DOCSLIB.ORG

IN the CONSTITUTIONAL COURT of UGANDA at MBALE CONSTITUTIONAL PETITIONS Nos

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
IN the CONSTITUTIONAL COURT of UGANDA at MBALE CONSTITUTIONAL PETITIONS Nos 5 THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF UGANDA AT MBALE CONSTITUTIONAL PETITIONS Nos. 49 of 2017, 3 of 2018, 5 of 2018, 10 of 2018, and 13 of 2018. 10 CORAM: Hon Mr. Justice Alfonse C. Owiny – Dollo, D.C.J./PCC Hon Mr. Justice Remmy Kasule, J.A./JCC Hon Mr. Justice Kenneth Kakuru, J.A./JCC Hon Lady Justice Elisabeth Musoke, J.A./JCC 15 Hon Mr. Justice Barishaki Cheborion, J.A./JCC 1. CONSTITUTIONAL PETITION NO. 49/ 2017 MALE H. MABIRIZI …………………............................................... PETITIONER 20 VERSUS ATTORNEY GENERAL …………………......................................... RESPONDENT 2. CONSTITUTIONAL PETITION NO. 03/ 2018 25 UGANDA LAW SOCIETY ……………….......................................... PETITIONER VERSUS 30 ATTORNEY GENERAL ………………........................................... RESPONDENT 3. CONSTITUTIONAL PETITION NO. 05/2018 35 1. HON GERALD KAFUREEKA KARUHANGA } 2. HON JONATHAN ODUR } 3. HON. MUNYAGWA S. MUBARAK }} :::::::::::::::::::::::: PETITIONERS 4. HON. ALLAN SSEWANYANA } 5. HON. SSEMUJJU IBRAHIM NGANDA } 1 | P a g e 5 6. HON. WINIFRED KIIZA } VERSUS ATTORNEY GENERAL .............................................................. RESPONDENT 10 4. CONSTITUTIONAL PETITION NO. 10/ 2018 1. PROSPER BUSINGE } 2. HERBERT MUGISA }} :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: PETITIONERS 3. THOMAS MUGARA GUMA } 15 4. PASTOR VINCENT SANDE } VERSUS ATTORNEY GENERAL …………………………............................... RESPONDENT 20 5. CONSTITUTIONAL PETITION NO. 13/ 2018 ABAINE JONATHAN BUREGYEYA ………….................................. PETITIONER VERSUS 25 ATTORNEY GENERAL …………………........................................ RESPONDENT JUDGMENT OF HON. JUSTICE ALFONSE C. OWINY – DOLLO; DCJ/PCC Introduction: 30 The five Constitutional Petitions captioned herein above were severally lodged in this Court pursuant to the provisions of Article 137 (1) & (3) of the 1995 Constitution of the Republic of Uganda; and, as well, Rules 3, 4, 5, and 12 of the Constitutional Court 2 | P a g e 5 (Petitions and References) Rules. The Petitions each seek, and plead for, various reliefs from this Court by way of orders and declarations; and these reliefs prayed for, are set out in full detail here below. Background: 10 In 2017, Hon Raphael Magyezi, a member of the 10th Parliament of the Republic of Uganda, representing Igara County West Constituency, Bushenyi District, moved a motion in Parliament seeking leave to table a private member’s Bill to amend the Constitution. Leave was granted as prayed; and so, he introduced 15 Constitutional (Amendment) Bill No. 2 of 2017 in accordance with the provisions of Articles 259 and 262 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda; seeking to amend Article 102 of the Constitution by lifting the Presidential age limit provision there from. The stated objectives of the Bill were: 20 (i) To provide for the time within which to hold Presidential, Parliamentary and Local government council elections under Article 61, 3 | P a g e 5 (ii) To provide for eligibility requirements for a person to be elected as President or District Chairperson under Articles 102 (b) and 183 (2) (b), (iii) To increase the number of days within which to file and determine a presidential election petition under Article 104 10 (2) and (3). (iv) To increase the number of days within which the Electoral Commission is required to hold a fresh election where a Presidential election is annulled under Article 104 (6); and, (v) For related matters. 15 In the course of the passage of the Bill in Parliament, more specifically at the stage of the second reading of the Bill, when the House was sitting as a Committee of the whole House, two separate motions were moved to amend the Bill. The first motion sought to amend the Constitution by extending the tenure of Parliament and 20 Local Government Councils from five to seven years; with a rider provision that the amendment would be effective from 2016 when each of the two legislative organs assumed office. The other motion sought to reinstate the Presidential term limit, which a previous Parliament had lifted from the Constitution. Parliament passed the 4 | P a g e 5 Bill as amended by the aforestated motions; and it was sent to the President for his constitutionally required assent, which he did. The Bill then became the