Look beyond women around the presidential candidates…

In 2001, when Col (rtd) Dr Kiiza Besigye contested for the presidential elections, there were many things exciting about his candidature. One of the things that took people by storm was the women in charge of his campaign. They seemed to have come from the proverbial nowhere, but redefined women’s place in politics, at the time. They made the question of whether the candidate cared about women unnecessary. They were on the front lines and holding their own.

There was Ms Anne Mugisha. For us young women at the time, it was difficult not to admire Ms Mugisha. She was articulate, knowledgeable, and made politics sound interesting. She was the ideal face of Dr Besigye’s campaign and right there in the trenches, breaking down what was at stake and mobilising voters. Then there was Ms Beti Kamya, you could not dismiss her even if you wanted to. When she took on the debate, you wanted to keep listening or watching. She was a real force for Dr Besigye, and perhaps that’s why she ended up in government. Winnie Babihuga added the cherry on top.

There were other women, of course, but it is Dr Besigye’s partner, Winnie Byanyima, who excited many more. When Winnie Kiiza became Leader of the Opposition in Parliament, I interviewed her at her office, and she spoke about that election with nostalgia, and how it had redefined her own career. These women were quite the group. They all made the case for women without talking too much about women, keeping their eyes on the national issues without losing focus on what mattered for women. Few tried to make fun of them. It was inspiring and admirable.

It is thus not surprising that people still remember these women vividly long after some of them have left the Ugandan political scene and public life. They were the model of women’s meaningful participation in politics. They made patronage politics and tokenism look bad. They demonstrated that women were there if political parties created the space for them to participate meaningfully, beyond adding the numbers. They had conviction, drive, and exuded brilliance. They communicated clearly. It appeared normal for woman to choose the Opposition candidate, until that started to seem like a mistake. They set a very high bar.

The 2001 presidential elections will remain perhaps the most exciting election for years to come. It came close to an ideal competitive election that had a national character, with good focus on issues, with an eye on reforms. The election petition that followed was equally exciting. It was the one time that people had hopes in the Judiciary, to plug in the gaps in the political process and move us toward a democratic path Ugandans never knew. Despite the outcome of the petition, it is the one election that offered deeper insights into our democratic path and process.

As a young researcher following keenly on the presidential election at the time, on which I would write a thesis on political reforms in 2002, I was deeply intrigued by the women in the campaign trail and the force they were in the mobilisation of voters. It is an election in which we had no female presidential candidate, yet the race remained heavily influenced by women and good questions raised by women. No one was questioning why there were no women in the race, because the candidates had nicely integrated women in their campaign teams. It is the reason women in public life remained a lifelong issue of research for me.

President Museveni had done a lot to integrate women in political participation using all means, including affirmative action and appointment of women to key political positions. Many had hailed the appointment of Dr Wandera Kazibwe, vice president, as revolutionary for women and the assignment of Betty Bigombe to the conflict resolution process in northern Uganda as particularly courageous. Over the years, many women have been appointed heads of government agencies, too.

Something happened along the way, and the quality of representation of women in politics became deeply concerning. Many point fingers at the changing nature of our politics, at a time when more women are educated and greatly empowered. Many are disappointed by the quality of representation and debate on women’s issues. Although legislation that addresses issues relevant to women have been made and policies formulated, questions remain on our commitment to women.

At an election time like this, there is a need to look beyond the women around the presidential candidates who are mobilising voters and praise singing for them.

It is crucial that women look more into the manifestos of candidates to see what offers are being made and the ability of various parties to deliver on the promises to women in order to bargain for women. More importantly, look to whether the candidates have co-opted women in the campaign process that bring to life their promises. Looking beyond the number of women to the contribution of women offers greater insights into the mindset of the candidates towards women.

Justice Baguma rejects Besigye petition to quit case, transfer file

High Court judge Emmanuel Baguma has, for the second time, declined to recuse himself from hearing the treason charges against jailed veteran opposition politician Dr Kizza Besigye, arguing that there was no valid reason given by the four-time presidential contender to justify his withdrawal from the proceedings.

‘I am sorry for the delay. I have also been waiting because the Luzira people have delayed to come,’ Justice Baguma told a fully-packed courtroom on Wednesday after taking his bench at around 12:15pm.

Dr Besigye, together with his co-accused Hajj Obeid Lutale and Capt Denis Oola, is charged with three counts of treason and misprision of treason allegedly committed on February 21, 2025.

While delivering his ruling, the judge noted that the trio was committed to the High Court by Nakawa Magistrate’s Court on May 29, 2025, and the case was later allocated to the Criminal Division for trial through the Electronic Court Case Management Information System (ECCMIS) on June 27, 2025.

Justice Baguma said he had carefully examined the lower court record and found no evidence that the case was ever forwarded to the International Crimes Division (ICD) as claimed by the applicants.

‘I have scrutinised the entire lower court record and the history of this matter even before committal. On May 29, 2025, the accused were committed to the High Court for trial. In my view, the Criminal Division is a division of the High Court and therefore, has jurisdiction to handle this case,’ he said.

Justice Baguma noted that Dr Besigye and his co-accused had previously filed applications for bail and revision within the same Criminal Division, confirming their recognition of the court’s authority.

‘The turnaround by the accused to now claim that the file was hijacked from the ICD appears to be a deliberate move whose intention is not known,’ he said.

On the request for him to step aside, Justice Baguma said the allegations of bias and incompetence were unfounded.

‘The ruling on mandatory bail was determined on its own merit. The denial of bail at one stage does not mean that the judge is biased or will never grant bail in the future,’ he said.

He added that dissatisfaction with a court’s decision cannot be used to justify claims of bias.

‘It is not proper for parties to use decisions that are not in their favour to allege bias against a judge. The law provides avenues for dissatisfied parties to appeal,’ Justice Baguma ruled.

