. This ban effectively removed all political opposition and allowed Amin to rule by military decree and bypass any democratic accountability.

When the Uganda National Liberation Front (UNLF) installed Godfrey Binaisa as president in August 1979, his administration imposed a ban on political parties, believing that with such a ban Uganda would avoid “the politics of religion, sectarianism, rivalry and hatred’, and be able to work for and even achieve the politics of consensus. Binaisa was ousted by pro-Obote forces within the military structures, leading to the return of the multiparty dispensation under which the contested 1980 elections took place, with Obote controversially declared victorious.

Obote’s win forced Mr Museveni to wage a five-year war in the Luweero jungles, and once he took to the streets of Kampala, he once again banned political parties. Mr Museveni claimed that Ugandans were being ruled under what he termed a broad-based government. Yet Dr Kizza Besigye, in his dossier when he was parting with the NRM, insisted implementing the broad- based system was a myth since there were ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders.’

‘Historical NRM politicians who thought that they were not ‘appropriately’ placed in government, blamed this on the large number of the ‘non-NRM’ people in high up places, and set out to campaign against the situation. They created a distinction between government leaders as ‘NRM’, and ‘broad-based.’ If you were referred to as ‘broad-based’, it was another way of saying that you were undeserving of your post, or that you were possibly an enemy agent (‘5th Columnist’),’ Dr Besigye wrote in 1999.

The journey from the bustle of the city to the tranquil hills of Sipi in Kapchorwa District is not a short one. It takes about six hours or more on the road, leaving behind the concrete skyline and traffic of urban life for a landscape that grows greener with every passing kilometre. The drive may feel long, but it is a journey that rewards patience. As the road begins to climb into the rolling hills of eastern Uganda, the scenery transforms dramatically, offering a glimpse of the beauty that awaits.

Kapchorwa is best known as the home of some of Uganda’s greatest long-distance runners and for producing high-quality Arabica coffee. Perched on the slopes of Mount Elgon, the district enjoys cool temperatures throughout much of the year, making it a refreshing escape from the heat and pace of city living. It is a destination where nature takes centre stage, with sweeping views of valleys, terraced farms and mist-covered hills stretching as far as the eye can see.

For visitors looking for a memorable place to stay, Sipi Valley Resort provides an ideal base from which to explore the area. Nestled amid the hills, the resort blends rustic charm with modern comfort. Stone pathways, well-manicured gardens and cosy cottages create a welcoming atmosphere that immediately puts guests at ease. Large windows and outdoor sitting areas allow visitors to soak in the magnificent views that surround the property.

One of the highlights of staying at the resort is simply waking up to the sounds of nature. On clear mornings, guests can watch the sun rise over the valley, painting the landscape in shades of gold and orange. The dining experience is another reason many visitors remember their stay fondly. Meals are prepared using fresh local ingredients, with menus featuring a mix of Ugandan favourites and international dishes. Whether enjoying a hearty breakfast before a hike or a warm dinner after a day of adventure, the food complements the overall experience of relaxation and comfort.

Guided by local farmers, visitors gain insight into the cultivation, harvesting, roasting and brewing processes while learning about the role coffee plays in the local economy. The trails wind through villages, farms and scenic viewpoints, providing opportunities to interact with local communities and appreciate the region’s natural beauty. For those seeking an adrenaline rush, abseiling more than 100 metres down one of the waterfalls offers an unforgettable experience and a unique perspective of the falls.

Five years ago, convincing a Kampala resident to spend a weekend in Kasese was not the easiest sell. Today, thousands do exactly that every August. They book hotels months in advance. They drive across the country. Some fly in from overseas and take a long bus ride to Kasese for the marathon and, of course, believe it or not, the mad after-party.

As the Tusker Lite Mt Rwenzori Marathon prepares to celebrate its fifth edition this August, it is worth reflecting on what has happened in Kasese over the last five years. Because what started as an ambitious sporting event has evolved into something far bigger; a tourism boom, an economic catalyst, a launchpad for athletes and perhaps one of the most successful examples of place-branding Uganda has seen in recent years.

The story, fittingly, begins with a mountain.

