Press Release: United States Contributes US$9 Million To WFP To Support Refugees In Uganda (06.10.2015)

Nyakabande TC

KAMPALA – The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) today welcomed a contribution of US$9 million from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to provide food assistance for more than 320,000 refugees living in Uganda.

“This generous contribution has arrived just in time, as a funding shortfall was threatening to force WFP to reduce rations for refugees, including the new South Sudanese arrivals,” said acting Country Director Michael Dunford. “Those cuts will not be necessary now, and we are extremely grateful to USAID for its lifesaving support for people fleeing conflict in neighbouring countries and seeking refuge in Uganda.”

Dunford said WFP will use the funding, received through USAID’s Office of Food for Peace, to purchase more than 13,000 metric tons of cereals and beans within Uganda for more than 300,000 refugees.

The support will also allow WFP to provide cash to 20,000 refugees in areas where markets are able to meet the demand. As well as meeting the immediate food needs of refugees, cash assistance has the added benefit of allowing some flexibility for the refugees to buy nutritious foods that may not be part of WFP’s food basket and to manage their household food resources themselves.

This contribution brings USAID’s 2015 WFP support to refugees in Uganda and extremely vulnerable populations in Karamoja to an estimated US$26 million.

Uganda currently hosts more than 490,000 refugees, mostly from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), South Sudan and Burundi. Roughly two-thirds of the refugees in Uganda depend on WFP to meet their basic food needs.

WFP’s assistance for refugees is closely coordinated with the Government of Uganda through the Office of the Prime Minister, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and NGOs.

DRC – Burundi Refugee Assistance #16 – 02 September 2015

WFP Burundi Sep 2015WFP Burundi Sep 2015 2

A Cup of tea: The recent Tea-export numbers from Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda and Uganda

TeaMombasa

There been in the recent days fresh export numbers. And they are either positive or staggering in the different countries. I have taken the massive cup of tea and how much of the leaf that are being sold abroad. So we can see the difference between Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda and Uganda. Which has stories; the most significant is Burundian Tea Export especially considering the turmoil and issues after the “election and swear-in” on the third-term of Pierre Nkurunziza. But I believe the numbers will speak for themselves. I will take it country by country.

black-tea-330x265

Numbers from Burundi:

“Burundi’s tea export earnings in the first half of the year were up 61 percent on the same period of 2014” (…)”Burundi’s state-run tea board (OTB) reported first-half earnings of $17.9 million, against $11.1 million in the same period last year, on export volumes that jumped to 6,262,710 kg from 5,229,351 kg” (Nduwimana, 2015).

Tea-Board

Numbers from Kenya:

“Kenya’s tea output fell 22 percent in the first-half of 2015 from a year before, according to data from the industry regulator, after the country was hit by drought at the start of the year” (…)”The data also showed Kenya exported 247.57 million kg of tea, down from 249.8 million kg in the first six months of last year” (Clarke, 2015).

1361404042_RWANDA MOUNTAIN GREEN TEA.WGT.100g(50 tea bags.Price-US$3.1(Rwf.2000)

Numbers from Rwanda:

“Rwanda’s tea export earnings increased by 27 per cent to over $6 million in July, driven by better prices on the international market, the National Agriculture Exports Board (NAEB) monthly report indicates” (…)”Tea prices were up 55 per cent to $3.49 (about Rwf2, 617.5)/kilo in July, up from 2.25 (about Rwf1, 687.5)/kilo during the same period last year, according to the report” (Tumwebaze, 2015). Auctioned of sale of tea at the Mombasa Market: “Kenya, the leading contributor on the Auction, offered 5.6 million kilogrammes and was able to sale 4.5 million, indicating a 24 per cent sale” (Nakaweesi, 2015).

dscf3627

Numbers from Uganda:

“The data shows value of exported tea fell by 4.6 per cent or Sh5.3 billion ($51 million) in the period to stand at Sh110.4 billion” (Irungu, 2015). More scary numbers of this cup of tea:  “Uganda has about 200,000 hectares suitable for tea production, but only 14 per cent (28,000 hectares) is utilised both by small holder and estate owners” (Nakaweesi, 2015).

Afterthought:

That Burundi has gotten such a leap forward and Kenya going down because of drought. Rwanda is earning more per kilo and Uganda export also slowed down. And this is important for the rural agriculture and export business. The rural famers need security of export and prices. Therefore the worldwide change of prices together with the weak local currencies isn’t making things safe for farmers. That is not their business to keep the inflations at bay. They are making sure we’re drinking a superb cup of tea. Therefore when we see these prices the Governments has an issue to make sure the value of export is stabile for the sake of the farmers. This are not just numbers for crunchers to swallow and by “futures” to secure stock in the trade and a quick buck. They don’t see the hard-work on the ground. The farmers should be paid fair for their work and surplus of their produce. As everybody would be given what they deserve for their harvest, right? Peace.