Justice Baguma further explained that the filing of a complaint against him before the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) was not a legal bar to his continued handling of the case.

‘This court is a temple of justice which upholds the principles of fair trial and natural justice. The filing of a complaint seeking the removal of a judge from office is not a bar to him continuing to hear a case,’ he ruled.

He dismissed the application for his recusal and the request to transfer the case, ordering that the matter be fixed for plea-taking.

However shortly after the court’s ruling, Dr Besigye through his lawyers led by Ernest Kalibbala asked court to refer the matter to the Constitutional Court to determine if it is proper for Justice Baguma to continue presiding over the case when there is a pending complaint seeking his removal from the Office of a judge pending before the Judicial Service commission.

In his response the Chief State Attorney Richard Birivumbuka argued that before any court refers any matter for Constitutional reference, it must be satisfied that there is a question of law that must be interpreted.

“Any matter disguised as a violation of human right is not a matter that this court can refer for interpretation. The court has been extremely fair to the applicants. The premise of the application is the alleged complaint to the JSC , there is no copy of that complaint and even then it is the duty of the JSC to serve it to the Judicial officer and determine it,” Mr Birivumbuka said.

He further submitted that the complaint had not yet been brought to the attention of the prosecution and therefore, there is no act of the judicial officer so far that requires Constitutional interpretation.

But Mr Kalibala told court that the matters raised touching on the impartiality of the court are fundamental questions of Constitutional interpretation which among other things will establish whether this is an impartial and independent court as per Article 28 of the Constitution.

“The state has responded about a complaint before the JSC and they are unhappy that they have not been served with the same. The complaint is not before the prosecution and they cannot even deny their existence but the ruling of the court confirms it exists,” Mr Kalibbala said.

Adding…”To the point that our clients can file a direct petition before the Constitutional court , its true but however the Constitutional also provided other avenues in Article 137( 5) and the distinguishing factor is that the question arises in proceedings like this one.”

Mr Kalibbala further told court that the matter that has been raised today is not about determination of the complaint before the JSC its related but the specific problem is whether a judge who is a respondent in a complaint before the JSC can try to sit in a matter to determine the innocence of the person’s complaining against him/ her.

The trial judge adjourned court proceedings to November 6 as the former Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) president’s started chanting freedom songs that echoed through the court corridors.

Decades of delay: Busoga sub-region’s long waits for promised road

Project Affected Persons (PAPs), local residents, and key stakeholders are urging the government to fulfill President Yoweri Museveni’s longstanding pledge to construct the Ambercourt-Mbulamuti-Kamuli-Buyende road.

The road, which serves as a vital agriculture produce transport route, has remained in a deplorable state despite repeated assurances from top leadership.

Stakeholders argue that the poor road conditions continue to hamper agricultural trade, increase transport costs, and limit access to essential services such as healthcare and education.

“For three decades, I have campaigned and pushed for construction of this road from Jinja Amber Court through Mbulamuti to Bukungu. What Busoga needs now is road connectivity to access markets,” said Ms. Rebecca Kadaga, First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of East Africa Community Affairs.

However, local leaders and residents are increasingly frustrated over the delay of the road that has cut them off in accessing markets for their produce. “We love, vote, and support the NRM here, but it seems the presidential pledges have shifted from promises to lies used as bait to keep us hoping, only to be resurrected during campaign season,” said Mr. Michael Kanaku, Chairperson Buyende District.

Mr. Chris Mugweri, a former NRM cadre turned to National Unity Platform (NUP) supporter and current Mbulamuti District Councilor, echoed similar sentiments.

“There seems to be an orchestrated corruption syndicate where funds for these projects are released at the source but vanish before implementation. These perennial unfulfilled pledges are lies and a betrayal of public trust,” he said.

During a recent community engagement, PAPs emphasized the urgent need for government intervention, citing delays in compensation and lack of transparency in the road project’s implementation timeline. The Ambercourt-Buyende road remains a key test of government responsiveness and commitment to infrastructure development in rural Uganda.

Mr. Richard Gulume, Jinja Resident City Commissioner, confirmed that the road has been on the agenda of the government and recently a consultant was on ground to assess the road project as planned.

“We have continued to develop the land and property and are demanding more money. The government is committed, and efforts are underway for commencement of the project,” he said.

PAPs through their representative in Jinja, Dr. Sam Olam, said their land titles were taken by the Uganda National Road Authority for compensation verification purposes three years ago, and they have received no feedback. Dr. Olam said the PAPs demand government pronouncement as they have experienced significant losses due to the government’s actions.

The Ministry of Works and Transport has assured PAPs that all land titles are safe and will be returned to owners promptly once the required right of way is established and residue titles are prepared.

“Our team is actively on ground conducting data collection to support valuation and the eventual compensation of the project affected persons,” said Mr. Allan Ssempebwa, Senior Communication Officer of the Ministry of Works and Transport.

The Monitor has learned that the government is set to borrow money from Citibank Bank to finance and build the Jinja-Mbulamuti-Kamuli-Buyende Road.

Constitutional Court upholds cash bail system in Uganda

The Constitutional Court has dismissed a petition that sought to abolish the imposition of cash bail in Uganda’s judicial system, ruling that the practice is not unconstitutional and remains within the discretion of judicial officers when granting bail.

The five-judge panel led by Deputy Chief Justice Dr. Flavian Zeija unanimously held that Section 78(b) of the Magistrates Courts Act and the relevant provisions of the 2022 Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature do not contravene the Constitution. Other Justices are Fredrick Egonda-Ntende, Ketrah Kitariisibwa Katunguka, Florence Nakachwa, and John Mike Musisi.

Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Nakachwa ruled that while every accused person has the constitutional right to apply for bail, the law allows courts to impose reasonable conditions, including cash deposits, to ensure attendance at trial.

