Category: Politics
Press Statement: FDC statement on consultations between the FDC and Amama Mbabazi (30.10.2015)
Uganda – Statement of Principles of Ugandans Committed to Democratic Change (29.10.2015)
Government of South Africa already had the KEY to “Fees for Free” for Higher Education
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.
NRM Primary continues in its usual Pace
There are some more initial and special reports even from the trenches and it is in an usual pace. In the one where we speak about vote-rigging and pre-ticket ballots, demonstrations against it or candidates now going independent claiming the election was filled with irregularities. Take a quick look!
NRM Secretary Justine Kalule Lumumba has been vocal today and with all the big birds shot down she was clear about one certain thing:
“Whoever lost in the NRM Primaries and is planning to run as an independent, will cease to be the member of the party”. So the Ministers and big men who have lost their slot will surely lose their crony status if they go against the NRM-Regime in the General Election.
Deflectors after the elections:
Dr. Fred Ruhakana has today officially announced his defection from the NRM party due to irregularities that was practiced during the elections in Kabale district where he lost the seat for kabale district chairperson.
Deborah Mwesigwa has rejected the result and outcome of the Kabuli County. She has claimed that the election in the county was filled with voter intimidation, that they used government resources to gain the upper hand. So Deborah has said after this that she will goes an independent candidate in the general election.
Some reports from the country:
Alebtong County:
“Isaac Apenyo has been declared NRM flag bearer for Ajuri. He thrashed the spokesman NRM parliamentary caucus, Hamson Obua” (…)”Christine Jibu Mambo has taken over the elections for Woman MP, beating Dorcus Acen, Emily Akullu…” (…) ”Meanwhile, asides the reported violence & vote rigging in Moroto county, Minister Rebecca Otengo was declared the winner. The supporters of her rival Sam Okwir, are very bitter about the results, they claim the security agents were so brutal on them. And so they’ve not come to terms with the results, saying the numbers were changed from Abia & Apala sub counties” (94.3 QFM Lira).
Bufumbira East:
The Flag-bearer for the county is Paul Geoffrey Bavuga.
Burashya District – Kabarole MP:
The Police had to intervene in Kabarole, where the one involved into the matter was John Busingye and Maragreth Muhanga, not the candidates themselves, but the supporters of the two was battling each other. The protest became so violent that they actually broke a bridge and that one was the bridge of Katanda!
Busiiro South:
Peter Ssematimba won the MP seat there.
Kanungu:
Where the press release was coming earlier today was because of Police and Special Force Unit (SFU) has been involved in the balloting and changing of the result in this district. At certain stage at some polling stations there was more police officers then voters.
Kassanda South:
The flag-bearer of the county is now Nsubuga!
Koboko:
There been said that Anite Evelyn was contesting unopposed in the county. Though some says she was contested against a Baba Diri and even the rumors of her losing badly to this person. So did she go as sole candidate in the county or did she not?
Kumi Muncipality:
Charles Olaboro won the election in Kumi and because of that the one who lost the election in the area Silas Aogon cires foul and has sent an petition to the NRM Electoral Commission on the matter.
Luweero:
The Police has banned unapproved and the unregulated victory parties in the county especially the parties for the NRM candidates.
Lwengo:
Where there been madness in the recent days a Police Officer has been taken with pre-ticket ballot-papers and he is being charged with the offence of rigging the vote.
Mbrarara:
“Although voting begun late,the exercise in Mbarara was peaceful with a heavy security presence to avert any violence.MP results at various polling stations in Kakoba are still being counted” (…)”At Kakoba Police: Agip and Manji for mayorship and Kakyebezi is in the lead.Tumwiine is leading at Nsikye1 and Kiyindi polling stations” (…)”Booma didnt go to polls. Voters rejected the process since only ballots for MPs were delivered” (…)”Two people have been arrested over vote rigging.The duo identified as Frank Mugisha and Mwebesa were arrested from Nyakayozo with ticked ballot papers of two of the Mbarara mayoral candidates” (91.2 Crooze FM).