Constitution (Amendment) Act (No. 1) of 2018. Aggrieved by the passing of the Bill by Parliament, which became Constitution (Amendment) Act (No. 1) of 2018 upon the Presidential 10 assent thereto, the five consolidated Constitutional Petitions named herein were severally lodged in this Court; each challenging the validity of specific provisions of the Constitution (Amendment) Act (No. 1) of 2018. However, when they came up for hearing, and owing to the fact that in many respects the five Petitions address 15 common issues, this Court consolidated them to enable a joint hearing; which, as it turned out, was quite prudent since this afforded both convenient and expeditious hearing of the Petitions. THE RELIEFS THE PETITIONERS HAVE SOUGHT: 1. Constitutional Petition No. 49 of 2017 20 This petition sought the following reliefs; namely that: (i) The action of the respondent and his agents to claim that the term of office of the current president expires in the year 2021, after expiration of 5 years is inconsistent with and in contravention of Articles 102 (b) and 102 (c) of the 5 | P a g e 5 Constitution as they were in the year 2016, when the current President was elected into office, which peg the qualification of the President to those of a Member of Parliament and hence when s/ he ceases to possess the qualification of being below 75 years, such president ceases to be eligible to be so and new 10 elections must be conducted. (ii) The actions of Parliament to prevent members of the public, with proper identification documents to access the Parliament’s gallery during the seeking of leave and presentation of the Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 2 of 15 2017 was inconsistent with and in contravention of Articles 1, 8A and 79 of the Constitution which require Parliament to only act in the name of the people, in conformity with the Constitution, laws and the rules of Parliament. (iii) The actions of the combined forces of the Uganda Police Force 20 and the Uganda People’s Defence Forces to invade Parliament and beat up, torture and arrest members of Parliament on 26th September 2017 was inconsistent with and in contravention of Articles 1, 8A, 79, 208 (2), 209, 211 (3) and 212 of the Constitution which require Parliament to only act in the name 6 | P a g e 5 of the people, in conformity with the Constitution, laws and the rules of Parliament and require the said forces to be non- partisan. (iv) The actions of Parliament to reconvene on the same day and in the same place where the combined forces had beaten up, 10 tortured and arrested Members of Parliament was inconsistent with and in contravention of Articles 1, 2, 8A and 79 of the Constitution which require Parliament to only act in the name of the people, in conformity with the Constitution, laws and the rules of Parliament. 15 (v) The actions of Parliament to consider and grant leave to Hon. Raphael Magyezi to table a Private Member’s Bill entitled The Constitutional (Amendment) Bill, No. 2 of 2017, when the Leader of Opposition, Opposition Chief Whip and other Opposition Members of Parliament were not in Parliament was 20 inconsistent with and in contravention of Articles 1, 8A, 69 (1), 69 (2) (b), 71, 74, 75, 79, 82A, and 108A of the Constitution which guarantee a multi-party dispensation and creates two sides for government and opposition in Parliament. 7 | P a g e 5 (vi) The actions of the Speaker of Parliament to allow ruling party members of Parliament to cross the floor and sit at the opposition side during the presentation of the Bill was inconsistent with and in contravention of Articles 1, 8A, 69 (1), 69 (2) (b), 71, 74, 75, 79, 82A, 83 (1)(g), 83 (3) and 108A of 10 the Constitution which guarantee a multi- party dispensation and creates two sides for government and opposition in Parliament. (vii) The action of Parliament to entertain presentation and grant of leave of a Private Member’s Bill which had the effect of 15 charging money from the Consolidated Fund was inconsistent with and in contravention of Article 93 (a) (ii), 93 (a)(iii) and 93 (b) of the Constitution which restricts Parliament not to make such legislations from private members. (viii) The action of Parliament to entertain and allow 8 new 20 members on the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee of Parliament almost when the same Committee had finished hearings from the public about the Bill and allowed them to sign the Committee Report as if they had attended the Committee Sessions was inconsistent with and in 8 | P a g e 5 contravention of