In June 2022, tourism entrepreneur Amos Wekesa and a small team stood atop the snow-capped peaks of the Rwenzoris and raised a Tusker Lite Mt Rwenzori Marathon flag. It was a symbolic gesture, one that marked the beginning of an idea few could fully comprehend at the time. The vision was simple enough: create a world-class marathon in one of Africa’s most spectacular landscapes. The question is not why a marathon was brought to Kasese but rather why Tusker Lite chose to be part of it. For Elizabeth Mutamuliza, Marketing Manager, Beer, at Uganda Breweries, that is precisely why it made sense.

‘Tusker Lite has always been a brand for people who seek out adventure. As a low-carb beer, we naturally appeal to consumers who embrace active lifestyles and are constantly looking for new challenges and new experiences. The marathon gave us an opportunity to create something authentic to the brand while also creating long-term value for Kasese, its people and Uganda’s tourism sector,’ she says.

The first edition, held in September 2022, was a challenging adventure. Runners battled rain, mud and demanding terrain. The conditions were unforgiving, but they also became part of the event’s identity. The local community embraced it immediately. Villages transformed into cheering stations. Roads filled with spectators. Businesses opened their doors to visitors arriving from across Uganda and beyond. And when the race ended, another experience began; the after party.

The after-party, the Tusker Lite Neon Rave, is mad. Picture thousands of people from across the world dancing in the streets the whole night, chugging beer and sharing street food. One boda boda rider told me he had worked for 17 hours straight, arriving at his workstation a few hours after the marathon, he worked all evening and all night without resting. A story is told that on the night of the second edition, Kasese ran out of chicken.

By the third edition, the event had secured World Athletics course certification, giving athletes such as Abel Chelangat access to internationally recognised times and opening pathways to bigger opportunities abroad. Yet while the athletic success stories are impressive, the transformation of Kasese itself may be even more remarkable. A study by the Makerere University Tourism Research and Development Centre estimated that the marathon generated more than Shs3.5 billion for the local economy during the 2023 event weekend alone. Hotel owners, bartenders, street food venders, bodaboda riders, everyone benefits from the influx of visitors. But the impact extended beyond economics.

Every year, thousands of people who may never have considered visiting Kasese find themselves spending a weekend there, discovering the Rwenzoris, exploring Queen Elizabeth National Park, visiting local attractions and experiencing the warmth of the community. Now, as the event prepares to mark its fifth edition on August 22, a $1 million (about Shs3.6 billion) prize kitty was announced, further elevating its profile. Party hunters from across the country are twitching impatiently. Five years ago, the idea was to organise a marathon. Today, it has become launchpad for pro athletes, for tourism, for local enterprise and unsurprisingly, wild party town.

Lee White is a British-Gabonese conservationist, zoologist, environmental policy expert, and former government minister best known for his work protecting the rainforests and wildlife of the Congo Basin. He served as Gabon’s minister of Water, Forests, the Sea and Environment from 2019 until 2023. He talked to Derrick Wandera about conservation funding cuts, Africa’s forests and the future of protected area.

International conservation funding has faced major cuts in recent years. From your perspective, how serious is the impact of declining aid and charity funding on forest and wildlife protection globally?

I think we’re seeing a transition rather than a complete collapse.

My experience is mainly in Central Africa, particularly the Congo Basin, although I’ve also worked in countries such as Sierra Leone, Uganda and Rwanda. We have seen major reductions in American funding for conservation in the Congo Basin. The US Fish and Wildlife Service, which was previously a major funder, has cut almost all of its funding. Government support has declined significantly.

However, some of that has been replaced by philanthropy. Wealthy donors, including foundations linked to the Walton family, are now looking to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in national parks across Africa.

So the picture is mixed. Some sources of funding are declining while others are emerging.

You have managed large conservation programmes over the years. What has been your experience with donor funding?

Over my career, I’ve raised and managed about $500 million from bilateral donors, multilateral institutions, NGOs, philanthropy and the private sector. Looking back, I believe much of that donor money was actually more negative than positive.

The procedures imposed by donors are often so complicated that spending the money becomes extremely difficult. For example, in a typical aid project it can take two and a half years just to buy a vehicle.

If you’re running a four-year conservation programme, that creates huge operational challenges. Another problem is that donors sometimes change priorities midway through a project. Funding that was promised for one activity can suddenly disappear, leaving significant gaps.

So what is the solution?

My view, after almost 40 years working in conservation, is that African governments must recognise conservation as a valuable investment. Take the Congo Basin rainforest. I consider it the heart of Africa.

