Press Release: Court dismisses Case against Uganda and SG on the alleged Failure to Investigate Business related to Trafficking of Military Goods (05.11.2015)

cadets10 UPDF

East African Court of Justice Arusha, 5 November 2015: The First Instance Division dismissed a case filed by a Ugandan national, Oscar Okaly Opuli, against the Secretary General of the East African Community (1st Respondent) and the Republic of Uganda (2nd Respondent) alleging that the government of Uganda’s failure to investigate David Greenhugh and business related to trafficking of military goods from Ukrain to Sudan through Uganda, a conduct which is contrary to the United Kingdom’s Export Control Order Act 2008 and the East African Community Laws is an infringement of the Treaty. The Applicant also alleges that the Secretary General’s inaction constitutes an infringement of the Treaty for the Establishment of the EAC.

In February 2015, the Court directed the Applicant to file evidence of a witness by way of affidavit and his submissions with the Court by 8th May 2015. To date none of the orders have been complied with and the Court has gone ahead and dismissed the matter.

The Court in its ruling stated that, they agree with the Counsel for the Respondents that no sufficient reasons had been advanced by the Counsel for the Applicant for his failure to take steps ordered by the Court on 23rd Feb 2015 after the Scheduling Conference. The Principal Judge Hon. Lady Justice Monica Mugenyi further said that in absence of sufficient reasons such failure amounts to abuse of Court process. The Court therefore exercised its discretion under Rule 1 (2) and 66 (3) of the Court’s Rules of procedure and dismissed the case.

Before the Court ruled, the Lawyer for the Applicant submitted that the Applicant lost contact with the witness leading the to delay in filing of the Submission as the Court had ordered in February 2015 and was requesting the Court for more time of 30 days to file the same.

Mr. Agaba representing the Secretary General also submitted opposing the prayer for the Applicant and said that Applicant has consistently shown lack of interest in the matter since the time the Court directed him to file his submission up to today. That this was evidenced by his failure to communicate to Court what the challenge was. He further said that if he had failed to submit the requirements in eight months then he might not do the same in the one month being requested for. Mr Agaba asked Court to strike out the case because the Applicants have failed to fulfill their obligations and that is the abuse of the Court’s process.

The 2nd Respondent (Attorney General of Uganda) represented by Ms. Margaret Nabakooza also associated herself with the submissions of Counsel for the Secretary General and asked Court to dismiss the case.

The matters came before a bench of the Judges of the First Instance Division composed of Honourable  Lady Justice Monica Mugenyi (Principal Judge), Justice Dr. Faustin Ntezilyayo, and Justice Fakihi A . Jundu.

Notes for editors
Rule 1 (2) of the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure 2013 states that; nothing in these Rules shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect the inherent power of the Court to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the Court.

Rule 66 (3) of the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure 2013 provides that; Where any party to whom time has been granted fails to produce evidence or to cause the attendance of its witness, or to perform any other act necessary to the further progress of the case, the Court may, notwithstanding such failure, proceed to determine the dispute or reference forthwith.

About the EACJ

The East African Court of Justice (EACJ or ‘the Court’), is one of the organs of the East African Community established under Article 9 of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community. Established in November 2001, the Court’s major responsibility is to ensure the adherence to law in the interpretation and application of and compliance with the EAC Treaty.

Arusha is the temporary seat of the Court until the Summit determines its permanent seat. The Court’s sub-registries are located in the respective National Courts in the Partner States.

ENDS-
For more information please contact:

Ms. Geraldine Umugwaneza, Ag. Registrar
Email: umugwaneza@eachq.org

Mr. Owora Richard Othieno, Head of Department;
Corporate Communications and Public Affairs Department;
EAC Secretariat
Tel: +255 784 835021; Email: othieno@eachq.org

East African Court of Justice
Arusha, Tanzania

Welcome to the East African Court of Justice

Bank of Uganda move to control inflation ahead of elections (Youtube-Clip)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QH6JV1xTSg4

Press Release: Kenya must review Double Tax Agreement with Mauritius (02.11.2015)

kenya-money-1

(Nairobi, November 2, 2015) – Kenya is teetering on the brink of financial meltdown with the implosion of at least two private commercial banks in the last few months and signing of loophole-ridden double taxation agreements with tax havens Mauritius, United Arab Emirates and Qatar.