Articles 44 (c), 90 (1) and 90 (2) of the Constitution which makes fair hearing a must and requires Committees of Parliament to work subject to the Constitution. (ix) The action of Parliament to entertain the Chairperson of the 10 Legal Affairs Committee, Hon. Oboth–Oboth, on 18th December 2017 to present the majority Committee Report on the Bill when the Leader of Opposition, Opposition Chief Whip and other opposition Members of Parliament were not in Parliament was inconsistent with and in contravention of 15 Articles 1, 8A, 69 (1), 69 (2) (b), 71, 74, 75, 79, 82A and 108A of the Constitution; each of which guarantees a multi-party dispensation and creates two sides in Parliament; one for government and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Cabinet Handbook
    THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA THE CABINET HANDBOOK Cabinet Secretariat Office of the President www.cabinetsecretariat.go.ug December 2008 FOREWORD I am pleased to introduce the Cabinet Handbook which provides clear and comprehensive policy management guidelines for the Cabinet and other arms of Government involved in the policy management process. Cabinet is the highest policy making organ of government and is therefore responsible for policy development and its successful implementation. Cabinet collectively, and Ministers individually, have a primary duty to ensure that government policy best serves the public interest. This Cabinet Handbook outlines the principles by which Cabinet operates. It also sets out the procedures laid down to facilitate Cabinet’s realization of its central role of determining government policy and supporting ministers in meeting their individual and collective responsibilities, facilitating coordinated and strategic policy development. In the recent past, my government has made major contributions in the documentation and improvement of processes and procedures that support decision making at all levels of government. In conformity to our principle of transforming government processes and achieving greater transparency, and effectiveness in our management of policy; my government has focused its attention on introducing best practices in the processes and procedures that support decision making at all levels of Government. This Cabinet Handbook is primarily intended for Cabinet Ministers and Ministers of State. However, it must be read by all officers that are in various ways associated with the policy process, so that they are guided to make a better contribution to Cabinet's efficient functioning. The Secretary to Cabinet and the Cabinet Secretariat are available to offer advice and assistance.
    [Show full text]
  • Uganda's Constitution of 1995 with Amendments Through 2017
    PDF generated: 26 Aug 2021, 16:53 constituteproject.org Uganda's Constitution of 1995 with Amendments through 2017 This complete constitution has been generated from excerpts of texts from the repository of the Comparative Constitutions Project, and distributed on constituteproject.org. constituteproject.org PDF generated: 26 Aug 2021, 16:53 Table of contents Preamble . 14 NATIONAL OBJECTIVES AND DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES OF STATE POLICY . 14 General . 14 I. Implementation of objectives . 14 Political Objectives . 14 II. Democratic principles . 14 III. National unity and stability . 15 IV. National sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity . 15 Protection and Promotion of Fundamental and other Human Rights and Freedoms . 15 V. Fundamental and other human rights and freedoms . 15 VI. Gender balance and fair representation of marginalised groups . 15 VII. Protection of the aged . 16 VIII. Provision of adequate resources for organs of government . 16 IX. The right to development . 16 X. Role of the people in development . 16 XI. Role of the State in development . 16 XII. Balanced and equitable development . 16 XIII. Protection of natural resources . 16 Social and Economic Objectives . 17 XIV. General social and economic objectives . 17 XV. Recognition of role of women in society . 17 XVI. Recognition of the dignity of persons with disabilities . 17 XVII. Recreation and sports . 17 XVIII. Educational objectives . 17 XIX. Protection of the family . 17 XX. Medical services . 17 XXI. Clean and safe water . 17 XXII. Food security and nutrition . 18 XXIII. Natural disasters . 18 Cultural Objectives . 18 XXIV. Cultural objectives . 18 XXV. Preservation of public property and heritage . 18 Accountability . 18 XXVI. Accountability . 18 The Environment .