Reference:

Clarke, David – ‘Kenya’s tea production falls 22 pct due to drought’ (08.09.2015) link: http://af.reuters.com/article/kenyaNews/idAFL5N11E2P020150908

Irungu, Geoffrey – ‘Shilling under pressure as export-import gap rises by Sh115bn’ (06.09.2015) link: http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Export-import-gap-up-by-Sh115bn/-/539552/2860600/-/item/1/-/yhbrw0z/-/index.html

Nakaweesi, Dorothy – ‘Regional tea prices go down’ (03.09.2015) link: http://mobile.monitor.co.ug/Business/Business/Regional-tea-prices-go-down/-/2471014/2856212/-/format/xhtml/-/3qljyl/-/index.html

Nduwimana, Patrick; Drazen Jorgic and Goodman, David – ‘Burundi first-half tea earnings jump by 61 pct’ (08.09.2015) link: http://af.reuters.com/article/investingNews/idAFKCN0R80S120150908

Tumwebaze, Peterson – ‘July tea exports rake in Rwf4.7b, earnings from coffee drop 21%’ (04.09.2015) link: http://www.newtimes.co.rw/section/article/2015-09-04/192182/

Burundi – The fresh reports of torture from Amnesty and proof that it’s old habits from the regime in the country

Burundi Report Police

There was released a report on torture of citizens in Burundi in recent year from CSO Amnesty the 24th of August. This here has been described I will take the defining characters of this from that report, but also some older documentation to prove that this isn’t new actions from the Governmental and Security organizations in Burundi. In 2006 the Committee from International Service from Human Rights commented on the torture matters already then. After that I will look on what numbers and anti-torture project where the purpose was: “Effectively build capacity for sustainable support to victims of torture; and prevent future incidences of torture”. And the projects are telling from the USAID in the same period. USAID had also a monitoring period that ended in 2007 that gives some interesting insights to the methods of torture. United Nations has made a review of the situation when it comes to torture as well in 2014. So that Amnesty International is telling stories that everybody who cares about Human Rights should read all of the personal stories. I have taken the big picture from the report that was delivered from the organization on the 24th of August 2015. Which also shows to the works of the UN and OHCHR and describing the matters and sadness of how the police and other units treats its citizens who demonstrate against the government. It should be stopped and international community should do something about it. Though it’s an issue that is continuation from 2006 and I am sure earlier then that while in war, an CNDD-FDD promised to lead with the USAID projects to shun this activities, but certainly hasn’t with the reports released recently. Read under the quotes and outtakes from a set of reports and some of the pieces from Amnesty.

Reports from 2005 and so on:

“The Committee criticised the lack of a definition of torture in Burundian domestic legislation. The delegation admitted that while Burundi officially endorses the definition contained in the Convention, their criminal code does not define torture, nor is torture as such criminalised. In practice, torture is treated as an ‘aggravating circumstance’ and pursued on the basis of ‘infliction of bodily harm’” (…)”Both country rapporteurs underlined that the legislation prohibiting torture must not only cover physical torture (which is the case as long as torture is prosecuted under the category of ‘bodily harm’), but needs to extend to psychological and mental torture. The Committee drew the delegation’s attention to the obligation States have to initiate investigations into cases of torture. Mr Camara said that given the lack of a domestic legal basis, prosecutors in Burundi did not have a clear incentive to investigate cases of torture” (…)”the National Intelligence Service (NIS). It is responsible for the collection of date in order to protect the state security of Burundi. It can also carry out police functions and arrest people. According to the State report, the NIS is one of the main institutions involved in cases of torture. The Committee repeatedly expressed concern about this situation. Mr Mariño said the NIS seemed to have a dual mandate and be responsible for political oppression; it needed to be reformed, monitored and made accountable to the judiciary. Mr Camara asked if NIS officers could be sanctioned by the PPS; the delegation confirmed this with reference to ongoing cases. The delegation agreed that the NIS had too many prerogatives and specifically asked for recommendations on how to curb its power” (…)”In reference to the prohibition of the use of evidence obtained through torture, the delegation referred to a supreme court judgement which prohibits such evidence from being used in court. However, a Committee member pointed out that this particular decision is ambiguous since it says that “a confession is not proof in itself, but merely a piece of evidence that must be corroborated by other evidence”. The Committee felt this could be construed so that evidence extracted through torture could be used if supported by other evidence (Human Rights Series, 2006).

Turning to concrete cases, some Committee members asked about further information on a massacre which had taken place at Gatumba. The delegation responded by saying that it had issued a report which attributed the responsibility for the massacre to members of the armed movement PALIPEHUTU-FNL” (Human Rights Monitor Series, 2006).

What USAID has worked on a long while and had programs with:

“IMPLEMENTING PARTNER: Search for Common Ground (SF CG), Trauma Healing and Reconciliation Services (THARS), Ligue ITE KA, Association pour la Protection des Droits Humains et des Personnes Détenues (APROD H)

FUNDING PERIOD: March 2003–September 2005

AMOUNT: $1,700,000

PURPOSE: Effectively build capacity for sustainable support to victims of torture; and prevent future incidences of torture” (Victims of Torture Fund, USAID, 2005-2006).

Trauma healing: Eighteen Healing Memory Group activities (785 participants) held to provide psychological healing for victims. 372 victims of torture received psychological support and 567 received medical services; 289 referred to partners; 750 transported to medical facilities (Victims of Torture Fund, USAID, 2005-2006).