Tax havens are countries or states that position themselves as low tax jurisdictions allowing companies and rich individuals to hide their wealth without paying appropriate taxes where they actually make their profits or wealth. Tax Justice Network-Africa (TJN-A) in October 2014 sued the Government of Kenya (specifically the Cabinet Secretary to the Treasury, Kenya Revenue Authority and the Attorney-General) challenging the constitutionality of the Kenya/Mauritius Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement signed in Port Louis, Mauritius on May 11, 2012 and as contained in Legal Notice 59 published in the Kenya Gazette of May 23, 2014.

The Agreement significantly undermines Kenya’s ability to raise domestic revenue to underpin the country’s development by opening up loopholes for multinational companies operating in the country and super- rich individuals to shift profits abroad through Mauritius to avoid paying appropriate taxes. For example, provisions under Article 11 of the Agreement relating to interest limit Kenya’s withholding tax to 10 per cent whereas the Kenyan domestic rate currently stands at 15 per cent. This will significantly affect the tax base of the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA). The Agreement also sharply contravenes Articles 10 and 201 of the Constitution and is inconsistent with the principles of good governance, sustainability and accountability. The Agreement is open to abuse and this could endanger the growth and development of Kenya.

Three main reliefs sought by TJN-A are: that the High Court declares the government’s failure or neglect to subject the Kenya-Mauritius Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement to ratification in line with the Treaty Making and Ratification Act 2012 as a contravention of Articles 10 (a), (c) and (d) and 201 of the Constitution of Kenya.

That the Court directs the Cabinet Secretary for Treasury to immediately withdraw Legal Notice 59 of 2014 and commence the process of ratification in conformity with the provisions of the Treaty Making and Ratification Act 2012.  And award cost of the petition with interest against the Government of Kenya. The case came up for mention at the Nairobi High Court today, November 2, 2015. The court will fix a date for hearing the case on November 9, 2015. Speaking at a press briefing earlier today, the Executive Director of TJN-A, Alvin Mosioma said “there is need for public participation in the process of ratification of double tax agreements…double tax agreements kill the competitive edge of local firms”. 2 Senator Hassan Omar of Mombasa County who also addressed the press said Kenya’s “Parliament needs to appreciate its responsibility in safeguarding the public’s interests,” adding that “the reason people steal is because there is complicity and people are aware of it”. Provisions under Article 12 of the Agreement which relates to royalties also restrict at- source withholding tax to half (10 per cent) of Kenya domestic rate of 20 per cent. This will significantly weaken Kenya’s ability to raise revenue to finance its development. Additionally provisions under Article 20 of the Agreement reserves all taxation of “other income” not dealt with in specific Articles to the residence state.

This effectively reduces withholding tax to zero per cent on services, management fees, insurance commissions among others, whereas Kenyan domestic withholding tax rate currently stands at 20 per cent. This is a major gap that will lead to massive revenue leakages. The Agreement is neither United Nations nor OECD compliant and it also fails to address the issue of disposal of shares in companies. The Agreement effectively reserves under Article 13.4 all taxation of capital gains from selling shares in companies to Mauritius where the effective Capital Gains Tax is zero per cent. Under the Agreement foreign investors in Kenya can acquire Kenyan companies through Mauritius holding companies and Kenya cannot tax any of the gains when they sell these businesses again. This is open to abuse. Similarly, domestic Kenyan investors can dodge Kenyan taxes by round-tripping their investments illicitly through Mauritian shell companies. Kenyan companies can also easily avoid Kenyan taxes in dividends paid to foreign investors through devices like share buy-backs therefore deny the government of development funds.

The provision is very similar to the Capital Gains Tax Article in the India-Mauritius treaty which has proved very controversial costing India an estimated US$600 million a year in revenues as a result of tax avoidance and illicit round-tripping by Indian business executives driving the Government of India to initiate steps to renegotiate its agreement with Mauritius. Under the definition of ‘bilateral treaty’ in Section 2 of the Treaty Making and Ratification Act an ‘agreement’ such as the one between Kenya and Mauritius and which is the subject matter of this legal case, is a treaty subject to the Act and therefore requires that the Cabinet Secretary to the Treasury in consultation with the Attorney General, submit to the Cabinet the treaty, together with a memorandum outlining, inter alia – 1. Policy and legislative considerations, 2. Financial implications 3. Implications on matters relating to counties, 4. The views of the public on the ratification of the treaty.

Mauritius presently has tax treaties with 13 African countries namely Botswana, Lesotho, Madagascar, Mozambique, Namibia, Rwanda, Senegal, Seychelles, Swaziland, South Africa, Tunisia, Uganda and Zimbabwe. Apart from Kenya, Mauritius also has signed Double Taxation Agreements with Congo, Zambia and Nigeria. Currently Mauritius is negotiating DTAs with Algeria, Burkina Faso, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, Malawi and Tanzania. Unlike Mauritius’ DTA with Uganda and Nigeria, for example, which have specific provisions for withholding tax for management/technical services fees, Kenya failed to negotiate any such provisions. 