    [Show full text]
  • Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995
    CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA, 1995. Arrangement of the Constitution. Preliminary matter. Arrangement of objectives. Arrangement of chapters and schedules. Arrangement of articles. Preamble. National objectives and directive principles of State policy. Chapters. Schedules. THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA, 1995. National Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy. Arrangement of Objectives. Objective General. I. Implementation of objectives. Political objectives. II. Democratic principles. III. National unity and stability. IV. National sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity. Protection and promotion of fundamental and other human rights and freedoms. V. Fundamental and other human rights and freedoms. VI. Gender balance and fair representation of marginalised groups. VII. Protection of the aged. VIII. Provision of adequate resources for organs of Government. IX. The right to development. X. Role of the people in development. XI. Role of the State in development. XII. Balanced and equitable development. XIII. Protection of natural resources. Social and economic objectives. XIV. General social and economic objectives. XV. Recognition of the role of women in society. XVI. Recognition of the dignity of persons with disabilities. XVII. Recreation and sports. XVIII. Educational objectives. XIX. Protection of the family. XX. Medical services. XXI. Clean and safe water. 1 XXII. Food security and nutrition. XXIII. Natural disasters. Cultural objectives. XXIV. Cultural objectives. XXV. Preservation of public property and heritage. Accountability. XXVI. Accountability. The environment. XXVII. The environment. Foreign policy objectives. XXVIII. Foreign policy objectives. Duties of a citizen. XXIX. Duties of a citizen. THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA, 1995. Arrangement of Chapters and Schedules. Chapter 1. The Constitution. 2. The Republic.
    [Show full text]
  • The Inspector General of Government and the Question of Political Corruption in Uganda
    Frustrated Or Frustrating S AND P T EA H C IG E R C E N N A T M E U R H H URIPEC FRUSTRATED OR FRUSTRATING? THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF GOVERNMENT AND THE QUESTION OF POLITICAL CORRUPTION IN UGANDA Daniel Ronald Ruhweza HURIPEC WORKING PAPER NO. 20 November, 2008 Frustrated Or Frustrating FRUSTRATED OR FRUSTRATING? THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF GOVERNMENT AND THE QUESTION OF POLITICAL CORRUPTION IN UGANDA Daniel R. Ruhweza HURIPEC WORKING PAPER No. 20 NOVEMBER, 2008 Frustrated Or Frustrating FRUSTRATED OR FRUSTRATING? THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF GOVERNMENT AND THE QUESTION OF POLITICAL CORRUPTION IN UGANDA ­­aniel R. Ruhweza Copyright© Human Rights & Peace Centre, 2008 ISBN 9970-511-24-8 HURIPEC Working Paper No. 20 NOVEMBER 2008 Frustrated Or Frustrating TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...................................................................................... i LIST OF ACRONYMS/ABBREVIATIONS......................………..………............ ii LIST OF LEGISLATION & INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS….......… iii LIST OF CASES …………………………………………………….. .......… iv SUMMARY OF THE REPORT AND MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS……...... v I: INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………........ 1 1.1 Working Definitions….………………............................................................... 5 1.1.1 The Phenomenon of Corruption ……………………………………....... 5 1.1.2 Corruption in Uganda……………………………………………….... 6 II: RATIONALE FOR THE CREATION OF THE INSPECTORATE … .... 9 2.1 Historical Context …………………………………………………............ 9 2.2 Original Mandate of the Inspectorate.………………………….…….......... 9 2.3