Social Reintegration: Twenty-seven victims associations created. Thirteen ongoing series of monthly healing sessions/retreats with 1,636 participants (Victims of Torture, USAID, 2005-2006)

Funding/Year 2002 2004 2005 Total
USD In:  Thousands of Dollars 1,200 500 1,200 2,900

(Victims of Torture, USAID, 2005-2006)

Print

USAID has continued to follow up the country and reports on Torture between October 2007 – September 2011. Here is their findings and what they have received of information on the matter: “Human rights. The project worked to strengthen the institutional capacity of civil society organizations, particularly those focused on women, to advocate for gender-based violence, victims of torture, and conflict management. By launching campaigns and engaging in effective discourse with the government and the media, civil society groups were able to open up about the sensitive and often dangerous nature of supporting human rights, which led to increased awareness and understanding” (…)”Victims of torture. In Burundi, torture continues to be practiced and victims have had little recourse because those in positions of authority, such as public security agents, presidential police, soldiers, local government officials, and rebel groups have all practiced torture without being held accountable for their actions. Through its activities, the project has been able to help Burundians open up a public dialogue and raise awareness about the problem of torture, a subject that over the years had become taboo in many parts of society” (…)”Victims of torture consortium. One organization cannot influence change alone, and working in the anti-corruption or human rights arena can be dangerous. Thus to strengthen advocacy against torture in Burundi, the project convened civil society organizations working in human rights and torture to start a dialogue on what is needed in this area and propose the idea of creating a consortium. The project worked via the consortium structure to coordinate these various and extensive activities. At subsequent meetings, the number of civil society organizations more than doubled and by the time the consortium, Consortium Action Contre la Torture (CACT), was incorporated it represented most of Burundian civil society working in human rights, with 26 organizations and government entities. The consortium, designed to coordinate advocacy for the eradication of torture in Burundi, identified priorities for reform when the consortium was first formed” (…)”Victims of torture grants. The project allocated 18 grants to civil society organizations in Year 2; eight of them provided medical and legal assistance to 453 victims of torture. The project provided medical, psychosocial healing, and legal and judicial assistance. The grants were provided to organizations with previous experience in this area, and they were able to work in cooperation with other grantees as well as in the consortium against torture. The most pressing need for a victim of torture is medical assistance. Many victims are debilitated or prevented from working due to the injuries, and others live with the physical scars and residual pain. The assistance consisted of providing victims medicine, hospitalization, and specialized care. Seven grantees provided medical assistance to victims in various provinces. One example of the medical services provided by grantees is the work done by ACAT, an organization that carried out medical services in 26 communes” (…)”In addition to being physically traumatic, torture is also emotionally and psychologically traumatic. Even if physical scars heal, there are lasting psychological effects. The project created a support group that fostered an atmosphere of empathy, affection, and security that victims greatly appreciated — especially significant because most victims never dared to speak about their experiences” (…)”In Year 4, project grantee ABDP-DRS advocated for the use of alternative sentencing to imprisonment in accordance with a law of 2009. By meeting with decision-makers, including prison authorities, police, and judges to present data from a survey, ABDP-DRS was able to provide information on alternative sentencing. It also organized prison visits so that police and judges could see the current conditions of the prisons to which they were sentencing perpetrators. Action Chrétien Contre la Torture (ACAT) also received a grant to continue advocating decision-makers and judiciary actors. ACAT equipped judges, judiciary police, and prison officers with information gained during site visits of detention centers in 11 provinces to evaluate the torture cases, living conditions for detainees, and the application of the penal code regarding torture” (Burundi Policy Final Reform, 2007).

When we see earlier what the UN has scaled on the State of torture in the State of the Burundi. The UN commented this on the issues that were at hand in 2014:

Legislative measures for the prevention of torture

  1. While noting that an absolute prohibition of torture is established in the Constitution, the Committee is concerned at the numerous shortcomings of the organization and command structure of the country’s security services, particularly the Burundian National Police (Police nationale du Burundi) and the National Intelligence Service (Service national de renseignement). These services are still governed by presidential decrees, whereas the Constitution provides that they be governed by the necessary legal framework. While noting that article 31 of the State party’s Criminal Code establishes that an order from a superior officer cannot be used as an argument by the defence in a case of torture, the Committee remains concerned about the effective implementation of that provision (arts. 2, 6 and 16)” (United Nations, 2014).