In a related development, the Government of Kenya has signed an equally harmful Double Tax Agreement with United Arab Emirates and Qatar – both of which are tax havens – in which Kenya further deems its right to tax as unnecessary in a bid to attract investment from these two countries. These agreements will deepen Kenya’s current cash crunch by allowing the further erosion of the country’s tax base. – END.

ABOUT TJN-A: Tax Justice Network-Africa (TJN-A) is a Pan-African initiative and a member of the Global Alliance for Tax Justice. It is a network of 29 members in 16 African countries. TJN-A collaborates closely with these member organisations in tax justice 3 advocacy at the national and regional levels. TJN-A seeks to promote socially just and progressive taxation systems in Africa, advocating for pro-poor tax policies and the strengthening of tax systems to promote domestic resource mobilisation. TJN-A aims to challenge harmful tax policies and practices that favour the wealthy and aggravate and perpetuate inequality. For further enquiries, please email Kwesi Obeng at kobeng@taxjusticeafrica.net (+254 726 804 400) and/or Michelle Mbuthia at mmbuthia@taxjusticeafrica.net (+254 724 994 796).

First Nomination Day of the Presidential Aspirants in Uganda

Vote M7 031115

Today and tomorrow are the days where the stadiums will be filled for the nomination rallies in Uganda for before the General Election in 2016. This will be for Yoweri Kaguta Museveni (NRM), Amama Mbabai (Go-Forward) and Dr. Kizza Besigye (FDC). Even the businesses in central parts of Kampala are shut-down while people are going to Mbabazi’s Nakivubo stadium. It’s also been hectic and jams around Ntinda today. The Police have had check-points on the roads into the Nakivubo Stadium today! A strong police presence in Kampala is strong today!

Its election time so the NRM-Regime does something to the citizens they have actually given free fuel and free money before the Nomination Rally at Kololo Independence Ground today! Surely election season, things can sometimes become free!

Amama Mbabazi: “We are fully aware of the election obstacles in Uganda and we are going to overcome them”.

Yoweri Kagua Museveni extract from the recent speech to the NRM CEC 01.11.2015:

“I need to caution our members about branding each other ─ saying this, is “pro-Mbabazi” “pro-FDC”, etc. Ugandans know how to speak for themselves. Those who want to join Mr. Mbabazi can speak for themselves. Nobody else should speak for them. If they are acting as infiltrators, we shall discover them and deal with the infiltration”.

Mathias Mpuunga: “Enough is enough. 30 years is too long. We are here to assure you that we are ready for change” (…) “Opposition political parties, all regions of this country are going forward. We are going fooorward”.

Closed Schools 031115

The crowds coming to Kololo and the NRM stadium has been shipped in with buses from Jinja Road from all over the country and also closed local schools in town to support the President.

Earlier today this has happen:

Museveni 031115

Candidate Museveni duly nominated at 10.21 am, where he was with the Electoral Commission Chairman Eng. Dr. Badru M. Kiggundu hands him nomination certificate.

Prof Byra - UPF

Professor Venasius Baryamureeba has also been certificated the nomination for the Presidential Aspirant, and he got nominated at 12:00 Am at Makerere University Business School (MUBS). The Professor has himself thanked the Uganda Police Force for handling the crowd well today. Prof Barya said this today: “Today is when we begin a serious journey of beginning back our country Uganda to the right track”.

Earlier reported that Charles Lwanga has arrived and been at the Electoral Commission has been accepted for his nomination as a Presidential Aspirant.  But later reports tell that he failed to fulfill requirements and also have the bank slip with the 20 million fee for the candidacy. So he will surely not run this 2016-2021.

Information from the Electoral Commission:

There been totally 48 picked nomination forms, the total 12 returned forms, 10 satisfied requirements for nomination has gotten the nomination certificate.

Nasser Ntege Ssebaggala 031115

One of candidates who have now returned his Presidential candidacy is Nasser Ntege Ssebaggala the former Mayor of Kampala.

President Museveni said at the Nomination Rally today: “I request your vote to finish what I have started plus new development programs for the country”.

Amama Mbabazi says this: “I am happy I came after President Museveni this is how things are going to be”.