‘Although an accused person has a right to apply for bail, it does not necessarily follow that one is automatically entitled to it,’ Justice Nakachwa stated. Adding, ‘The rationale behind granting cash bail is to balance the accused person’s right to liberty with the need to ensure their appearance in court and to prevent obstruction of justice.’ She emphasized that cash bail serves as a deterrent against absconding and as a mechanism to promote respect for the law. ‘Delinquent behavior will be avoided if members of the public know that release on bail may require payment of a cash bond. This financial pinch leads to obedience to the law and the promotion of the rule of law,’ she said.

The petition had been filed by Mr. Amos Kuuku, an advocate, Mr. Ezekiel Kasule, and Mr. Frank Barnabas Kajubi, who argued that Section 78(b) of the Magistrates Courts Act and Guidelines 23 to 28 of the Bail Guidelines (Practice) Directions, 2022, were inconsistent with Articles 21, 23(6), and 28(3) of the Constitution.

They contended that cash bail discriminates against indigent accused persons, prolongs remand periods, and contributes to prison congestion since those unable to pay remain in custody despite being granted bail. In their affidavits, the petitioners cited instances where they or other accused persons remained on remand for months or years because they could not raise bail money. They asked the Court to declare the provisions unconstitutional and to direct the release of all prisoners detained for failure to pay cash bail.

However, the Attorney General, represented by Counsel Richard Adrole and Jackie Amusugut, defended the law, saying that courts retain discretion to impose bail conditions they deem reasonable under Article 23(6) of the Constitution.

‘The right to bail is not automatic; whether rich or poor, all persons have the right to apply for bail, and the decision whether or not to grant it depends on the court’s discretion after considering the circumstances of each case,’ the State argued. The State further warned that removing cash bail could undermine the administration of justice. ‘Should cash bail be scrapped, it would cause mayhem. Accused persons will not fear absconding court sittings, and the public may lose confidence in the justice system,’ the Attorney General’s lawyers submitted.

In her judgment, Justice Nakachwa agreed with the State’s position, ruling that cash bail is a legitimate and constitutional condition of release.

‘The imposition of cash bail is one of the legal considerations for bail and hence not inconsistent with or in contravention of any provisions of the Constitution,’ she held. Adding, ‘Banning cash bail would stifle court’s discretion in bail applications. Had Parliament intended that bail bond be non-cash, it would have said so.’

The Court also rejected the petitioners’ plea for compensation, finding that any person who pays cash bail is entitled to a refund upon conclusion of the case, provided they comply with bail terms.

‘The issue of compensation for property sold off in order to raise bail money is misplaced. A civil court would require proof of such allegations. The 2nd petitioner has a remedy of claiming a refund of the bail money at the end of his criminal trial if he does not abscond,’ Justice Nakachwa stated.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Egonda-Ntende agreed that the petition lacked merit but noted that an unreasonable cash bail order in a particular case could amount to a constitutional violation.

‘A wrong application of Section 78 may result in a particular decision being unconstitutional. Where an order for a cash deposit is made without inquiry into an accused’s means to pay, it may be unreasonable and potentially unconstitutional,’ he observed.

However, Deputy Chief Justice Zeija disagreed with that interpretation, stating that it would be impractical for courts to conduct financial inquiries during bail hearings. ‘It would be impractical for a judicial officer to inquire into an individual’s financial ability during a bail application. Such an inquiry would turn into a trial within a trial,’ he said.

Justices Katariisibwa and Musisi both concurred with Justice Nakachwa’s lead judgment, agreeing that the petition be dismissed and each party bear their own costs. Concluding the unanimous decision, the Court declared the petition lacks merit and is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs, since this is a public interest litigation.

The ruling, delivered at the Constitutional Court in Kampala, effectively upholds Uganda’s cash bail system, affirming that the practice remains constitutional, discretionary, and refundable, and that courts must continue to exercise that discretion judiciously and reasonably.

Too close-yet-too far: Raila the President Kenya never had

The 2022 presidential race marked former Prime Minister Raila Odinga’s five so-close-yet-so-far presidential bids.

Odinga, who died on Wednesday aged 80 – had become a perennial presidential contender, having contested in 1997, 2007, 2013, 2017 and 2022.

But his ambition to become the country’s president remained elusive.

Popularly referred to as the enigma of the Kenyan politics, Mr Odinga had for close to four decades amassed huge political support base spread across the country.

He became one of the most consequential political player in nearly all the General Elections, with campaign messaging either crafted around Raila-phobia or Raila-mania.

His reformist and pro-people credentials endeared him to the population, especially those who felt marginalized by successive regimes that have largely rotated between the country’s two main ethnic blocs.

In some of the presidential elections, like the 2007 contest, he entered the race as the perceived preferred candidate. He narrowly lost to incumbent Mwai Kibaki in one of the country’s closely contested presidential race. The outcome of the election highly disputed, plunging the country in one of the deadliest post-election violence in the history of the country.

His supporters believe he was rigged out in the contest. In the election, his Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) won majority parliamentary seats, beating Kibaki’s Party of National Unity (PNU).

He was named Prime Minister in the subsequent grand coalition that was formed after the peace talks mediated by late former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Anan.

In the 2022 presidential race, Mr Odinga was once again perceived as a front runner in the contest that pitted him against then Deputy President William Ruto. In the election, Mr Odinga had the backing of then President Uhuru Kenyatta, who had fallen out with his deputy, Dr Ruto.

The veteran politician’s supporters – who for years believed he had been rigged out in the previous elections – were convinced the 2022 contest was his surest bet to ascend to the presidency. They believed with his massive traditional support bases and assistance by State machinery, his victory would not be stolen again. He lost to Dr Ruto.

Dr Ruto garnered 50.49 percent of the vote against his 48.85 percent. Mr Odinga challenged the results at the Supreme Court. However, the seven-judge bench upheld Dr Ruto’s win.