The United Nations continues with this:

“The absolute prohibition of torture” (…)”The State party should, as a matter of urgency, take steps to incorporate provisions into its Military Criminal Code that establish that acts of torture and ill-treatment committed by military personnel constitute an offence, that such offences are not subject to any statute of limitations and that the sentences for such offences are irreducible. The provisions to be incorporated into the Code should also establish appropriate penalties” (…) “The Committee is alarmed by credible, corroborative and persistent reports of a large number of acts of torture and extrajudicial killings committed by members of the Burundian National Police and the National Intelligence Service. It is concerned about the slow pace and limited scope of the investigations and judicial proceedings that have been opened in this connection, which would appear to corroborate claims that the perpetrators of these acts enjoy impunity. The Committee also finds it regrettable that no information about cases that have gone to trial or the outcome of those trials has been forthcoming. It is also concerned at the absence of protection for victims and witnesses, who are subject to reprisals (arts. 2, 4, 6, 7, 12 and 14)” (…)”The Committee is alarmed at the appalling conditions of detention in places of deprivation of liberty. It deplores, in particular: the high levels of prison overcrowding; the failure to separate male prisoners from female prisoners, adults from minors and persons awaiting trial from those already sentenced; the shortage of beds and sleeping space; the poor sanitary conditions; the dilapidated state of the facilities; prisoners’ inadequate and unbalanced diet; and the lack of health care. It further deplores the death of 263 inmates, inter-prisoner violence and the sexual violence against women and minors perpetrated by other inmates and guards. Lastly, the Committee is concerned about the continuing practice, in the State party, of detaining patients in hospital for non-payment of fees” (…)”While taking note of the fact that article 289 of the new Code of Criminal Procedure provides for the compensation of victims of torture, the Committee expresses its concern at the failure to apply this provision, in violation of article 14 of the Convention” (…) “The restrictions on the right of assembly and demonstration imposed by law enforcement bodies and reports of cases involving the violent suppression of demonstrations resulting in the excessive use of force by the authorities, for example during the protests of March 2014” (…)“The serious human rights violations perpetrated by a youth group (referred to as the Imbonerakure) with close ties to the Government, including: the harassment of political opponents; the disruption of public meetings, acts of intimidation, arbitrary arrests and arbitrary detention and other acts of violence; and the use of so-called “amicable” arrangements for settling disputes. The Committee is deeply concerned by reports that the Government is providing this group with weapons and training” (United Nations, 2014).

brigade_de_recherche_et_dintervention_judiciaire

Amnesty has in recent reports on how the torture has been from May 2015:

“Both the SNR and the Burundian National Police (PNB) are responsible for torture and other ill-treatment. Former detainees described being beaten with branches, iron bars, and police batons; and being stomped on, threatened with death, denied medical care, and verbally abused. In one particularly horrific case, a five-litre container full of sand was hung from a man’s testicles, causing enormous pain and swelling, and then the man was made to sit in a shallow layer of what he believed was battery acid, burning his skin severely” (…) “In and after the demonstration in April 2015 this has happen: “The police response to the demonstrations was marked by a pattern of serious violations, including of the right to life, freedom of association and peaceful assembly. They used excessive and disproportionate force, including lethal force, against protesters, at times shooting unarmed demonstrators running away from them. Even where children were present during demonstrations, police still failed to exercise restraint, and used tear gas and live ammunition” (…)”The cases of torture and other ill-treatment under SNR detention documented here all took place at the SNR compound near Bujumbura’s cathedral” (…)”In early June, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in Burundi told Amnesty International they had documented nearly 50 cases of torture and other ill-treatment. On 7 July, the UN Secretary General’s report on the electoral observation mission in Burundi stated that “some 307 people have been arrested, including 14 minors. Most of those arrested have been subjected to torture and cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment by security officers (mainly police and intelligence agents)” (…)”According to information received from lawyers, when individuals previously held by the SNR have alleged torture before court, the evidence obtained under such circumstances did not appear to have been declared invalid in spite of clear provisions in the Burundian Code of Criminal Procedure. To date, there is no investigation and nobody has been arrested for torture at the SNR” (…) “However, the Burundian Code of Criminal Procedure makes provision for a detainee to remain silent if his lawyer is not present and for a detainee to communicate freely with his lawyer.16 A leading Burundian human rights organization, the Association for the Protection of Human Rights and Detained People (APRODH), is no longer granted access to the SNR’s compound. At least one detainee says that he signed a document under duress” (…)”A man held at the SNR was also told by other detainees that the Imbonerakure had given information to the police for their capture” (…)”several testimonies of torture and other ill-treatment at a place known as Chez Ndadaye in Bujumbura. According to a policeman and UN human rights monitors, Chez Ndadaye is an operational command centre for the police.36 It is known as Chez Ndadaye because the presidential palace that housed President Melchior Ndadaye, the country’s first democratically elected president and first Hutu president, once stood there” (…)”According to the first policeman and two victims, demonstrators were not kept overnight at Chez Ndadaye, but were beaten there before being transferred to the judicial police and/or police stations” (…)”The OHCHR carried out a planned visit to Chez Ndadaye on 12 June 2015, but did not observe any torture or beatings at the time” (…)”One policeman told Amnesty International some policemen are frustrated by the situation. He explained: “Several policemen are not happy about what takes place at Chez Ndadaye and have complained to their superiors. Most of the perpetrators are those who were previously in the bush (ex-FDD). They beat protestors. Maybe around 10 people came through Chez Ndadaye every day. Police used their batons and electric wires to beat them. They’d say ‘you who are against Nkurunziza, you are wasting your time, he’ll be president forever’,” (Amnesty, 2015).