It recycles water, generates rainfall, supports the Nile system, feeds the Sahel and sustains major river basins across the continent. If we lose the Congo Basin rainforest, Africa faces a catastrophic future. We could see hundreds of millions of climate and water refugees.

Protected areas should be viewed as critical infrastructure. They generate economic value just as roads, dams and power stations do.

For example, Mont de Cristal National Park in Gabon protects the water resources that supply hydroelectric dams serving Libreville. The value of that water, in terms of electricity generation alone, is estimated at about $30 million annually.

Do we know how much conservation funding has actually declined?

I have not calculated the figures across the entire Congo Basin, but in Gabon I estimate conservation funding has fallen by between 30 and 40 percent.

Additionally, many of the large pledges announced internationally have not materialised. For example, a significant portion of the funding promised for the Congo Basin at the Glasgow climate conference has been reduced or delayed.

Even before recent policy changes in the United States and Europe, only about 50 to 60 percent of promised donor funding typically arrived.

When you look deeper, a considerable share of that money returns to developed countries through consultants, equipment procurement and administrative costs rather than directly benefiting African conservation efforts.

You also mentioned climate finance and REDD+. What has been your experience there?

REDD+ was designed to reward developing countries for reducing deforestation. Gabon generated 187 million tonnes of verified REDD+ carbon credits, validated through United Nations processes.

At the agreed price of five dollars per tonne, the country should have received nearly one billion dollars. Instead, Gabon received only $17 million.

Even that money was not provided directly to the government but channelled through third-party organisations and UN agencies. After four years, only a fraction of those funds had actually been spent. This illustrates a broader problem. Developed countries negotiate agreements and make commitments, but often fail to honour them fully.

Some argue that deforestation, poaching and forest degradation in African countries may be contributing to reduced funding. Do you see a connection?

That may be true in some cases, particularly under mechanisms like REDD+, where payments are linked to reducing deforestation. However, most conservation funding is provided precisely because those problems exist.

Donors fund anti-poaching operations and forest protection because they recognise there are challenges that need to be addressed. In my experience, donors rarely withdraw support simply because a country is experiencing deforestation or poaching.

It’s also important to recognise that many African countries outperform developed nations in forest conservation. Scotland, for example, has only about three percent of its natural forests remaining. Uganda’s forest cover is significantly higher than that.

You argue that African countries must take greater responsibility for conservation. Is that realistic given the limited resources available?

The real question is whether it is realistic to expect developed countries to do it for us. I don’t believe it is. Do developed countries have a moral obligation? Yes. Their wealth was built partly on natural resource exploitation and high levels of pollution. But whether they will fulfil that obligation is another matter.

Ultimately, African countries must recognise the value of their natural resources and lead their own conservation efforts. If we demonstrate leadership, international partners may be more willing to support us.

What local solutions can help sustain conservation programmes such as anti-poaching units and ranger operations?

We need to integrate conservation into broader national development strategies. Protected areas should generate economic value through ecotourism, carbon markets and ecosystem services.

Countries such as Kenya, Botswana, Namibia and South Africa have demonstrated that conservation can support significant economic activity.

The long-term solution is not dependence on aid. It is recognising that forests, wildlife and ecosystems are national assets that contribute directly to economic growth, water security and public welfare. If governments value those assets and invest accordingly, conservation programmes can become more sustainable and resilient.

On any given night along the busy Bukoto-Ntinda road, 29-year-old Godfrey Tindyebwa can be seen expertly maneuvering a motorcycle through the dark.

To a casual observer, he is just another motorist beating the traffic. But closer inspection reveals a remarkable story of sheer grit: Tindyebwa operates the motorcycle’s gear shift lever with a custom-welded hand stick. He is an amputee, riding to survive.

Tindyebwa, currently pursuing a Certificate in Computer Science at YMCA Kampala, lives a double life. By day, he attends lectures; by night, he hits the road to raise his own tuition and personal upkeep.

His grueling journey began in 2006 at a school clinic in Kamwema, Isingiro District. A botched anti-malaria injection triggered a severe medical crisis that eventually led to a diagnosis of bone marrow cancer. In 2016, doctors at Bombo General Military Hospital amputated his leg.

“It took me eight months of sleepless nights and agonizing pain,” Tindyebwa recalls.