He went on to forge a working arrangement with President Ruto, leading to the formation of broad-based government that has ODM members sitting in the Cabinet.

Born on January 7, 1945 to the country’s first Vice-President Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, Mr Odinga, served as MP for Lang’ata between 1992 and 2013. He first won the Lang’ata seat on a Ford Kenya ticket before he retained it on a National Development Party ticket in 1997, National Alliance Rainbow Coalition (Narc) in 2002 and ODM in 2007.

Mr Odinga had his first stint in public service in 1974 when he was appointed Group Standards Manager at the Kenya Bureau of Standards (KeBS) and promoted to the position of Deputy Director in 1978 until 1982 when he was detained because of his political activity.

He was placed under house arrest for 7 months by the regime of former President Daniel Moi. He was later charged with treason, but was instead detained without trial for six years. During his time in detention, his mother died in 1984.

Moi ordered his release on February 6, 1988, but he was re-arrested in September the same year and was once again detained.

He was released on June 12, 1989, only to be incarcerated again on July 5, 1990, this time with Mr Kenneth Matiba and Mr Charles Rubia during the agitation for multi-party democracy.

He was released on June 21, 1991, but fled the country for Norway the following November amid fears of another arrest.

He returned to Kenya in February 1992, and joined Forum for the Restoration of Democracy (Ford) — where he was elected vice Chairman of the General Purposes Committee of the party.

He was elected Lang’ata MP in 1992 on a Ford Kenya ticket. When his father, Mr Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, died in January 1994, he challenged Mr Michael Wamalwa Kijana as the chair of the party but lost.

He resigned from Ford-Kenya to join the National Development Party (NDP).

He contested the presidency in 1997 and finished third but retained his position as Lang’ata MP. After the election, he led a merger between his party, NDP, and Mr Moi’s Kanu party.

He served in Moi’s Cabinet as Energy Minister from June 2001 to 2002. In the subsequent Kanu elections, he was elected the party’s secretary-general as part of the power sharing deal of the merger.

In 2002, Odinga fell out with Moi after he endorsed Mr Uhuru Kenyatta as his successor.

Mr Odinga and other Kanu members, including Kalonzo Musyoka, the late George Saitoti and the late Joseph Kamotho, opposed this step arguing that the then 38-year-old Mr Kenyatta was politically inexperienced and lacked the leadership qualities required to govern.

They joined the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), which later teamed up with Mr Mwai Kibaki’s National Alliance Party of Kenya (Nak), a coalition of several other parties, to form the National Rainbow Coalition (Narc) that eventually defeated Mr Kenyatta in the 2002 poll.

He later fell out with Mr Kibaki and contested the presidential election in2007 that was marred by Kenya’s deadliest post-poll violence. He was named Prime Minister in the subsequent grand coalition that was formed after the peace talks mediated by late former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Anan.

He also lost the 2013 presidential election to Mr Kenyatta. After the Supreme Court nullified the poll results, he boycotted the repeat election held on October 2017.

In the run-up to the 2017 poll, Odinga had a strong coalition behind him – the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (Cord) – which later became the National Super Alliance (Nasa), seven months to the polls. He successfully challenged Mr Kenyatta’s re-election at the Supreme Court. He, however, chose to boycott the repeat poll, citing lack of reforms at the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC).

His death has now marked a permanent closure on his presidential ambition, but his achievements in the fight for democratic space and second liberation will continue to stand out, according to his supporters.

Raila Odinga: The ultimate dealmaker

Raila Odinga was the man around whom the nation revolved-yet the presidency, like a distant star, always hovered just beyond his grasp. He was the ultimate dealmaker.

For more than half a century, this engineer-turned-insurrectionist-turned-statesman strode across Kenya’s political stage like colossus. His presence could reorder a room, his name alone could ignite a movement, and his longevity outlasted rivals, protégés, and coalitions. To his devotees, he was simply Baba-the father of the people. But the legend was never uncomplicated.

When he collapsed and died during a morning walk in Kerara, India, he breathed his last far from the people he had spent a lifetime trying to lead. By then, Raila Odinga was no longer just a man; he was an institution. He was the face of Odingaism.

To follow Raila was to learn Kenya’s most elemental civic rhythms. Raila could conjure a crowd with a whisper, still a riot with a glance, and complicate a scandal with a perfectly timed sound bite. To some, he embodied the restless conscience of the republic; to others, he was the consummate tactician, forever transforming indignation into smoke-filled understandings. Either way, he made the country’s political blood run hot.

For decades, Raila carried the title of ‘opposition leader’ like a fixed identity. But unlike others before him, he wore it loosely. He dismantled the label at will, crossing camps and dragging millions of supporters along, often without warning. He wore the broker’s tag with ease, pivoting between outsider and insider with astonishing fluidity.

His admirers called him flexible, shrewd, pragmatic. His critics called him a political chameleon-forever adjusting to the shifting landscape of power. His final act was no different. When the Gen Z uprising shook the foundations of President William Ruto’s government, it was Raila-not the youthful protesters-who reaped the spoils. He had not lit the spark, but he controlled the oxygen. In the aftermath, he brokered a deal to form a ‘broad-based government,’ rescuing Ruto from political isolation and placing his own ODM allies in Cabinet. After decades of chasing the presidency, Raila seemed to arrive at a simple, hard-earned truth: in Kenya, opposition is not a fixed position. It is a fluid instrument, to be picked up and set down as needed.

Raila’s initiation into hard politics was forged in steel. In 1982, when a faction of the Kenya Air Force tried to topple President Moi, the state’s dragnet fell wide. Odinga was arrested, detained without trial, and delivered to Kamiti Maximum Prison where Kenya forges her dissidents. For six long years, he was in solitary confinement-and came out, not a broken man but a national martyr. In his life, Raila carried with him a potent mix of grievance and charisma. The second liberation-the long march to multiparty democracy-suddenly had a conductor by his ageing father’s side.