    [Show full text]
  • Uganda Date: 30 October 2008
    Refugee Review Tribunal AUSTRALIA RRT RESEARCH RESPONSE Research Response Number: UGA33919 Country: Uganda Date: 30 October 2008 Keywords: Uganda – Uganda People’s Defence Force – Intelligence agencies – Chieftaincy Military Intelligence (CMI) – Politicians This response was prepared by the Research & Information Services Section of the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) after researching publicly accessible information currently available to the RRT within time constraints. This response is not, and does not purport to be, conclusive as to the merit of any particular claim to refugee status or asylum. This research response may not, under any circumstance, be cited in a decision or any other document. Anyone wishing to use this information may only cite the primary source material contained herein. Questions 1. Please provide information on the Uganda Peoples Defence Force (Ugandan Army)/Intelligence Agencies and a branch of the Army called Chieftaincy Military Intelligence, especially its history, structure, key officers. Please provide any information on the following people: 2. Noble Mayombo (Director of Intelligence). 3. Leo Kyanda (Deputy Director of CMI). 4. General Mugisha Muntu. 5. Jack Sabit. 6. Ben Wacha. 7. Dr Okungu (People’s Redemption Army). 8. Mr Samson Monday. 9. Mr Kyakabale. 10. Deleted. RESPONSE 1. Please provide information on the Uganda Peoples Defence Force (Ugandan Army)/Intelligence Agencies and a branch of the Army called Chieftaincy Military Intelligence, especially its history, structure, key officers. The Uganda Peoples Defence Force UPDF is headed by General Y Museveni and the Commander of the Defence Force is General Aronda Nyakairima; the Deputy Chief of the Defence Forces is Lt General Ivan Koreta and the Joint Chief of staff Brigadier Robert Rusoke.
    [Show full text]
  • Monday, 26 July 2021
    PARLIAMENT OF UGANDA Monday, 26 July 2021 Parliament met at 10.13 a.m. in Parliament House, Kampala PRAYERS (The Deputy Speaker, Ms Anita Among, in the Chair.) COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIR THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, I welcome you to today’s special sitting whose main objective is to elect a Member of the East African Legislative Assembly to replace hon. Mathias Kasamba who passed on. This election is aimed at filling that vacancy that was created when the representative passed away on 27 April 2021. The late hon. Mathias Kasamba had previously been elected to EALA on 28 February 2017 on the NRM ticket. Pursuant to section 8 (1) of the East African Legislative Assembly Elections Act, 2011, the Speaker of EALA notified the Parliament of Uganda on 18 May 2021 of the vacancy at EALA. On 4 June 2021, during the sitting to receive the State-of-the-Nation Address by His Excellency the President, the Speaker of Parliament formally notified the House of the existence of the vacancy in Uganda’s representation to EALA, and guided that the vacancy had to be filled within 90 days of nomination as required by the EALA Elections Act, 2011. In the same line, he instructed the Clerk to Parliament to initiate the process of filling the vacancy. The Clerk to Parliament, on 19 July 2021, appointed two nomination days, namely 21 and 22 July 2021. Further, in line with paragraph 3 of Appendix B of the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Uganda, on 19 July 2021 the Clerk to Parliament, through general notice No.