Iganga LCV Vice Forman Gabula Ezra defects from the NRM to the Go-Forward.  Acting DP Publicity Secretary Paul Kakande has deflected from the party to Go-Forward today and Lango elders vouch for the Amama Mbabazi as well. The Lango elders gave him a walking stick as a “sign of respect”, they gave him that the Nomination rally at the Nakivubo Stadium and even some Lango supporters gave him a spear.

Amama 031115

The NRM Youth leaders Omodo-Omodo and Adam Ruzindana are at the Amama Mbabazi Nomination Rally today. There is reported to be some leaders from the Conservative Party also represented at the venue today! Uganda Federal Alliance’s Betti Kamya was also present at the Stadium. People’s Progressive Party has said it has supported the candidacy for Dr. Kizza Besigye three times and that has been in vain. So they now endorse Go-Forward now! Asuman Basaliirwa of the Justice Forum (JEEMA) said: “JEEMA will back Amama Mbabazi for and are positive for 2016 and is time for Amama” (…)”The country has only one problem…Mister Museveni”.  Former Tooro Kingdom Prime Minister Hon. Stephan Kaliba has endorsed Go-Forward! Medard Lubega Segona the Buganda Information Minster claims today: “gives credit to Amama Mbabazi for pilling pressure on Museveni to return Buganda property”.  Jimmy Akena claims to be the UPC President at the JPAM rally.

While somewhere else is Olara A. Otunnu claims to be the President of the UPC.  So while this is happening, who is really running the UPC? We have known for a while about the split and Otunnu and Akena wings of the Party… but the introduction of both leaders as leader of the Ugandan People’s Congress is a bit tricky on a day like this! Olara A. Otunnu said this: “All those who want the change should come together and unite to be one. Unite with Amama Mbabazi”. Mira Matembe said that this the motto of the country has changed from “For God and Country” to “For my stomach and my family” she continues: “Even Mbabazi realized that things had changed for the worst, that’s when he gave it (Regime) up!” (…)”NRM simply uses and discards its woman and youth”.

Dr. Abdi Bwanika will launch his candidacy for Precedency tomorrow and launch his campaign at the Nsambya Sharing Hall.

Dr. Ian Clarke who has run as Mayor for Makindye, he is now officially running for MP.

Important Notice for 5th of November:

Eng. Dr. Badru M. Kiggundu the Electoral Commission Chairman has told the media that he will have meeting with the Presidential Aspirants and Candidates so they can harmonize their campaigns on the 5th November.

Buses from Western Part of Uganda 031115

There was rumored about the buses from the other parts of the country for getting NRM-Supporters to Kololo Independence ground and the Nomination Rally of Yoweri Kaguta Museveni today. The issue and reports now is that the same people does not have a de-tour or return buses from the NRM. So certain NRM supporters from Up-Country are stuck at and around the Kampala Central Police Station and Bombo Road. For the simple reason there is no official transport back to Lira, Gulu and Arua. This was from where they was shipped from to get to the venue and start of the Campaign for 2016 for Mzee.

Press statement from The Democratic Alliance (TDA):

“Hon. Amama Mbabazi was successfully nominated a presidential candidate today morning. He is currently addressing a mammoth rally at Nakivubo War Memorial Stadium. Go Forward is part of the forces of change under The Democratic Alliance (TDA)”.

This is interesting start to the official start of this presidential election in February 2016. Tomorrow is the others candidates start as official candidates.  As the big one tomorrow is Dr. Kizza Besigye.  And the other candidates that might have a clarity to run; even if we have a mighty big chance of the NRM-Regime to rig the coming elections in favor of Yoweri Kaguta Museveni and the NRM, then we shouldn’t be surprised. The thing we can see if there will calm and clarity and if the UPF will keep their heads cool! That is something to look forward to… see if they can achieve that.

Kizza Beisgye 041115

Official Program for Tomorrow:

NOMINATION PROGRAMME FOR COL. DR. KIZZA BESIGYE ON 04th NOVEMBER, 2015:

07.00 am SUPPORTERS ASSEMBLE AT DESIGNATED LOCATIONS

08.00 am PROCESSIONS START FROM NAJJANANKUMBI

10.00 am PROCESSION ARRIVES AT BANDA

10.30 am PROCESSION ARRIVES AT KIREKA

10.40 am PROCESSION ARRIVES AT BWEYOGERERE

11.00 am PROCESSION ARRIVES AT NAMBOOLE

11.00 am ARRIVAL OF FLAGBEARER AT NAMBOOLE

12.00 am FLAGBEARER LEAVES NAMBOOLE FOR NAKIVUBO STADIUM

01.30 pm ARRIVAL OF INVITED GUESTS

02.30 pm SPEECHES MADE BY THE LOCAL LEADERS

02.45 pm SPEECH BY THE FDC PARTY CHAIRMAN

02.50 pm THE LORD MAYOR GREETS THE PEOPLE

03.00 pm THE PRESIDENT CONSERVATIVE PARTY GREETS THE PEOPLE

03.10 pm SPEECH BY THE FDC PARTY PRESIDENT

03.20 pm FLAG BEARERS SPEECH

06.00 pm END OF THE RALLY AND ENTERTAINMENT

Daily Monitor Museveni 031115

Party Partisan media, really? Aga Khan is surely loyal to M7 🙂 Don’t think so while looking at that?

