I will not use too much time looking into the recent letter written by Yoweri Kaguta Museveni. I will instead show some significant pieces of it. That settles the puzzle of who he is as an President and Head of State. Because, it shows his force and his way of governing, by mere words. That his the overlord and without question has the right to take lives. Especially, since killers are pigs, but if it wasn’t for killing himself. He wouldn’t have won his own rebellion in the 1980s. But we’re supposed to forget that, in which, makes that statement contradictory.
Before I go on a long rant… Just look at this!
“ As I told you before, these criminals are pigs. Anybody who kills people outside war is a pig. Moreover, many are stupid. They forget that all crime leaves clues and, eventually, the criminals will be captured. Up to the killing of Kaweesi, Kiggundu and Abiriga, the security infrastructure had lagged behind. You remember after those killings, I presented to Parliament a 10 points anti-crime plan on the 20th of June 2018. Although we have only partially implemented it, many of the killers in recent times have been arrested. The Masaka gang of Kiddawalime was wiped out (killed or arrested), Serugo Paul and his Syndicate in Masaka, Kanyesigye Juilius alias Mwesigye Amon in Rwizi and Kampala and the Usafi mosque criminal syndicate were neutralized” (Museveni, 10.09.2019).
I am sure that Obote, Tito Okello or anyone else he got rid of would call him a criminal or a pig over his actions. As the rebellion he used was over his own grievances. His saying certain sanctioned killings is cool, as long as they are done in the midsts of war. Even though certain criminal activity and crimes against humanity can warrant arrests, charges and sentencing at the Internal Criminal Court (ICC). Surely, the President who fears that institution, will not mention that, as he acted without question, in a brutal way in the Democratic Republic of Congo and could at one point answer for that in Hague.
Well, the other striking distinction … is how is openly saying he failed implementing the 10 point plan of June 2018. That must surely be as failing to implement as the 1986 Ten Point Programme, which he still haven’t finish. Maybe, we need to give the President another 32 years to finish of his second 10 point plan. He always needs time, while partly making things work.
Before I continue, the President had this to say as well:
“You may commit a crime, carelessly taking away the lives of others; however, you will also lose your own life. We need to make this clear to the Courts. It must be an eye for eye. Nothing less will be acceptable to the freedom fighters that I represent and the entirety of the electorate of Uganda that I represent” (Museveni, 10.09.2019).
The President will ensure that state is allowed and can shoot-to-kill before the Courts have found a verdict and said a set individual is guilty of the charges. This sort of policy is made for police states who will not answer to laws, but to enforcement itself. Killing of killers is within reason, but with the enforcement of laws and by evidence produced in the courts.
If it is directly an eye for an eye, than a stray-shot might kill another innocent civilians and anarchy will persist. Where there is no legal bound, but to carry weapons. As everyone will can do it. Instead of making changes and securing the public, these sort of acts will if it is enforced, make life very cheap. Who knows if the ones killed by law-enforced is the killer or his neighbour? Because, when your dead, your either a hero or a terrorist. In the eye of the President, the dead man would initially be a criminal pig. Even if the person shot and killed by security officials was innocent, they can frame it like yet another criminal taken-out.
This is enough for me, because, there is so much in the text that he wrote, but for me this is the standout. Which needs to be addressed, if he believes in justice. He should consider measures that secures a verdict based on evidence, affidavits and proof. Not hearsay and random picking people out and giving them a fatal punishment. Than the innocent could loose their lives, just like the lives taken by the killer. While the ones whose supposed to get sanctioned runs free, because you claim that the innocent did the evils bidding. Did he ever consider that?
Don’t think so, because he seemed focus on retaliation, more than countering injustice with justice. Which means, there is hard to strike a difference between whose the criminal and whose the law-enforcement. That should worry anyone. Peace.