Aftermath:

I don’t really want to comment more on the issues. Because the reports on reports are really telling its own tale, I will not add much on it. Then it’s a sad story of real men and woman who is scared and hurt for their position in society. That the UN, USAID, OHCHR and Amnesty reports from 2006-2015 is telling a vivid stories and painful facts. Too many victims of the government and police of Burundi, they all deserve a voice, they all deserve justice and a society where this wouldn’t happen. Instead the Police and Government of Burundi is going after their own people without prosecution and trial. Putting them in shackles, pushing them in cells and hurting them in places like Chez Ndadaye in Bujumbura and that is not the only house and police institution that is being used in a vile place. So no matter what people are being unjustified threaten and punished by the police and security forces in Burundi. There should be something the world could do to stop this systematic and unjust ways. Not just in writing and councils reviews of the United Nations, but in actual forum that can change the President Pierre Nkurunziza of Burundi and the regime of the country. That is the issue and it’s not easy especially with the ways that the president got “elected” into the third term. Pierre Nkurunziza will always be remembered in a unique way and essentially with the shunned sworn-in celebration in mid-August 2015. An also for the reports of torture that the police and security organizations are doing as well in his presidency as well, which isn’t a beautiful view. Peace.

Reference:

AFR 16/2298/2015 – ‘“JUST TELL ME WHAT TO CONFESS TO”, TORTURE AND OTHER ILL-TREATMENT BY BURUNDI’S POLICE AND INTELLIGENCE SERVICE SINCE APRIL 2015’ (24.08.2015) – Amnesty International

CAT/C/BDI/CO/2 – ‘Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Burundi’, Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Committee on Torture (12.12.2014) – United Nations

Human Rights Monitor Series – ‘COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE 37TH SESSION BURUNDI, INITIAL REPORT’ (2006), International Service for Human Rights

‘BURUNDI UNDER REVIEW BY UNITED NATIONS UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW: RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING JUSTICE MATTERS’, Commonwealth Human Rights Intiative

USAID – ‘BURUNDI POLICY REFORM FINAL REPORT October 2007 – September 2011 (12.09.2011) – This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Chemonics International.

USAID – ‘VICTIMS OF TORTURE FUND PORTFOLIO SYNOPSIS 2005–2006’, Victims of Torture Fund, U.S. Agency for International Development

Burundi: Surprise Swearing-in Ceremony (Youtube-Clip)

Uganda Shocked:

SG/SM/17011-AFR/3197: Condemning Assassination of Former Army Official in Burundi, Secretary-General Stresses Need for Inclusive Dialogue to Peacefully Settle Differences (17.08.2015)

BurundiNTVNews

The following statement was issued today by the Spokesman for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon:

The Secretary-General condemns the assassination of Colonel Jean Bikomagu, former Army Chief of Staff, by unknown assailants in Bujumbura on 15 August.  He conveys his condolences to the family of the deceased.

The Secretary-General is troubled by the trend of politically motivated violence in Burundi.  He welcomes the Government’s decision to carry out investigations, and arrests and trials of the perpetrators behind the recent killings.

The Secretary-General reiterates his calls to all Burundians to resume an inclusive dialogue without delay to peacefully settle their differences.  He also reiterates the commitment of the United Nations to support the efforts aimed at consolidating peace and stability in Burundi.

Press release: The African Union strongly condems the Assassaintion of Cononel Jean Bikomagu, Fomer Cheif of Army Staff (of Burundi) – (16.08.2015)

AUC160815

Press Release: Burundi: Police Barricade Parts of the Capital (13.08.2015)

In response to police in Bujumbura, Burundi barricading the neighborhood of Jabe to search residents’ homes and collect weapons, Freedom House issues the following statement:

“This is clearly an attempt by Burundian authorities to stifle peaceful freedom of movement and assembly in Bujumbura,” said Vukasin Petrovic, director of Africa programs. “Burundian authorities should not use the latest uptick in unrest to justify further repression of the rights of citizens,  as it exacerbates political polarization in the country.”

Background:
Since President Pierre Nkurunziza decided to defy term limits in April, Burundi has spiraled into near chaos. Over 180,000 persons have fled the country, and more than 100 others have been killed. On August 2, General Adolphe Nshimirimana, seen as President Pierre Nkurunziza’s number two man, was assassinated. On August 3, Pierre Claver Mbonimpa, prominent human rights activist, was assaulted. Police raids in Jabe and other neighborhoods in the capital are viewed as attempts to suppress opposition to Nkurunziza seeking a third term.

Burundi is rated Not Free in Freedom in the World 2015, and Not Free in Freedom of the Press 2015.

Freedom House is an independent watchdog organization that supports democratic change, monitors the status of freedom around the world, and advocates for democracy and human rights.

Ranking of Peace in the East Africa Countries in 2015

East-Africa

First and foremost I will address what the trending and ranking means. What kind of things that the Global Peace Index does and what kind of attributes and recent history means for individual countries. All of this makes violence, homicides, social security, militarization which is part of the evaluation of the scores which makes the Index. The countries that will take on is Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, Somalia, Tanzania and Uganda. Which have different histories, though they are close to each other? Why are the numbers so far apart? What makes this? We can wonder. But look through what been said in the report and the numbers.