    [Show full text]
  • “The Life and Contribution of the Late Benedicto K. M. Kiwanuka to the Political History of Uganda”
    “The Life and Contribution of the Late Benedicto K. M. Kiwanuka to the Political History of Uganda” By Paul K. Ssemogerere, Former Deputy Prime Minister & Retired President of the Democratic Party A Lecture in Memory of Benedicto Kiwanuka Organized by the Foundation for African Development and the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung on 13th October 2015, Hotel Africana 1. Introduction I believe I am speaking for all present, when I express sincere appreciation to the leadership of the Foundation for African Development (FAD), who, in collaboration with the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung (KAS) of Germany, instituted this series of Annual Memorial Lectures/Dialogues in happy memory of someone who lived and worked under great difficulties but, guided by noble principles, and propelled by sustained personal endeavor to lead in order to serve, rose to great heights, and eventually leaving his star shining brightly for all of us long after his awful extra- judicial execution – an execution orchestrated by fellow-men held captive by envy and personal insecurity. I welcome today’s main presentation for the Dialogue on “What needs to be done to avert the risk of election violence before, during and after the 2016 General Elections in Uganda”, for three main reasons: • First, because anxiety about the likelihood of violence breaking out with disastrous consequences is well founded; there are simply too many things wrong about the forthcoming election while, at the same time, there is, so far, an apparent lack of genuine interest to address them seriously and objectively
    [Show full text]
  • Phone-Tapping and the Right to Privacy [Ronald Kakungulu]
    Phone-tapping & the Right to Privacy: A Comparison of the Right to Privacy in Communication in Uganda & Canada R. Kakungulu-Mayambala * Email: [email protected] Table of Contents List of Acronyms................................................................................................2 Abstract ............................................................................................................2 Key Definitions ..................................................................................................3 I. Introduction...................................................................................................4 II. Historical and Legal Conceptions of the Right to Privacy in Uganda. .................5 2.1 History of Phone tapping and Surveillance in Uganda..................................5 III Elemental aspects of the right to privacy in communication in Uganda 1995 - 2008.................................................................................................................7 3.1 The Rationale for the right to privacy in communication..............................7 3.2 Enjoyment of the right to privacy in Uganda for the period 1995 – 2008....9 IV. The Right to Privacy in Communication in Canada and lessons for Uganda.....17 4.1. The Experiences with and approaches to the Right to Privacy in Communication in Canada ............................................................................17 4.2. The Right to Privacy in Communication in Canada and Lessons for Uganda ...................................................................................................................19
    [Show full text]
  • The Rwenzururu Movement and the Struggle for the Rwenzururu Kingdom in Uganda
    DISCUSSION PAPER / 2016.01 ISSN 2294-8651 The Rwenzururu Movement and the Struggle for the Rwenzururu Kingdom in Uganda Arthur Syahuka-Muhindo Kristof Titeca Comments on this Discussion Paper are invited. Please contact the authors at: [email protected] and [email protected] While the Discussion Papers are peer- reviewed, they do not constitute publication and do not limit publication elsewhere. Copyright remains with the authors. Instituut voor Ontwikkelingsbeleid en -Beheer Institute of Development Policy and Management Institut de Politique et de Gestion du Développement Instituto de Política y Gestión del Desarrollo Postal address: Visiting address: Prinsstraat 13 Lange Sint-Annastraat 7 B-2000 Antwerpen B-2000 Antwerpen Belgium Belgium Tel: +32 (0)3 265 57 70 Fax: +32 (0)3 265 57 71 e-mail: [email protected] http://www.uantwerp.be/iob DISCUSSION PAPER / 2016.01 The Rwenzururu Movement and the Struggle for the Rwenzururu Kingdom in Uganda Arthur Syahuka-Muhindo* Kristof Titeca** March 2016 * Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Makerere University. ** Institute of Development Policy and Management (IOB), University of Antwerp. TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT 5 1. INTRODUCTION 5 2. ORIGINS OF THE RWENZURURU MOVEMENT 6 3. THE WALK-OUT FROM THE TORO RUKURATO AND THE RWENZURURU MOVEMENT 8 4. CONTINUATION OF THE RWENZURURU STRUGGLE 10 4.1. THE RWENZURURU MOVEMENT AND ARMED STRUGGLE AFTER 1982 10 4.2. THE OBR AND THE MUSEVENI REGIME 11 4.2.1. THE RWENZURURU VETERANS ASSOCIATION 13 4.2.2. THE OBR RECOGNITION COMMITTEE 14 4.3. THE OBUSINGA AND THE LOCAL POLITICAL STRUGGLE IN KASESE DISTRICT.