Born in 1945 at Maseno’s Church Missionary Society hospital to Jaramogi Oginga Odinga-Kenya’s first vice president-and Mary Juma, Raila grew up fluent in the language of high stakes. East Germany gave him a degree in mechanical engineering and an instinct for precision that would forever wrestle with his impulse for disruption.

Returning home, he taught at the University of Nairobi, founded a gas-cylinder company, and lobbied for a standards bureau. In a different universe, he might have spent his prime calibrating turbines instead of negotiating the turbulence of power. But history had other plans. In July 1970, barely 25, he faced his first press conference, pleading with the government to free his father from detention. Whether appointed or propelled by conviction, Raila stepped forward. In the battle between the house of Jomo and the house of Jaramogi, the elder Odinga had been silenced. The younger Odinga, unbowed, found his voice and never lost it.

With multiparty elections, Raila comfortably won the Lang’ata seat and in 1998 he tried to run for presidency. But after placing fourth in the presidential race, Raila made a move that shocked his own base. He crossed the aisle to join President Moi’s government-a calculated pivot that drew both outrage and admiration. His National Development Party (NDP), symbolised by the tinga (tractor), became the ballast Moi’s shaky parliamentary majority needed. The alliance baffled the opposition establishment. Kijana Wamalwa, Mwai Kibaki, and Charity Ngilu watched in disbelief as Raila threw his lot in with the very man who had detained him. But Raila understood something they didn’t: politics was not about moral lines in the sand. It was about leverage. And leverage required proximity to power.

In the power matrix in 2001, Moi handed Raila the powerful Ministry of Energy-a docket where deals were made, contracts written, and networks cemented. Raila also chaired the parliamentary committee on constitutional review, a strategic perch from which to shape Kenya’s political future. Around the same time, his business dealings came under scrutiny as Raila was thrown into the world of old money. Through Spectre International, the Odinga family acquired the state-owned Kisumu Molasses Plant at a price critics called suspiciously low. Then Starehe MP Maina Kamanda accused him of ‘grabbing’ the facility; the Odingas insisted they paid Sh120 million. Soon after, Canadian-based Energem International-a firm with a controversial record in Africa’s mining belts-acquired a 55 percent stake. Kisumu residents, once central to the purchase, were left with just 5 percent. The Odingas held 40. The public conversation around Raila began to split: reformist hero to some, political capitalist to others.

Raila’s gamble on Moi had one intended prize: the presidency. But Moi, ever the tactician, chose another heir-Uhuru Kenyatta, the son of Kenya’s founding president. The betrayal was surgical. Raila’s response was swift. He stormed out of KANU, where he’d been secretary general, and returned to the opposition fold. There, he brokered yet another alliance, this time with Kibaki and Ngilu, helping to build the National Rainbow Coalition (NARC) that eventually ended KANU’s 40-year reign. The 2002 declaration-‘Kibaki Tosha’-would go down as one of the most electrifying moments in Kenya’s political history. On that day at Uhuru Park, the mountain moved. Raila, the dealmaker, had delivered victory to someone else. But power rarely keeps its promises. After the election, Kibaki’s allies reneged on a secret MOU that would have made Raila prime minister. He was handed a ministry instead. Furious but calculating, Raila sowed dissent within NARC, destabilising Kibaki’s first term from inside the tent. The Kibaki men never forgave him.

The split led to the 2005 constitutional referendum fall out. Kibaki’s ‘Banana’ camp went down in flames to Raila’s ‘Orange’ movement-a populist juggernaut that gave birth to the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM). Two years later came the 2007 general election, arguably the most consequential of Raila’s career. ODM dominated Parliament. The presidential tally, however, dissolved into chaos. Raila claimed the election was stolen. The country burned. More than 1,000 people died, hundreds of thousands were displaced, and Kenya teetered on the edge. In the end, under international pressure led by Kofi Annan, Raila accepted a deal: he would become prime minister in a grand coalition with Mwai Kibaki. It was a power born of blood, not ballots.

The Grand Coalition was fragile from the start-a house of cards held up by uneasy handshakes. It wasn’t built on shared vision but on the rubble of a crisis. Raila brought energy to the office, but scandals trailed him like a shadow. A maize saga involving members of his circle erupted in Parliament. He called it ‘a bunch of nonsense.’ Then came whispers about the Kazi kwa Vijana programme. Sh900 million had reportedly vanished. Raila admitted to an audit query of Sh308 million but dismissed the rest as manufactured outrage. And yet, within that uneasy coalition, Kenya achieved one of its most significant milestones since independence: the 2010 Constitution. Devolution, a bill of rights, and a re-empowered judiciary became fixtures of the state. The insurgent had learned to govern-and to bargain. The 2013 and 2017 presidential elections would be Raila’s most bruising. He lost both. In 2017, however, the Supreme Court-against expectation-annulled the presidential election, forcing a rerun. Raila boycotted, declared himself ‘People’s President,’ and staged a symbolic oath ceremony. Then, in a move that blindsided allies and foes alike, he shook the hand of the man he had sworn to oppose-President Uhuru Kenyatta. The Handshake of March 2018 recalibrated Kenya’s politics overnight. Raila became the establishment’s favourite outsider. Uhuru, in turn, sidelined his deputy, William Ruto. The Building Bridges Initiative (BBI) emerged from this détente, promising a new constitutional order. Courts struck it down, but Raila had already achieved what he often did best: rearranging the chessboard.

As the 2022 elections approached, Uhuru threw his weight behind Raila. Meanwhile, at Raila’s Capital Hill office, the handshake era had earned him another title: arbiter. As Uhuru cracked down on Ruto allies facing corruption charges, Raila’s allies seemed untouchable. Capital Hill became known as a ‘cleansing house’-a place where sins evaporated in the heat of political utility. Raila branded Ruto a thief. Ruto called Raila a mganga. Their supporters traded barbs like artillery and reconciliation seemed impossible.