Last years trend:

“Over the past eight years the average country score deteriorated 2.4 percent, highlighting that on average the world has become slightly less peaceful. However, this decrease in peacefulness has not been evenly spread, with 86 counties deteriorating while 76 improved. MENA has suffered the largest decline of any region in the world, deteriorating 11 per cent over the past eight years (GPI, P: 2).

Economic price of violence:

“The economic impact of violence on the global economy in 2014 was substantial and is estimated at US$14.3 trillion or 13.4 per cent of world GDP. This is equivalent to the combined economies of Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom. Since 2008, the total economic impact on global GDP has increased by 15.3 per cent, from US$12.4 trillion to US$14.3 trillion” (GPI, P: 3).

“Societal safety and security:

This section analyses the effects of urbanisation on violence, and finds that peace generally increases with higher levels of urbanisation. This is a by-product of higher levels of development. However, countries that have weak rule of law, high levels of intergroup grievances and high levels of inequality are more likely to experience deteriorations in peace as urbanisation increases” (GPI, P: 3).

“Militarisation:

Since 1990, there has been a slow and steady decrease in measures of global militarisation, with large changes in militarisation occurring rarely and usually associated with larger, globally driven geopolitical and economic shifts” (GPI, P: 3).

Important evaluation that makes the GPI:

  • Ongoing domestic and international conflict
  • Societal safety and security
  • Millitarisation
  • Indirect cost of violence: Accounts for costs that are not directly related to an act of violence and accrue over the long run. This can include losses of income due to injury or pain or grievance of others who were not directly involved in the crime.
  • Internal Peace: A set of indicators that measures how peaceful a country is inside its
  • national borders
  • Negative Peace: The absence of violence or fear of violence.
  • Positive Peace: The attitudes, institutions and structures which create and sustain peaceful societies. These same factors also lead to many other positive outcomes that support the optimum environment for human potential to flourish.
  • Positive Peace Index (PPI): A composite measurement of Positive Peace based on 24 indicators grouped into eight domains.
  • Resilience: The ability of a country to absorb and recover from shocks, for example natural disasters or fluctuations in commodity prices.
  • Violence containment: Economic activity related to the consequences or prevention of violence where the violence is directed against people or property.

(GPI, P: 4).

Listings of Peaceful ratings:

World Rank: Country: Score: State of the Peace: Change in Score: Regional Rank:
130 Burundi 2,323 Low +,0,009 34
155 Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) 3,085 Very Low -0,033 41
119 Ethiopia 2,234 Low -0,143 27
133 Kenya 2,323 Low -0,086 35
139 Rwanda 2,420 Low -0,027 38
157 Somalia 3,307 Very Low -0,079 42
159 South Sudan 3,383 Very Low +0,107 44
64 Tanzania 1,903 Medium -0,024 10
111 Uganda 2,197 Medium +0,013 24

(GPI P: 8-9, P: 13)

The Regional Rank is set for the region of Sub-Saharan Africa. Therefore the regional rank is different from the World Rank. In the World rank it goes from 64 of Tanzania and 159 of South Sudan. That is 100 countries in between in the World, when we talk about peaceful environment and the fear should be one South Sudan (159), Somalia (157) and DRC (155).  Tanzania which is on top is the 64. Next place is for Uganda was ranked on 111, the third and fourth country in the region which was near each other was Kenya (133) and Rwanda (139). And the fifth place is Burundi (130) – which I am certain will fall on the rank after the elections in 2015. But for the GPI 2015 there is still high level for the region.

On Armed Conflicts and War in Sub-Saharan Africa: “Although sub-Saharan Africa has the highest number of conflicts, these conflicts tend not to last as long as in other regions. There were only three conflicts in sub-Saharan Africa in 2013 which started more than three years ago, two of which are long-standing conflicts in Ethiopia” (GPI, P: 51).

On Peacefulness in the region: “In 2008, MENA had the same level of peacefulness as sub-Saharan Africa, and was the 6th most peaceful region in the world. By 2015 it has become the least peaceful region in the world, deteriorating by 11 per cent over the period” (GPI, P: 55).

On South Sudan: “South Sudan’s ranking declined by only three places, but this was on top of by far the sharpest fall in the 2014 GPI. It remains embroiled in the civil conflict that broke out in December 2013, and which has thus far proved immune to numerous peace efforts” (…) “South Sudan also fell for its third consecutive year, slipping a further 3 places to 159. (GPI, P: 13, 16).

On Somalia: Somalia is on the highest cost of violence percentage of GDP which was 22%. “The majority of” (…) “Somalia’s costs stem from IDPs and refugees and homicides” (…) “The same category represents 54 per cent of Somalia’s total costs. (GPI, P: 77).

The difference is staggering from Somalia and South Sudan to the best state of peace in Tanzania. The other countries in between is ranked so close and with scores that could easily point them further down for next year if the militarization and violence inside the countries continue. Like I have a grand feeling that Burundi will fall on the ranking next year, also Uganda with the recent attacks and continuously going against opposition to the Presidential elections in 2016. Rwanda will sure shut down anybody who goes against the third term of Paul Kagame. There are also issues that are meeting Joseph Kabila’s planed third term in Democratic Republic of Congo. Ethiopia is in a stalemate of totalitarian regime that keeps the borders clear and with the resistance that comes from Somalia or the Omoro Liberation Front (OLF). Kenya has issues with building the border to Somalia where they has also taken districts in Somalia. And Kenya has the fear of Al-Shabab after the terrorist attack in Nairobi (2013) and that has happen also in Kampala (2010) in Uganda.