This is just so you know and this will be interesting. Peace!

For Immediate Release: Message to the Congress — Notification to the Congress on AGOA Program Change – Burundi (30.10.2015)

Burundi Report Police

TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES:

In accordance with section 506A(a)(3)(B) of the African Growth and Opportunity Act, as amended (AGOA) (19 U.S.C. 2466a(a)(3)(B)), I am providing notification of my intent to terminate the designation of the Republic of Burundi (Burundi) as a beneficiary sub-Saharan African country under AGOA.

I am taking this step because I have determined that the Government of Burundi has not established or is not making continual progress toward establishing the rule of law and political pluralism, as required by the AGOA eligibility requirements outlined in section 104 of the AGOA (19 U.S.C. 3703).  In particular, the continuing crackdown on opposition members, which has included assassinations, extra-judicial killings, arbitrary arrests, and torture, have worsened significantly during the election campaign that returned President Nkurunziza to power earlier this year.  In addition, the Government of Burundi has blocked opposing parties from holding organizational meetings and campaigning throughout the electoral process.  Police and armed youth militias with links to the ruling party have intimidated the opposition, contributing to nearly 200,000 refugees fleeing the country since April 2015.  Accordingly, I intend to terminate the designation of Burundi as a beneficiary sub-Saharan African country under AGOA as of January 1, 2016.

 

BARACK OBAMA

UBOS Press Release: Uganda – Consumer Price Index – October 2015

CPI October Uganda

Government of South Africa already had the KEY to “Fees for Free” for Higher Education

WEB_CARTOON_STUDENTFEES_191

Here has been told how they could make it in 2012. How to fix the accommodations and different structures and fees together with the historical views on how to fix the monies situations for the poor so they can be a part of the higher education in South Africa. Because if there will be bridging the gap and getting more people education there will be over time strengthening the manpower and levels of technical production. Also there views and patterns of society will generate more people an opportunity to be educated and gain more for getting the low-income parts of the citizens to rise into another social bracket and bring more of their own with them as people do when they get into a great and better situation. Let’s take a look at the government of South Africa’s lost key!

“The White Paper (1997) recognizes that South Africa’s stark income disparities were a barrier to higher education enrolment, and argues that the direct cost to students be proportionate to their ability to pay. This basic principle underlines the imperative that access by poor students must be subsidized by the state through a system of financial aid. Arguing against the idea of a general system of fee-free higher education, the White Paper instead proposes a state-funded student financial assistance system that has since became known as the National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS)” (Report P: V).

“The White Paper immediately adds, however, that it is important that “the direct cost to students should be proportionate to their ability to pay” and that “financial need should not be an insuperable barrier to access and success in higher education”. Referring to the need for “a realistic fee structure”, it explores options for the provision of student financial assistance for poor students” (Report P: 5).

“Finally, the Green Paper for Post-School Education and Training (DHET 2012) outlines government’s intention gradually and carefully to expand enrolments and participation rates at universities, so as to cater for 1 500 000 students (at a participation rate of 23%) by 2030 (DHET 2012: x). Government aims at the same time to phase in free undergraduate university provision for the poor, “building on the progress already made in expanding financial aid through NSFAS” (DHET 2012: 5). The reference here to progress already made is to the conversion of NSFAS loans to full bursaries for those students who complete their final undergraduate year successfully. The DHET envisages that “this programme will steadily be introduced to cater for students in the pre-final years” (DHET 2012: 48)” (Report P: 9).

“University education, because of its intrinsic characteristics, and as compared to the basic and secondary spheres of education, is a costly social service. It directly benefits a fairly small segment of society at any one time, and indirectly benefits society which makes use of their knowledge and skills” (Report: vi).

“Historically, although the idea of ‘free’ access by the poor to higher education, and the role of the state in its provision, is relatively new to South African policymaking, it has a relatively long track record in many other countries. In the last century, especially since the 1920s, this basic idea – of providing access opportunities to the ‘children of the working class’ to traditionally elitist universities – has preoccupied policy-makers in many parts of the industrialized world” (Report P: 12).