Finally, William Ruto outmanoeuvered both, turning the race into a morality play between ‘dynasties’ and ‘hustlers.’ Ruto’s narrative stuck and Raila, for the fifth time, lost the presidency.

Then came the Gen Z uprising-youth-led, decentralized, leaderless, furious at a Finance Bill. It was a movement that existed outside Raila’s orbit. For the first time in decades, Kenya was protesting without him. But when the state turned to negotiate, it turned to the man who had made a career of negotiation. Raila seized the moment. Rigathi Gachagua, once the iron deputy, was politically isolated. Raila stepped into the vacuum, striking a deal that placed his allies inside Ruto’s government. It was the most unexpected alliance of his career-and perhaps the most strategic. By then, his ambitions had widened beyond State House. He wanted the chairmanship of the African Union Commission, a role he sought with Ruto’s blessing. To critics, it was capitulation. To loyalists, it was evolution.

The pivot came with risks. When Raila convened a press conference to champion the contentious bid of Indian tycoon Gautam Adani to manage Jomo Kenyatta International Airport and invest in the energy sector, he waded into treacherous waters. Kenya Kwanza was already reeling from corruption allegations; now Raila, once the face of opposition purity, stood shoulder to shoulder with the administration’s economic agenda. Since his ‘broad-based’ alliance with Ruto, and the elevation of ODM allies to Cabinet, Raila had effectively become a defender of the very administration he once savaged. If he was dancing to Ruto’s rhythm, it was to remain politically relevant. Raila Odinga’s biography is inseparable from the story of modern Kenya. He was born in the furnace of liberation politics, came of age in the turbulence of one-party rule, and matured in the transactional swirl of multiparty democracy. He survived detention, betrayals, stolen elections, handshake politics, and internet-era protest movements. And through it all, he remained the country’s most persistent protagonist. He won Lang’ata in 1992. He placed third for president in 1997. The arc seemed destined to end in State House-until it kinked. But Raila was not built for quiet exits. He turned kinks into pivots, losses into leverage, defeats into deals.

He was many things: a symbol, a broker, a tactician, a reformer, a wheeler-dealer. He gave Kenya some of its loudest democratic victories and brokered some of its most delicate political truces. He normalised protest politics, then perfected boardroom bargaining. He fought for a Constitution and learned how to stretch it. He could stir the street with righteous fury and negotiate its quiet end with quiet precision. Raila Odinga did not deliver a perfect democracy. Few ever do. But he helped create a noisier, more assertive, more constitutional Kenya-a country whose citizens believe they have the right to question power. He forced the state to answer with more than a baton and a shrug. He taught a generation to turn anger into instruments. He also taught them that politics is not only about purity but about power, and that compromise-however bitter-can shape history.

Raila’s story ends not with a conquest but with a calculus. In the twilight of his life, he embraced the establishment he had once fought, pursuing continental ambitions even as his domestic star dimmed. He was still negotiating, still cutting deals, still leaning into history. The presidency eluded him, but Kenya did not. Behind the political theatre was a private life that paid the price of public power. His wife, Ida Odinga, stood beside him through detentions, betrayals, and campaigns. His children grew up learning that fatherhood in politics is an act of love-and a series of absences. His friendships were ironclad, his loyalties fierce, his humour dry. He could talk constitutional reform in the morning and Gor Mahia football by afternoon.

Raila Odinga’s life resists tidy conclusions. Was he a hero who bent the arc of democracy? A broker who traded ideals for deals? Or both? What is undeniable is the imprint. The 2010 Constitution carries his fingerprints. So does the street protest that forces the state to listen, the coalition that crosses tribes, and the citizen who walks into court with confidence. These are not monuments. They are habits. And perhaps that is his most enduring deal of all-not for himself, but for the republic.

Locals turn scrap metal into money

Despite the stigma attached to it, selling scrap metal has become a lifeline for many residents of Kagadi District, helping families escape poverty.

In rural areas, collectors buy a kilogramme of scrap metal at Shs800 and sell it to wholesalers for between Shs1,500 and Shs2,000 depending on demand. Collectors earn an average of Shs10,000 a day selling scrap metal to wholesalers who transport them to factories in Jinja.

Mr Peter Taremwa, 44, a resident of Mambugu, is one of the many who have found success in the business. Dressed in black and riding a bicycle loaded with scrap metal, he moves door to door announcing, ‘Bring old metals for cash exchange!’ With a weighing scale around his neck, he buys scrap at Shs800 per kilogramme.

‘I joined the scrap business after dropping out of school in Primary Four due to lack of fees,’ he says. After years of unemployment, he joined a friend in the trade in 2008.

‘I persevered until I saved capital worth Shs400,000. Today, I’m a father of eight with land and children in school,’ he adds.

Now employing six people, mostly school dropouts, Mr Taremwa says he deploys his workers each morning to different areas to collect metals.

‘They bring back full bags and earn about Shs50,000 weekly depending on performance,’ he explains. By buying at Shs800 and selling at Shs1,500, he earns up to Shs1.8 million monthly.

According to the Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS), more than 45,000 people in Kagadi District are unemployed, most between 18 and 30 years old.

However, scrap metal trade is becoming a refuge for many who once struggled to find formal work. Mr Francis Asiimwe, 40, a father of seven, joined the business in 2009 after failing to find employment despite completing his studies.

‘I started with Shs500,000. It wasn’t easy, but now I own a store where people sell scrap,’ he says.

With 12 years of experience, Mr Asiimwe employs five people. Through the business, Mr Asiimwe has built rental houses, educated his children, and maintained financial independence.