Worse still, he had to independently foot a medical bill of nearly Shs20 million. His father, a polygamist, offered no financial backing. Tragedy has long stalked Tindyebwa’s family; he is the de facto firstborn after his mother lost her first child, and she later passed away during childbirth. Despite this, Tindyebwa is now the sole caretaker of his aging father. The family remains alienated from wealthy relatives due to historic disputes over ancestral wealth-ironically, the same wealth that helped fund Tindyebwa’s initial treatment.

Seeking financial independence after healing, Tindyebwa acquired a loan to buy a motorcycle for food deliveries. He chose to ride exclusively at night to minimize the risk of daytime traffic accidents. However, the margins remain painfully low, and Kampala’s roads have not been kind. On December 27 last year, Tindyebwa’s bike lights suddenly failed in Kamwokya. He hit a deep pothole, throwing him violently to the ground. The accident left him with a cracked skull and another mountain of medical debt he is still clearing.

Undeterred, Tindyebwa is looking toward the future. His immediate focus is securing a computer science internship placement this September. Ultimately, he hopes to transition from two wheels to four. He believes that if a well-wisher could help him secure an automatic vehicle, he could safely run Uber or delivery services to change his fortunes.

Police have arrested a 27-year-old man in connection with a viral social media video that allegedly references criminal activities along Banda in Nakawa Division, Kampala District.

The suspect, identified as Solomon Wafula, a resident of Banda Zone III in Banda Parish, was arrested Thursday by detectives attached to Banda Police Station.

The video, which reportedly circulated via X, formerly Twitter, sparked concern among residents who questioned whether security had seen it. Detectives said the suspect was arrested after the video was widely circulated and the public became concerned because it makes references to criminal operations.

‘The video attracted attention, prompting intelligence to verify the claims made in it and identifying any individuals who may have been implicated or exposed by its contents,’ a detective said.

Kampala Metropolitan Police deputy spokesperson Luke Owoyesigyire said the suspect is being probed on the circumstances that led him to record the video and to establish whether he personally participated in any criminal activity.

“We are investigating the circumstances under which the video was made and whether the suspect or any of the individuals mentioned therein have been involved in criminal acts committed along Jinja Road and its surrounding areas,” Mr Owoyesigyire said.

Police emphasized the investigation is still at an early stage as detectives work to establish the authenticity of the claims made in the video, as well as the identities of other individuals allegedly mentioned in it.

Detectives indicate the video began circulating earlier in the week, attracting rapid attention due to alleged references to specific locations and unnamed individuals purportedly linked to criminal activity.

Owoyesigyire warned that while social media remains a vital tool for public communication, it can also be misused to spread content that may endanger investigations or encourage unlawful behavior.

‘Police would like to caution members of the public against producing, sharing, or circulating content that glorifies, promotes, or appears to endorse criminal activity,’ he said. ‘Such conduct is not tolerated and may undermine ongoing efforts to combat crime and maintain public order.’

Another detective from Police Crime Intelligence said they are pursuing leads linked to individuals allegedly mentioned or implied in the viral video.

‘We are profiling the suspect and connecting his records to see whether he has ever participated in any criminal activity,’ the detective said.

With barely a week left for normal registration, Uganda National Examinations Board has tasked heads of centres to ensure all 2026 candidates are registered on time to avoid surcharges.

According to a statement released June 25, 2026 and signed by UNEB executive director Mr Dan Odongo, normal registration for Primary Leaving Examinations, Uganda Certificate of Education and Uganda Advanced Certificate of Education ends Tuesday June 30, 2026.

‘Heads of centres are advised to make use of the remaining time to ensure that all the learners in the respective candidate classes are dully registered so that no learner, who is supposed to sit for this year’s examinations, is left out,’ Mr Odongo advised.

UNEB said late registration will run through July with surcharges: 100% for PLE, and 50% for UCE and UACE candidates. Late fees will be Shs 68,000 for PLE, Shs 246,000 for UCE and Shs 279,000 for UACE.

Odongo cautioned school heads and directors against charging fees not prescribed by UNEB and referring to them as UNEB fees.

Aggrieved parents or members of the public charged exorbitant fees alleged to be UNEB registration fees are advised to report to any police station and file complaints.

“This is an offence under the UNEB Act, CAP 259, Section 33. It attracts a penalty of Forty Million Shillings or a term of imprisonment not exceeding ten years or both,” he said.

He warned the board will also withdraw examination centres of such schools, and where the person convicted is a registered teacher, they shall be de-registered according to relevant laws.