Therefore these rankings are important to look at because you can see what the state of ease is at, this is about the peace and impact of the authoritarian and totalitarian regimes in these countries. And will be good to follow and see how it really turns out in the next year rankings from the same place the Institute for Economic and Peace.

Hope it’s been a drop of enlightenment for you as well. Peace.

Reference:

Institute for Economics and Peace: “Global Peace Index – 2015 – Measuring Peace, its causes and its economic value”

Power eats our big-men – The reason for why we need Presidential Term limits

stock-footage--s-newsreel-story-roosevelt-wins-third-term

There is for some strange reason a big discussion on the matter. Since some countries have them, some don’t. It is not like every constitution should be written the same with the same accords. In my homeland for instance there is no limit on how long the Prime Minister can sit in power, but that that depends if the people of my country get tired of the PM or the party affiliated with the PM. In bigger countries like the US there is a limit of two terms and only once a President who has broken that rule, was during Second World War and that was Franklin D. Roosevelt. Who had three terms and is the only one well known.

I am sure that Greece would have seemed happy with more often change of leadership. So if they hadn’t sunk that deep with loans and debt. Then it wouldn’t matter how long a regime is in power, if it essentially good, but if it’s not. Then it would be healthy with changes, so that the government recharge and fix the issues of old.  That is for check and balance, also to stop cogging the machine with nepotism and local graft from local councils and smaller government entities.

Now that Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Rwanda and Burundi is following Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, Sudan, Zimbabwe and Uganda. They have big-men who have been sitting for ages and continue to break a certain switch of leaders. Burundi has just been through a farce of a election that brought their President Pierre Nkurunziza to his third term. Paul Kagame in Rwanda is thinking the same. Paul Biya the President of Cameroon has ruled since 1982 and is still sitting comfortable. Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo has been the president of Equatorial Guinea has been in charge since 1979. Omar Al-Bashir in President of Sudan has been the chief since 1993. Robert Mugabe is the President of Zimbabawe is the big-men of the country since 1987. Yoweri Kaguta Museveni the President of Uganda has been the head honcho since 1986.

Have in mind Ben Ali in Tunisia, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Muammar Gadaffi in Libya. All of them had a hard fall during the Arab Spring. So during a short period of time these long times serving rulers was ousted by the public or militias in their countries. And those people mentioned that has been sitting since 1979 to now should have them in mind. They could be next.

Its reasons like this big-men why countries and constitutions, law and rule of laws should fix the longevity for the leaders of the countries. Even if some countries has benefited from leaders sitting long. There have been many who show other tales. That their starting and dealing with matters. Making sure that the countries are progressing, but the issue with all men, power can eat you and when it’s at your grasp you don’t want to leave it. The power corrupt and make sure your family eats and friends to. An leave the matters and supposed people your supposed to serve. That makes the basic issue of leaders who becomes the proof of states where there is “taxation without representation”. They goes from being heroes and big-men with legacy into Machiavellian and Orwellian monsters that swallows the governments, states and organizations. That evaporates and follows the pinpoints from the leaders, but not actual procedures or democratic values. Transparency does matters, checks and balance of information from the regimes dies down especially if it pokes at the government. Ethics of codes of conduct matters for the ruling party, but for the opposition is otherwise since they will be thrown into shackles and dungeons for standing up against the regimes.

There is a reason why media has to be strong against this leaders and big-men. Why term limits is a good thing? It’s because power corrupt and eat men. When you first get a spoon of the sweets they want the champagne and cocktails in the statehouses. While many of the big-men don’t strengthen the basic institutions and ministries of the countries they are in charge of. Instead they put more money into the security and armies, but not too strong because then they are worried that their general’s would make a coup d’etat, especially since some of them took power by the gun themselves. So they usually promise grand changes and grace periods where the institutions left soiling by former leaders. While they does certain things and necessary by them, if so only what needed and supported through aid or donor money they might do something more with this.

While these leaders also often toiled with multilateral organization that put strains on the economic freedoms and loans that funds the countries. The forced moves of liberate institutions instead of strengthen the powers of the nations. Free market thinking that has weakened the economies then making them stronger. So that they import more then they export. Produce simple raw material or farm products and import finished sophisticated products that give the budgets negatives for the countries and also a reason why the countries end up with loaning more money from the multilateral organization. Because of this the big-men make shady deals with international donor countries and producers that lead to more corruption. Their zealous and loyalist under-leaders get cuts and that happens as long as they follow the party lines. The sellers from abroad couldn’t care less because usually they get overpaid for the product and there wasn’t a fair process of the sale. So if there is a transparent overlook of the sale and ordering of the products to the country it wouldn’t have gotten a green light.