Similarly, Mr Calvin Kyalimpa, 30, a Business Administration graduate from Makerere University, turned to scrap metal trade after struggling to raise capital for employment. ‘I got a loan of Shs300,000 and opened a small store. People despise the job, but it’s profitable if done with commitment,’ he says. Mr Kyalimpa employs several workers who travel long distances to collect scrap metal. ‘The business has taught me financial discipline and management skills. I’ve repaid my loan, hired a security guard, and can sustain myself without depending on anyone,’ he notes.

In Ndaiga Sub-county, 29-year-old Hamza Tumusiime left fishing seven years ago to join the scrap metal business using savings of Shs200,000. He now employs four people .

‘From this work, I’ve bought land and a vehicle,’ he says. For many in Kagadi, scrap metal trade has become more than a survival strategy-it’s a pathway to dignity, employment, and environmental restoration.

The earnings

* Selling price to factories: Shs1,500 – Shs2,000.

* Average daily earnings: Shs 10,000 – Shs 30,000.

* Monthly income for experienced dealers: Up to Shs1.8 million.

Swimming: Uganda go for early points in Kasarani

Looking at the psyche sheet of the 10th edition of the Africa Zone III Swimming Championships due this week at Kasarani Aquatics Centre Nairobi, calculators for points will be out from the onset for all teams.

Hosts Kenya and defending champions Uganda led by coach Thomas Tamale are the main acts for the title but Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan, and even Nigeria have fielded swimmers that can make the mathematics far from straightforward.

12 and Under

In the 12 and Under girls’ age category, Nisha Pearl Najjuma and Gabriela Eleanor Nakimuli go head to head with Tanzania’s Willbroad Gracias and the Kenyan duo of Thandiwe Kamanga and Lea Ibrahim in the 200m backstroke to start off the event on Thursday morning. Aya Adams, 9, a familiar face as she trains in Uganda represents Somalia.

For the boys, Kristian Bwisho and Giovanni Cruz Mbanga have to deal with Kenyan duo of AbdulKadir AbdulKadir and Jaeden Nygel in the 200m back. Bwisho will then compete for 50m breaststroke gold with Kenya’s Don Ndirangu as Elijah Ayesiga searches for a place on the podium against Tanzania Ariel Sykes.

Najjuma is a favourite in the girls’ breaststroke and will be joined by compatriot Alba Ihunde who has to battle Heydleen Magashi from Tanzania and the Kenyan duo of Aisha Hassan and Shah Havya for a medal.

Ihunde will then be joined by Ashton Suubi in the 100m butterfly, where Magashi and her Tanzanian teammate Leyna Borega are the ones to beat.

For the boys’ 100m fly, Ayesiga is joined by Jordan Musoke to battle Sundan’s Yassin Mohammed and the Kenyans AbdulKadir and Ndirangu.

13-14

In the 13-14 girls’ 200m back Zara Mbanga and Paula Nabukeera have Tanzania duo Crissa Dillip and Zainab Moosajee to deal with while Joanathan Kaweesa is a favourite for the boys with Tanzania’s Kaysan Kachra not expected to be too far. Jayson Aronda, 13, will also be pushing for a podium finish ahead of Tanzania’s Max Missokia and Kenya’s Tevin Waweru.

In 50m breaststroke, Mbanga will battle Dillip for girls’ gold while Mackayla Ssali and Kenya’s Nadia Vusha seek bronze. For the boys’ Kaweesa and teammate Kigundu Ssango are favourites but should watch the Kenyan duo of Adrian Irungu and Baraka Nyakundi carefully.

Mackayla will be joined by favourite Tyrah Muganzi in the 100m fly girls’ battle with Tanzania’s Nicolene Viljoen while Kaweesa and Benjamin Ssali are tasked to take on Missokia, Nyakundi, and Andrew Ogola – also from Kenya.

15-16

In the 200m back for the 15-16 girls, Rahma Nakasule will be up against TZ’s Filbertha Demello for gold while Paloma Kirabo hopes to get on the podium at the expense of Kenya’s Ruth Wangari Linddkvist.

For the boys, Daniel Rukundo and Shaun Muringi could bring home gold and silver. They face a familiar face in Joshua Andriatsitohain, who used to swim in Uganda with Dolphins.

In the girls’ 50m breast, captain Peyton Suubi battles the hosts’ Macrine Kalombo for her first assignment but Nigeria’ s Alfred Olajie Atinuke and Tanzania’s Heep Bridget are also in the mix.

Rukundo and Peterson Inhensiko challenge Kenya’s Neo Olengo and Austin Okore for honours in the boys’ 50m breaststroke then hand over to Isaiah Kuc and Ethani Ssengooba to take on Kenya’s Victor Okech and Tanzania’s Fernandes and Okore for 100m fly medals. Peyton and Kirabo will battle Demello and her compatriot Bridget Heep in the girls’ 100m fly.

17 and Over

Tara Kisawuzi is a lone wolf and a firm favourite in the 17 and Over girls’ 100m fly. But first, she takes on Rwanda’s Axela Echessah, 21, in the 200m back then the Kenyan duo of Duini Caffini and Maria Mwasha in the 50m breaststroke.

For the senior boys, Sudan’s Saleem Mohamed Ziyad is favourite and could go under a minute in 200m back where Uganda’s Pendo Kaumi and Malcolm Nahamya will be happy to be seeded above Kenya’s Ishaq Bahir. But Tanzania’s Romeo-Mihaly Mwaipasi, and Burundi’s Zacharie Harinzimana are seeded higher.

Kyle Kaweesa and captain Ampaire Namanya are challenged by Burundi’s Tony Uwineza and Nicky Irakoze in the 50m breast while Kaumi battles Kenyans Johari Masinde and Nathan Matimu in the 100m fly.

Expanded age groups

The 800m freestyle will be swum in the 14 and Under plus 15 and Over age groups.