Ndorwa County East:
Grace Ankunda Bwesigye won the district and because of this the sour loser Osbert Byamukama quit the party this.
Ngoya:
The winner here is Terence Achia Naco.
Ntoroko District:
MP: Gerand Ibanda Rwemulikya
Woman MP: Jennifer K. Mujungu
Ruhinda County:
Captain Mugabe Domonzio Kahonda who won over Gen. Otafiire in the Primaries in the district has finally been released, but, there is a big but! He has to meet before Jinja High Court tomorrow! This starts be more interesting by the minute.
Rubirizi:
The winner and flag-bearer of the county is now Abas Agabe.
Last thoughts:
What do you think? This here never get boring, who and where is the next place for the police arresting and candidate together with security personnel going into the tally centers and secure voting results going their way. There will be more! But not more from me today I think, depending on what information I get… Peace!
Tanzania Decides: “Which Constituency is true? is it Uzini or Chwaka!
FDC Press Release on the UK Meeting with Hon. Amama Mbabazi (29.10.2015)
Press Release: Rejection of the Announced NRM Primary Election Results of Kanungu (28.10.2015)
NRM Primaries a little to Yellow? Sorry wange, it’s to Mellow!
Well after days of Primaries where I have showed details after details of practices of the NRM Electoral Commission and the actions on the ground. These primaries has been magnificent and that the proud professor Tanga Odoi doesn’t have the honor to tell the world that he didn’t have the capacity to deal with all of the voting stations, voting material and the excess of practices on the ground.
The National Resistance Movement who has run a country for 29 years ever since the year of 1986. Has held Internal-Elections to see who might represent them in the General-Election in 2016.
The surprise to people is how Ofwono Opondo spread the level of cost that was on the election 5, 5Billion shillings. That there was set up about 60, 000 voting stations. At the same time there been only registered 47 cars to the political party. The last straw today was that the NRM Register Office is set under the NRM Secretary General and not in the National Resistance Movement Electoral Commission. Therefore the governing body that is in charge of this spending and the amount of cars combined with initial areas that need material doesn’t sound like a something that easily could be questioned. Then they imported the Ballot-papers from Kenyan producers, surely as Dr. Odoi has said he wanted to secure that it wasn’t like in 2010 when people had ballot-papers in their houses and in their pockets. It still hasn’t been smooth.
Ballot-papers has missed candidates, Independent candidates has been on the NRM Ballot-Papers in certain districts, there has been missing slots like 7 boxes to tick and 8 candidates, the ballot papers has ended in the wrong district, there been ballot-boxes in prisons and in Central Police Stations before arriving to Polling Stations. There have even been missing candidates on the ballot-papers. So many wrongs are just the simple ballot-papers or the slips that the voters are supposed to decide their vote. More candidates has been taken with tens of thousands or just thousands of pre-ticket ballot-papers in their houses and cars.
On top of this is the massive arrests, the winning candidates that are still in jail, pre-ticket ballot-papers ready made for some candidates and some have pre-filled ballot-boxes arriving at the polling-station. FDC Members could willy-nilly vote and at certain voting stations. There been districts where the police have taken people with fake Yellow-Membership-Cards. People been taken to custody for election violence and others for charges of rigging the elections. The last charge has been in many districts. There been specific candidates who has had mobilization teams to bribe voters in counties, certain has been incarcerated for doing so. Certain candidates have held voters on gun-point to make them take the right decision on who to vote for! The Police has thrown tear-gas into the public to shut down demonstrations after postponing the elections in the county.
There have even been candidates whom have stormed tally-centers with security personnel and demanded all the people to get out. So they could clear the results. Even certain candidates has stolen the ballot-boxes after voting and ended up in jail. There been even candidates who couldn’t control the tally-center so the candidate actually took the declaration form and got caught, ended up also in jail.
For all of this there has even been talking that the Ghost of Amama Mbabazi is the one behind all of this. Isn’t that taking away the 80% satisfaction of Dr. Odoi?