“In 2005 the Department of Education reported that of the 120 000 students who enrolled in higher education in 2000, 36 000 (30%) dropped out in their first year of study. A further 24 000 (20%) dropped out during their second and third years. Of the remaining 60 000, 22% graduated within the specified three years duration for a generic Bachelors degree (Letseka and Maile 2008: 5)” (Report P: 33).

“The Ministerial Review argued that in order for the current system of student financial aid to realize its potential fully, it must overcome a number of challenges. The first of these challenges is the use of race as a proxy for socio-economic need, which, in terms of the current formula, results in unequal institutional allocations, with historically advantaged institutions with affluent black students receiving the same allocation as historically disadvantaged institutions with many poor black students” (Report: vii).

South Africa does not have an official singular definition of the poor, with different government departments using different definitions. Statistics South Africa and the National Treasury have proposed a poverty line based on ‘the money income needed to purchase a nutritionally adequate food supply and other essential requirements’” (Report: ix).

“”[f]ree university education means that workers on low to average wages substantially subsidize the university education of the children of higher income families, whom as a result of their university education will, on average, receive much higher incomes. Therefore, ‘free’ university education involves a substantial transfer of money from low income to high income households” (Li 2011:467). On the other hand, the probability of going to university is higher for children from middle class families. The result, however, is contingent on the taxation and other policies in the country in question, as a graduate tax, for instance, could offset some of these effects” (Report P: 14).

“The Ministerial Review of NSFAS estimated that NSFAS would need at least double its budget to meet even current demand (DHET 2010: 16). If participation rates were to increase, significantly more funds would be required. Unfortunately, government funding of public universities has been on the decline over the past decade: according to the Financial and Fiscal Commission, drawing on HEMIS and DHET data, the share of government grants in the total income of the public university system fell from 49% in 2000 to 40% in 2010, with both tuition fees and private or third-stream university income increasing to compensate for this decline. Expressed in terms of the number of enrolled students, government funding per full-time equivalent student fell by 1.1% per year in real terms between 2000 and 2010, while over the same time period, tuition fees per full-time equivalent student increased by 2.5% per year in real terms (FFC 2012: 53-4)” (…)”NSFAS faces several major challenges. First, it receives insufficient funds from government to meet the growing demand for financial aid by poor students. Second, it has been badly governed and managed since its inception. Third, the very high dropout rate attests to the fact that NSFAS has not addressed the key issue of ensuring that access is accompanied by success (Report P: 27).

“Other than historical factors and the inefficiencies of the school system, the present higher education funding architecture is a key reason often identified as an obstacle to an expedited expansion of higher education access. The higher education funding regime is currently characterised by declining real per student funding, for which universities have sought to compensate by, inter alia, regularly increasing tuition fees. This in turn has put pressure on NSFAS which, unfortunately, has not been able to adequately support all qualified and deserving students (Wangenge-Ouma 2012)” (Report P: 29).

“Furthermore, it would be wrong to assume that education functions best as a ‘free market’. While universities do compete for the best students, they do so not on the basis of price but rather on political, social and educational criteria; this can never be a meaningful buyer-seller relationship. University places are limited and students are selected on merit, not buying power. Policies whereby funding follows individuals, and to this extent are focused on individual advancement, may need to be balanced against policies which build state provision for the long-term benefit of society” (Report P: 37).

“Creating a higher education system characterised not only by increased participation and reduced dropout but, above all, free undergraduate study for the poor, will not be cheap. By definition, the households of poor students will not be able to share in any of the costs associated with university study, and even the households of slightly less poor students will be able to contribute only a small portion. Simply to make it possible for the 2013 cohort of students, for example, to begin receiving free university education, will require that NSFAS be given the financial muscle to advance loans of about R14 billion in 2013 prices” (Report P: 48).

Recommendation:

“Funding for free university education for the poor should be obtained, at least in part, from the funds of the Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) and the National Skills Fund (NSF)” (…)”Although in some instances these SETA funds are already being used for bursaries, short course skills programmes and internships, and notwithstanding the fact that various private sector companies and public service departments already support poor students in these ways, it is important to ensure that these funds and support, along with portions of corporate social responsibility funds, are organised and managed under a single, NSFAS umbrella, rather than being disbursed, as is often the case at present, in piecemeal and uncoordinated ways” (…)”For example, the private sector, and perhaps especially the large financial institutions, as well as international donors, may be willing to offer reasonable loans, if state guaranteed, to poor students who are in their final year and who have demonstrated their current dedication and future earning potential” (Report P: 50).