This thing grows and grows until it hit either the moon or the sun. The terms are what people looking at. Then you could have discussed and talked more directly about the countries that don’t have it. There isn’t like universal rules to how the constitutions should be and what countries should have in it. There is other ways around that countries has to follow the international agreements, resolutions, charters and convents they have to follow and make amendments to their existing laws. But that is whole other matter. The term limit question is more about the ethical place and trust in the big-men that is either elected or taken power on their own. And if you have issues with leaders taking power on their own, there is a slim chance of them actually caring about rule of law. Instead even if they say something they will turn against close to date of the final period of terms. Just like Yoweri Museveni did in Uganda, Pierre Nkurunziza did in Burundi, Paul Kagame in Rwanda and Joseph Kabila in Democratic Republic in Congo (DRC). They all did a turn-around in limited time right before the end of the official second term. So they could fix the laws and get an official third term.

We the people and the citizens care about our big-men and nations, about the institutions that are made to be around us and supposed to support us. As we want good leaders that actually lead and make changes, and structures to secure their people. Instead when their reign for so long that their stealing of wealth, lands and positions for loyalist can be vial and hurting the country, instead of reaching and making the place better. This could be less of a viable possibility if there were structures and codes into place that pushed leaders to leave behind a legacy and go off in grace instead of sitting into the man with a scythe coming and taking their souls to eternal rest.

If society fears that leaders will lead into nepotism, graft, corruption and other evils of long term stand still of leaders and philosophy. The journey that the political climate needs is sufficient tools to stand in rainy days and in glorious ones. Also proper training to lead the next generations into a secure place and leave a foundation that can bring something positive for the people and the nations as whole.

And it isn’t pure and true leadership if they aren’t coping with the ability of leaving the power. They know that and we the people know this. When that happens we see the issues translate into situations that nobody really wants to see. Like the failed Coup d’etat in Burundi in 2015 and the violence that has surged since. Then the failings of the ‘Walk to Work’ protest after the 2011 elections in Uganda. That only led to few fallen activists for the cause, but lead to now initial change. Also the reactions in the DRC after lawfully allowing it’s president a third term, this made people react and the #Telema uprising happened as a aftermath. This because the leaders don’t accept their reach and doesn’t step down in time, instead tries to sit until the chair is breaking. And in due time they will fall out of the chair, it’s just about how they will land and which legacy they want to leave behind.

I am Sure Honorable Mister Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe could have been a real gentleman and been in the league of freedom fighters who fought a just cause against oppression of a foreign power. He could have been seen as that if he stepped down in proper time and given security to the country. Instead he has let the economy run loose, people fleeing the country, rigging elections, letting special army and police trained by North Koreans go into villages before elections and spread fear amongst the citizens. If he had stopped before turning into a villain, he could have been seen as hero. Something that would been worthy actually of how he fought with the comrades against a far-away rulers to secure peaceful nationhood to Zimbabwe together with Joshua Nkomo. Today he will not only be remembered only for the Lancaster House Agreement! But for all of the other madness that has happen after.

The same will happen with these other leaders who might have done great things. And they have made a difference. They have made some kind of changes and progress in their countries. Yoweri Kaguta Museveni of Uganda has made progress in Uganda. Even by sitting very-very long in the chair of power. After uncertainties of the 80s he has with the Movement system made the land peaceful and that has made gains in the aspect of food productions. Even with help of neighbors and the U.S. sent LRA on the run to C.A.R. where he is trying to get them again. Though with lingering into power it’s now taking a toll on the budgets, inflation levels, value of the currency and the enormous level of spending to local councils since there is new district every 5 years or so.

I could go on about every leader I have mentioned and what has happen because of their steadiness of power. How that effects and what that has led to in the countries that their leading, still. Similarities are still that the countries don’t earn much on having the same leaders reigning for many terms. Because the countries getting sucked into the system and patrons of the big-man instead of build functioning institutions and ministries to really developing the countries.

And let this be clear, I don’t want the systems of the West unto these countries that is not what I am implying. The simple thing I am pounding on is how it will be healthy for a nation to have leaders and their big-men for too long. I doubt if it is healthy. The same with MPS and Ministers, they all will eat too much and become fat, instead of serving the people. The same happens with the grand big-man; therefore the change of leadership is an essential feature to society and government.

Therefore what I am initially implying is that no matter what kind of society the human soul and body will be eaten by the power. That’s simple reason is that this is a universal issue, the location and countries could be a mayor in my town for the matter or the leader of European Union, the secondly it could be a president in South America or Asia. This is a phenomenon that is everywhere if the big-man has the possibility. Let me take a few more honorable mentions:

  • Alexander Lukashenko has been the president of Belarus since 1994.
  • Saparmurat Atayevich Niyazov has been the president of Turkmenistan since 1985.
  • Nursultan Nazarbayev has been the president of Kazahstan since 1989.
  • Issas Afweki has been been the president of Eritrea since 1991.
  • Emomali Rahmon has been the president of Tajikistan since 1992.
  • Hun Sen has been the president of Cambodia since 1985.

So thanks for reading. Hope it was worth it and that this wasn’t as long as the tenure of certain big-men. Peace.