On government-sponsored candidates, Mr Odongo noted UNEB will not expect any candidates under UPE, USE or UPOLET to register during the late period as they were required to register during the normal period.

To date, 1,527,867 candidates have registered for all three examinations, compared to 1,416,448 last year, an increase of 7.3 per cent.

Schools can still make amendments where errors are identified by downloading and filling the amendment form on their school portals and returning it to UNEB before registration closes.

After registration, schools will display candidate registers in accessible places to enable candidates and parents confirm registration status and verify data. UNEB will also avail an SMS option. Dates for the display will be communicated by UNEB.

President Museveni has backed a multi-million-dollar proposal by Egyptian investors to construct a state-of-the-art dairy processing facility in Ngoma, Nakaseke District, as Uganda aggressively hunts for new continental markets to absorb its massive milk surplus.

The processing plant, expected to handle up to one million litres of milk daily, is slated to be spearheaded by the Arab Organization for Industrialization (AOI)-a massive state-backed Egyptian conglomerate established in 1975 with vast footprints in manufacturing, renewable energy, and infrastructure.

Speaking during a high-level meeting at State House Entebbe with an Egyptian delegation led by Maj. Gen. Khaled Shokry Ghaith, a consultant to the AOI Chairman, President Museveni noted that the investment aligns with Uganda’s broader strategic shift toward commercial agricultural mechanisation and value addition.

The development comes at a critical time for Uganda’s dairy sector, which has faced intermittent trade blockades and strict quotas from traditional East African Community (EAC) partners like Kenya. By courting North African capital, Kampala is seeking to diversify its export portfolio and process raw milk into high-value powders, cheese, and butter for the broader African market under the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).

President Museveni revealed that Uganda’s deliberate transition from subsistence to commercial farming has yielded a dramatic boom in milk volumes, positioning the country to compete with global dairy giants.

“We are now producing 5.4 billion litres a year and we are going to overtake Holland,” Mr. Museveni told the delegation, which also included Egyptian investor Maj. Gen. Abdelkader Mohamed Nagy and Mr. Abdel Nasser Mohamed. “With 5.4 billion litres, local consumption is still only about 800 million litres, meaning we have a surplus of about 4.6 billion litres.”

“The transformation from manual to mechanised systems is not a big issue. It is a question of mobilisation and investment because the manual system is the ancient way. We have been keeping cows for the last 7,000 years,” the President added.

Historically confined to domestic consumption or suppressed by colonial-era policies that prioritised cash crops like coffee, tobacco, and tea, Uganda’s dairy sub-sector has undergone rapid commercialization over the last two decades.

Beyond agriculture, Mr. Museveni linked the investment to geopolitics and the management of the River Nile resources-a frequent point of diplomatic friction between upstream East African nations and downstream Egypt.

The President argued that the ultimate protection for the Nile lies in the rapid industrialisation of countries within the tropics, which would lift populations out of poverty and reduce environmental degradation.

“I told Field Marshal President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi that if you are talking about the Nile, there must be socio-economic transformation,” Museveni revealed. “There must be electricity in the tropics so that people stop cutting trees for firewood and engage in modern agriculture like in developed countries.”

To support the proposed one-million-litre capacity plant, the President urged local farmers to abandon traditional free-range grazing, which requires large swathes of land, in favour of zero-grazing and modern pasture management.

“If you grow pasture, harvest it and feed the cows in the shed, one acre can feed eight cows. The yield will be higher because they are eating better,” he noted, adding that the government is actively working on genetic improvements to ensure local breeds produce at least 20 litres of milk per cow daily.

The Egyptian delegation confirmed they had already conducted extensive field assessments in Ngoma-the heart of Uganda’s cattle corridor-and engaged with the Dairy Development Authority (DDA).

Aside from processing, the investors plan to overhaul the local supply chain by introducing automated, hygienic milking equipment to eliminate manual handling, alongside refrigerated transport networks linking farms to cooling centres.

Welcoming the technology, President Museveni directed the Ministry of Agriculture and dairy stakeholders to immediately draft a comprehensive technical proposal mapping out the efficient movement of milk from farms to the planned factory.

Maj. Gen. Khaled Abdul Nasser expressed Cairo’s commitment to the venture, stating that the project will foster mutual economic benefits and deepen the historic ties between Uganda and Egypt.