

Uganda Police Force – Press Release: “We refute claims by a local daily of using sex workers as spies” (25.08.2017)








Despite the August 2015 peace agreement that formally ended the conflict, fighting and instability have persisted.
WASHINGTON D.C., United States of America, August 25, 2017 – A senior United Nations peacekeeping official today called on the leaders of South Sudan to show genuine political will to achieve sustainable peace in the strife-riven country, stressing that those whose long-time rivalry sparked the ongoing conflict can be the ones to resolve it.
“The conflict in South Sudan is a man-made conflict for which the leaders of South Sudan bear a direct responsibility,” Assistant Secretary-General for Peacekeeping El-Ghassim Wane told the Security Council. “But the same leaders can also bring the country back from the impending abyss.”
He noted that the dire economic situation and continued conflict in the country have combined to create a dangerous and precarious situation for its citizens, and all that is needed is genuine political will to halt military operations, peacefully negotiate and make the necessary compromises.
“I would also urge the Security Council to pronounce itself in this regard. It is critical that the leaders of South Sudan hear the international community’s unified demand of what is expected of them,” he stated.
Tomorrow marks the second anniversary of the signing of the South Sudan Peace Agreement between warring parties – the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) loyal to President Salva Kiir and the SPLA in Opposition backing then First Vice-President Riek Machar.
South Sudan, the world youngest country, which gained its independence from Sudan in 2011, has faced ongoing challenges since a political face-off between the two leaders erupted into full blown conflict in December 2013.
Despite the August 2015 peace agreement that formally ended the conflict, fighting and instability have persisted.
According to Festus Mogae, Chairman of the Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission (JMEC), “little meaningful progress” has been achieved in the implementation of the agreement, Mr. Wane said.
“More than ever before there is a critical need for continued and close coordination” between Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD), the African Union, the UN and the larger international community to leverage collective influence to bring an end to the suffering of the civilian population and help put South Sudan on a more positive trajectory, he stated.
IGAD comprises Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan and Uganda.
Mr. Wane said the security situation in South Sudan remains a cause for “very serious” concern. The expected ceasefire remains elusive as military operations continued during the reporting period, mostly in Upper Nile.
In July, 136 access incidents were reported by the humanitarian community – the highest number recorded in any one month since December 2013.
Incidents of looting also spiked during July, with 15 incidents reported across the country. Of particular concern were the six major looting incidents of warehouses and trucks in transit leading to the loss of 670 metric tons of food meant for vulnerable communities in Eastern Equatoria, Lakes, Upper Nile and Warrap.
In meetings between UN Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations Jean-Pierre Lacroix and South Sudan’s key government officials earlier this month, President Salva Kiir and his cabinet members expressed reservations on the inclusion of some personalities such as Riek Machar in any dialogue process, Mr. Wane said.
But there was, however, an acknowledgement that sizeable communities cannot be left out of a process just because they were led by or that they supported a particular individual, he added.
While the National Dialogue has made some progress, it continues to be criticized for its lack of inclusivity.
Briefing the Council via videoconference, Nicholas Haysom, Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Sudan and South Sudan, also expressed concern about the security situation and the trajectory and depth of the crisis.
Calling for a “clear commitment” to an inclusive and credible peace process, he described several recent international and regional support efforts – including Uganda’s initiative to reunify factions of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement and Kenya’s initiative to host opposition parties – which had achieved varying levels of success.