Afterthought:

This report has the answers to how they can implement free-fee or proper pricing of the higher education in South Africa; certainly the issue of not implementing it or even releasing it, because yesterday I read through the final draft of it.

There were more things to high light from the report it had also the difference ways of giving the fees and how to repay the fees that are in the countries, but in the recommendations that didn’t look like a consideration of the department. The main issue is that they was offering a advice on building on the already set function of the National Skills Fund and Sector Education and Training Authorities.

The cost of dropouts already in 2012 has to be about the same today and since they have implemented anything towards the cost of being a student while the intuition fees are running higher. Therefore when you already have a costly functioning system, than it should be open for greater part of the citizens of the country, not just the upper echelons of society.

That is an issue in many countries. The Republic of South Africa is not alone in that matter. What they might be alone in, is that they have the keys to the door, but don’t want to open the door. To open that door takes action, a certain level of moments of the characters and institutions. Also the government needs for facilitating and budgets to sustain the free-fee programs; which might lead to somebody in central government actually opening the door to the other place. That can happen if somebody or a government body has the ability to implement the key into lock of the door. So long as the door in locked and even with the key in hand. It feels like a missed opportunity to give something to coming students so they can evolve and gain maturity through studies they usually wouldn’t have the economical capacity to get into the campus life or studies in general, because even if the candidate for studies has the ability as a person to study, but not the money, then the state of South Africa is losing over time qualified workers and educated personnel that they could have gotten.

So now it’s up to the ANC to live up to their heritage and tradition. If that still means something or the only means right now is to build mansions for the new elites instead of building a growing society of prosperity for more of the citizens. Bond the different levels of society from youth towards pension age. This here isn’t easy at all, to build something sustainable and use the funds and opportunities for the general public to gain. The main issue is that they had the KEY at hand to OPEN the DOOR if they wanted to since 2012! ANC could have put things and movement into place and in the right forums to adjust and implement structures to secure a better level of studies for the POOR, even if the Republic of South Africa doesn’t have an definition of POOR. So now we all can ask, because this was draft and never intended to release from the Department of Higher Education which is under Blade Nzimande the minister has had this position since 2009. So he must have known about this all along.

And what I wonder about now is there more departments in the Zuma ANC regime who has more lost keys to official issues or structural reforms that can build society stronger, or is just one lost KEY?

And if so, please ladies and gentleman tell me. Nothing is as good for a transparency and accountability as shedding the light on the matters that the governments and ministries, and government bodies that they don’t want to tell. Because that might shift the moves of the men and woman in power, also gives them a smack that they need so they can use the KEYS and not just relax in the government buildings instead of doing their civic duty! Peace.  

Reference:

Republic of South Africa – Department of Higher Education and Training: ‘REPORT OF THE WORKING GROUP ON FEE FREE UNIVERSITY EDUCATION FOR THE POOR IN SOUTH AFRICA’ (Oktober 2012) – Final Draft.

Press Statement: AfDB marks World Statistics Day – “Better Data. Better Lives” (26.10.2015)

AfDB STATS

The African Development Bank (AfDB), one of the leading institutions driving statistical development progress in Africa, joined the world in celebrating World Statistics Day on Wednesday, October 20, 2015. The theme for this year’s event was “Better Data. Better Lives”.

Each year since 2010, World Statistics Day provides a platform for the global statistical community – producers, suppliers, users and all relevant stakeholders – to showcase their achievements and ongoing statistical work. This year’s celebrations follow a significant decision by world leaders to adopt the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). “The SDG agenda provides the political impetus and will help to shape the course of statistical capacity development in the years to come,” said Oliver Chinganya, Manager of AfDB’s Statistical Capacity Building Division.

As part of the celebrations, the AfDB Statistics Department held a series of seminars from October 19-23, 2015 with the aim of showcasing statistical activities already underway within Bank’s Statistical Capacity Building (SCB) program. Also highlighted were future programs planned in response to the current demands of the Data Revolution and the post-2015 development agenda.

The Bank’s SCB program is expected to gather momentum in response to the UN’s clarion call to harness the Data Revolution in order to enhance sustainable development. This will entail more data communities coming together and collaborating in a sustainable manner in the context of a data ecosystem.

Reliable and timely statistics are crucial for formulating policies that can positively impact the lives of millions of people. Without the numbers, development impacts cannot be measured. “Improved data sources, sound statistical methods, new technologies, and strengthened statistical systems continue to be actively promoted and financially supported through the AfDB’s Statistical Capacity Building Program,” observed Chinganya.