Mackyala and Muganzi go up against Dillup and Moosajee in the 14 and Under girls’ 800m free while Elijah Mukisa and Manuel Ssemanda are up against Missokia and compatriot Zac Okumu, plus Kenya’s Ogoola and Lawrence Okumu in the boys’ category.

Peyton and Sonia Mwere are up against Sudan’s Hani Rana, and the Kenyan duo of Lindkvist and Victoria Okumu in the 15 and Over girls’ 800m free while Kuc hopes for a medal position in the boys’ race.

The day concludes with relays, which will also be done in the extended age groups. Kisawuzi can make a team with the 15-16 girls while Inhensiko, 16, can swim up with Ampaire, Kaumi, and Mathew Mwase.

The masters will also be in action in the 50m breaststroke.

Thursday’s events: 200m backstroke, 50m breaststroke, 800m freestyle, 100m butterfly, 4x50m medley relay (gender)

Health experts warn on epidemic threats, call for sustained local support

Health experts have called for sustained support to local governments in building robust health systems capable of effectively responding to disease and epidemic outbreaks.

Dr. Tonny Kapsandui, the Head of Programs at Amref Health Africa in Uganda, highlighted the critical need for enhanced preparedness in Uganda, a country vulnerable to recurrent epidemics due to its porous borders and geographic location.

“Uganda is placed geographically in a manner that we are prone and vulnerable to emergence of these epidemics. From the north, we have South Sudan, from the west, we have the DRC Congo, which are vulnerable and unstable countries with health challenges in their systems.

And because of the lack of control of such epidemics, which is now increasing in terms of numbers, we continue to have these challenges in Uganda because of our porous borders,” Dr. Kapsandui said.

The Strengthening Health Systems towards Epidemic controls project, implemented by Amref Health Africa in Uganda together with partners in five districts in Eastern Uganda, aimed to strengthen and improve the resilience of health systems in the region.

The project focused on preparedness and response to epidemics, emphasizing community involvement and the adoption of the One Health Approach, which integrates human, animal, and environmental health.

Through the project, local leaders, Village Health Teams (VHTs), and other grassroots resource persons were empowered in disease surveillance, reporting, and early detection and management.

“We invested a lot in community mobilization and sensitization, taking the message out there and helping people understand that these epidemics come and go and keep emerging, and we don’t know when they emerge. So it’s essential to be ready,” Dr. Kapsandui said.

The project also handed over essential items like sanitizers, protective gear, and gumboots to district leaderships to strengthen their ability to detect, prevent, and respond to future health emergencies.

“Resilience is about building a system that can absorb shocks such as epidemics,” Dr. Kapsandui emphasized.

Dr. Kapsandui reaffirmed Amref’s commitment to supporting Uganda’s health sector and urged for sustained investment in emergency preparedness.

“Ministry of Health has actually done a great job to put in place systems to handle these epidemics, and Uganda is recognized not only in Africa but also globally. However, gaps still exist because of the funding challenge to the health system, and so certain things need to be plugged in,” he emphasized.

Ms. Hope Atuhaire, the Resident District Commissioner (RDC) of Kween District, commended Amref Health Africa for complementing government efforts in managing health emergencies, especially during recent Anthrax outbreaks that affected both humans and livestock.

“We have had outbreaks where people got infected after contact with infected animals, some even lost their lives. Through the One Health program, Amref brought together veterinary and medical teams to respond jointly,” she said.

The district health officials also highlighted the importance of continuous community sensitization and ongoing food safety and hygiene campaigns.

“Many outbreaks are linked to poor food handling and sanitation practices. Continuous surveillance in food service points helps prevent contamination and disease transmission,” said Dr. Leonard Cheptoyet, the Kween District Health Officer.

Diageo fined Shs2.5b over anti-competitive practices in Uganda

The Comesa Competition Commission has fined global beverages giant Diageo $750,000 (Shs2.5b) for engaging in anti-competitive business practices across Uganda, Eswatini, and Zambia.

Diageo, the majority shareholder in East African Breweries Limited, was found to have breached regional competition laws by restricting trade and distorting market dynamics within Comesa.

A 13-page ruling indicates that the Commission concluded that Diageo’s distribution and production agreements contained restrictive clauses that undermined fair competition and regional integration.

The case, filed in 2021, followed complaints from distributors about Diageo’s contractual terms.

The investigation identified clauses on minimum resale price, single-branding, and territorial restrictions, which the Commission said prevented fair competition.

The Commission found that Diageo’s contracts allowed it to influence retail prices, compel distributors to sell only its products, and prohibit them from selling outside designated territories.

In Uganda, these territorial restrictions were particularly strict, cutting off distributors from potential cross-border markets. The Commission ruled that the practices violated the Comesa Competition Regulations, which outlaw agreements that prevent or distort competition within Comesa.

‘These arrangements frustrated regional trade integration and ran counter to the objectives of the Comesa Treaty,’ the ruling reads in part.

After four years of correspondence, the Commission issued a Statement of Concern in September 2023, allowing Diageo to respond. Diageo initially denied wrongdoing but later opted for a negotiated settlement.

In May 2025, Diageo and the Commission reached a Commitment Agreement, a legal mechanism allowing companies to settle cases without admitting liability.

Under the deal, Diageo agreed to pay $750,000 (Shs2.5b), remove all restrictive clauses from its distribution contracts, and notify distributors within 30 days that such clauses were no longer enforceable.

It also committed to submit compliance reports for three years.

The agreement was signed in London, UK, on September 30, 2025, by James Edmunds, Diageo’s General Counsel, and Dr Willard Mwemba, the Commission’s Director and Chief Executive Officer.

The ruling was particularly critical of Diageo’s operations in Uganda, where its subsidiary Uganda Breweries Limited was found to have imposed severe territorial restrictions that barred distributors from selling outside their zones, even within neighbouring Comesa countries.