    [Show full text]
  • A Foreign Policy Determined by Sitting Presidents: a Case
    T.C. ANKARA UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS A FOREIGN POLICY DETERMINED BY SITTING PRESIDENTS: A CASE STUDY OF UGANDA FROM INDEPENDENCE TO DATE PhD Thesis MIRIAM KYOMUHANGI ANKARA, 2019 T.C. ANKARA UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS A FOREIGN POLICY DETERMINED BY SITTING PRESIDENTS: A CASE STUDY OF UGANDA FROM INDEPENDENCE TO DATE PhD Thesis MIRIAM KYOMUHANGI SUPERVISOR Prof. Dr. Çınar ÖZEN ANKARA, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................ i ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................... iv FIGURES ................................................................................................................... vi PHOTOS ................................................................................................................... vii INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER ONE UGANDA’S JOURNEY TO AUTONOMY AND CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM I. A COLONIAL BACKGROUND OF UGANDA ............................................... 23 A. Colonial-Background of Uganda ...................................................................... 23 B. British Colonial Interests .................................................................................. 32 a. British Economic Interests .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Syphilis in Uganda
    Bull. Org. mond. Santeh 1956, 15, 1041-1055 Bull. Wld Hith Org. THE HISTORY OF SYPHILIS IN UGANDA J. N. P. DAVIES, M.D., Ch.B., M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P. Professor of Pathology, Makerere College Medical School, Kampala, Uganda SYNOPSIS The circumstances of an alleged first outbreak of syphilis in Uganda in 1897 are examined and attention is drawn to certain features which render possible alternative explanations of the history of syphilis in that country. It is suggested that an endemic form of syphilis was an old disease of southern Uganda and that protective infantile inoculation was practised. The country came under the observation of European clinicians at a time when endemic syphilis was being replaced by true venereal syphilis. This process has now been completed, endemic syphilis has disappeared, and venereal syphilis is now widespread and a more serious problem than ever. This theory explains the observations of other writers and reconciles the apparent discrepancies between various reports. Until comparatively recent times the country now known as Uganda was cut off from the rest of the world. The Nile swamps to the north, the impenetrable Congo forest to the west, the mountains and the upland plateaux with the warrior Masai to the east, and the other immense difficul- ties of African travel, had protected the country from intrusion. In the southern lacustrine areas there had developed the remarkable indigenous kingdoms of Bunyoro and Buganda. These became conscious of the larger outside world about 1850, when a Baluch soldier from Zanzibar reached the court of the King of Buganda, the Kabaka Suna.
    [Show full text]
  • Are Family Planning Programs Reaching the Disadvantaged? an Equity Case Study of Uganda
    POLICY Brief September 2020 Are Family Planning Programs Reaching Authors: Kaja Jurczynska, the Disadvantaged? Kevin Ward, Lyubov Teplitskaya, Shiza Farid, and Kristin Bietsch An Equity Case Study of Uganda Introduction In just over a decade, the share of married women using modern methods of contraception in Uganda nearly doubled, increasing Equity in health means that from 18 percent in 2006 to 35 percent in 2016, and to a further 37 everyone has a fair opportunity 1 percent in 2019 (UBOS and ICF, 2018; FP2020, 2020). Uganda to reach their health potential, has cemented its commitment to family planning through the regardless of wealth, education, country’s first Family Planning Costed Implementation Plan for sex, age, race or ethnic group, 2015–2020 and subsequent pledges under the Family Planning residence, disability, and other 2020 (FP2020) partnership. Among its goals, Uganda has status or social group. committed to reducing inequities, particularly for those living in rural areas, adolescents, and those facing financial hardship (Ministry of Health, 2014; FP2020, 2017). Despite this progress, Uganda has experienced challenges in Box 1. HP’s Approach for meeting its family planning commitments for 2020 and 2021, Diagnosing Inequity in including those that are equity focused. For example, unmet Family Planning Programs need is higher than desired, at one quarter of all married women compared to the goal of 10 percent by 2020. The use of modern The approach answers the “who, contraceptive methods lags behind the 2020 goal of 50 percent what, and where” of inequities in (FP2020, 2019). While inadequate funding of family planning family planning: activities remains a key barrier to progress (Wanyana et al., 2019), better directing information and services for those women who • Who is experiencing inequity? need them most could address longstanding inequities while also • What components of bolstering uptake and improving allocative efficiency.
    [Show full text]