He underlined the importance of accurate and timely statistics being freely available to all stakeholders when they are most needed.

Through its ground-breaking Africa Information Highway (AIH) initiative, the AfDB provides free and open access to all stakeholders including the public, the Bank’s regional member countries, civil society organizations, academic and research institutions, UN agencies, and the media.

The inaugural World Statistics Day was declared by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly in 2010 to recognize the importance of statistics in improving lives.

Press Statement: Dear Ugandan voter and citizen you have the right to know what the Government in Power does with your hard earned Tax Money (22.10.2015)

Malcom Matsiko

Ugandans should be bold to ask tough questions. The committee in parliament on public accounts committe should come more often to account or expose the flaws in spending public money.

I would like President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni and the presidency department to account to the tax payers of this country the money he has spent in on foreign trips or travel since he become a head of state in 1986.

I recently approached protocal office at the Ugandan parliament with the intention to meet the president in person and put point blank the reasons I will never support him in this country. Among the issues our team wanted him to respond on was how much does he spend on frequent trips outside the country?

I was told I can’t meet him because the head of state is booked from now to next year May for NRM party activities and trips around the globe.

I was frustrated and am still with the burning issues we had prepared to deliberate on.

Atleast in the last 30 days , the president was in Khartoum Sudan, was in Kenya Nairobi, was in Rome Italy, He was in New York ,Algeria and I think other countries.

The president’s handlers should avail all the details on these trips sponsored by the Ugandan citizen and tax payers.

I guess the figures are exceedingly huge whereas civil servants and pensioners are not paid their little money, salaries/wages since July todate.

The children in Northern Uganda dieing because they can’t have a plate of food to eat in 24 hours if not at the border with Tanzania in Rakai district there are tens and hundreds reported dead because of lack of food and water. Many of these dieing are mostly refugees that were expelled by the government of Tanzania a few years ago and were allowed into Ugandan territory hurriedly without any prior consultations with primary stakeholders.

The prime minister’s office cut off supplying the refugee camp with food and water putting the lives of human beings in that camp at stake.

It was reported that men throw themselves in the nearby river to die instead of helplessly watching their loved ones starve to death.

The other day a couple of people called us saying we are not patritic because we referred to Mr. Yoweri Museveni the President of Uganda , his dim lieutenants and pals in government like Anite Evelyn, Kenneth Omona, Omondo Omondo, Namara , Kibuule , Hon.Ogwang and many others young or old government advisors as highly decorated opportunists Uganda has ever produced since time immomerial.

What justification can the whole band of “Tubonge Naawe” give to call for the commedians in luganda the”dikulas” of this country like Bebe Cool, Jose Chameleon , Juliana Kanyomozi and the entire crew of artistes that feasted with Mr. Museveni in Munyonyo luxury hotel last week wheras hundred of population starving in country supposed to be a basket of Africa???deaths of people within our borders due to lack of a mere plate of food and a mere glass of water to drink? Yet they gladly met to con Mr. Museveni under the auspice of NRM lady Anite Evelyn a minister in the current insensitive , elitest , lukewarm regime.

Uganda needs a third liberation, this time around by us Ugandans not foreigners like in the case of 1978/79 and 1981-1986 bush war that saw Rwandan commanders like Late Fred Rwigyema , Beingana, Bunyenyenzi, Katureebe , Kalegyeya and Gen. Kagame fighting and handing over power to rebel leader Yoweri Museveni. In 1979, unsung Tanzanian heroes liberated this country and handedover power to Ugandan renegades Yoweri Museveni inclusive.

So for one to really overstate that Yoweri Museveni is the father of this country, the liberator, the saviour and etc, like Anite Evelyn misleads the un informed Ugandans that is to be a pathetic and celebrated liar in modern times. The man was in sweden eating sauges when kampala fell and late Dr.Obote was overthrown by his very own solidiers , the Okellos and Milton ran to exile in to Zambia. The solidiers were later fooled by late Rwigyema led group and Salim Saleh to lose kampala to the NRA where Museveni outsmarted the NRM political wing and was sworn in as the junta leader of 1986. By now you can perfectly and orrectly understand why we said that Museveni is a highly decorated opportunist in Uganda.

We need the figures to see how much he spends on foreign presidential visits begging other countries to grant expensive loans to this nation since he become president and compare huge with the thorny challenges this country is bedevilled with .

Written by Presidential aspirant Dan (Malcom) Matsiko for the NFT (New Form for Thinking) and Independent Candidate in the coming Presidential Election and General Election in 2016 in Uganda.