There has been talk of moles into this election and IGP Kale Kayihura has said that the media should step off from being the media and foreign influence is making a lot of trouble. Well, the bribes are local, the mobilization teams are local, the candidates rides locally, the districts are run by local men, the NRM has decided who the wanted on the ballot, not moles or international influences so, IGP Kale Kayihura need yet another reality check!
There has been voting in done electronically on their cell-phone through the magical place of WhatsApp. There has been candidates going to markets and buying soldiers and police officers votes. Some people in this Internal-Election have been stopped from voting in the polling station even when they are registered. The police have even stopped mini-buses with shipped people from county to county to make the tally. There has been magistrates and candidates held temporary hostages by the public for a hot minute for trying to buy the electorate in the municipality.
This here is to set the issues in perspective. To show how the practices has been during this internal election. I will not bring more or less election results from the rest of the internal election of the NRM because the Daily Monitor, Elections.co.ug or other outlets does it better and with manpower and time I don’t have. But you should look over the big birds that are shot down and the changes of guards that has happen in the party. Dr. Tanga Odoi needs to be set straight for this. There was chaos in 2010, but this here hasn’t been a smooth eiter! There have been districts and counties with peace. But there been a lot of irregularities in this internal exercise.
Hope that Eng. Dr. Badru Kiggundu and the big Electoral Commission of the state can do a better job or maybe even hide the malfunctions better for the General Elections coming. Because Dr. Tanga Odoi is showing so much weakness in this, the NRM party as the ruling party is showing shady practices and rigging on a major scale. And if this is a pre-run and test before the coming one, then there will be a long walk in the wilderness and an even longer walk for free and fair elections in Uganda. Peace!
Press Release – Ongwen case: the confirmation of charges hearing to be held at the seat of the ICC in The Hague (28.10.2015)
Situation: Uganda
Case: The Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen
Today, 28 October 2015, the Presidency of the International Criminal Court (ICC) decided that the confirmation of charges hearing in the case concerning Dominic Ongwen, scheduled for 21 January 2016, shall be held at the seat of the Court at The Hague (Netherlands).
On 10 September 2015, the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber II had recommended to the ICC Presidency that that holding the confirmation of charges hearing in Uganda would be desirable and in the interests of justice. Following consultations with the Ugandan authorities, the ICC Presidency received an updated assessment from the Court’s Registry on the feasibility of holding the confirmation of charges hearing in Uganda.
The ICC Presidency noted the excellent co‑operation of Uganda in assisting the Registry with the preparation of its preliminary and final assessments. The Presidency noted also that there would be a number of benefits to holding the hearing in Uganda as in principle this would contribute to a better perception of the Court and bring the proceedings closer to the communities affected by the alleged crimes. However, the Presidency noted particularly the possibility, expressed by Uganda itself, that political tensions may increase during an upcoming electoral period, especially during January 2016, which may have an adverse impact on the Court. The Presidency also noted operational limitations, in particular concerns that holding proceedings in Uganda would significantly impact the Court’s resources during its move to its permanent premises scheduled for December 2015. For these reasons, the ICC Presidency found that the potential benefits of holding the confirmation hearing in Uganda in January 2016 are outweighed by the significant risks
The confirmation of charges hearing in respect of Dominic Ongwen is scheduled to commence on 21 January 2016 and is expected to last three to no more than five working days. The confirmation of charges hearing is not a trial. It is a Pre-Trial hearing held to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to commit the case for trial before a Trial Chamber.
Background: Dominic Ongwen was the alleged Brigade Commander of the Sinia Brigade of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). On 8 July 2005, ICC Judges issued an arrest warrant against Mr Ongwen for 3 counts of crimes against humanity (murder; enslavement; inhumane acts of inflicting serious bodily injury and suffering) and 4 counts of war crimes (murder; cruel treatment of civilians; intentionally directing an attack against a civilian population; pillaging) allegedly committed on or about 20 May 2004 at the Lukodi IDP Camp in the Gulu District. On 16 January 2015, Dominic Ongwen was surrendered to the ICC’s custody and transferred to the ICC Detention Centre on 21 January 2015. His initial appearance before the Court took place on 26 January 2015.