As time is going and the revelation from all the actors of July 2016 comes forward, the reality of what happen in Juba, South Sudan will be more fruitful, than in the past. It is over a year ago. There has been heads rolling and the Lt. Gen. Ondieki got fired for his mismanagement. The United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) approach to the flaring battles between SPLM/A-IG and the SPLM/A-IO. This done by the two parties who was starting the walk of the Transitional Government of National Unity (TGoNU). The fallout and the battles, that has lead to the now civil-war, shows how the lacking focus and problems of the action from the peacekeepers. These peacekeepers didn’t react, but deserted more from the conflict. They didn’t stand ground, but fled the scene.
Therefore, the newly revealed part of unreleased report are clearly showing that the Kenyans reactions to the sacking was justified. Since the previous reports on the days of flaring violence showed it was done recklessly. The violence and looting was done, because other battalions didn’t follow procedure, it was not all up to the leadership of Lt. Gen. Ondieki. Just take a look!
From an unreleased UN Report:
“On the uniformed side, the Force did not operate under a unified command, resulting in multiple and sometimes conflicting orders to the four troop contingents from China, Ethiopia, Nepal and India, and ultimately underusing the more than 1,800 infantry troops at UN House. The Force Commander appointed the Chinese Battalion Commander as the Incident Commander, commanding all the forces at the UN House in addition to his own battalion. Furthermore, the Force Commander ordered the Incident Commander to retain an explicit and ultimately confusing command link to Sector South headquarters in Tomping, which was physically cut off from the UN House for the duration of the fighting” (…) “This confused arrangement, in combination with the lack of leadership on the ground, contributed to incidents of poor performance among the military and police contingents at UN House. This included at least two instances in which the Chinese battalion abandoned some of its defensive positions at POC [Protection of Civilians site] 1 on 10 and 11 July. The Nepalese Formed Police Unit’s performance to stop looting by some IDPs inside UN House and control the crowd was inadequate.” (Brautigam, 2017).
Wrongful sacking of Ondieki:
“Lieut-Gen Ondieki had no direct control of deployment or response of the troops who were in the areas, according the UNMISS commanding framework. According to the rules of engagement, Lieut-Gen Ondieki could only send an order to the lead commanders who were in Juba, but they did not accept it. Therefore, Ban Ki-moon’s dismissal of Lieut- Gen Ondieki is not only an error in judgment, it is also unjust discrimination and a gross violation of his rights” (International Policy Group, P: 23 ,2016).
So the November 2016 Report is now more justified, as the leaked report on how the other peaceful-contingents didn’t follow procedures themselves. That a year later, the Chinese battalion abandoned their positions, therefore, the leadership under Lt. Gen. Ondieki was not all to blame. When other people moved without securing the PoC site like the UN House. These was ambushed and looted by the armies for stockpiles of needed supplies.
We can now wonder, who else also left their position and for what reasons, since this is just two paragraphs. The rest of the UN report might reveal even more, but with the knowledge that is out. The seemingly unfair treatment of Lt. Gen. Ondieki, especially when they acted on their own. Peace.
Reference:
Brautigam, Deborah – ‘UN Report confirms Chinese troops abandoned posts in South Sudan during 2016 fighting’ (21.08.2017) link: http://www.defencenewsindia.com/un-report-confirms-chinese-troops-abandoned-posts-in-south-sudan-during-2016-fighting/
International Policy Group – ‘Children of a lesser God – Report of the investigation into the power politics behind the removal of the Kenyan Force Commander of the UN Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) – November 2016

Over the past 12 months, an average of 1,800 South Sudanese have been arriving in Uganda every day.
GENEVA, Switzerland, August 18, 2017 – UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, is today reiterating its call to the international community for urgent additional support for the South Sudan refugee situation and Uganda in particular, where the number of refugees from South Sudan has now reached 1 million.
Over the past 12 months, an average of 1,800 South Sudanese have been arriving in Uganda every day. In addition to the million there, a million or even more South Sudanese refugees are being hosted by Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya, Democratic Republic of the Congo and Central African Republic.
In Uganda, more than 85 per cent of the refugees who have arrived there are women and children (below 18 years in age). Recent arrivals continue to speak of barbaric violence, with armed groups reportedly burning down houses with civilians inside, people being killed in front of family members, sexual assaults of women and girls, and kidnapping of boys for forced conscription.
With refugees still arriving in their thousands, the amount of aid we are able to deliver is increasingly falling short. For Uganda, US$674 million is needed for South Sudanese refugees this year, but so far only a fifth of this amount (21 per cent) has been received. Elsewhere in the region, the picture is only marginally better – in all US$883.5 million is needed for the South Sudan situation, but only US$250 million has been received.
The funding shortfall in Uganda is now significantly impacting the abilities to deliver life-saving aid and key basic services. In June, the World Food Programme was forced to cut food rations for refugees. Across settlements in northern Uganda, health clinics are being forced to provide vital medical care with too few doctors, healthcare workers and medicines. Schooling, meanwhile is also being impacted. Class sizes often exceed 200 pupils, with some lessons held in the open air. Many refugee children are dropping out of education as the nearest schools are too far away for them to easily access.
Since December 2013, when South Sudan’s crisis erupted in Juba, more than two million South Sudanese have fled to neighbouring countries, while another two million people are estimated to be internally displaced.

You know that the Uganda People’s Congress (UPC) are losing its value, when the leader of the Party is heckled in Lira. This is after the proposed agreement between UPC and National Resistance Movement, that have led to UPC Ministers in the growing cabinet of the 10th Parliament. Where even the wife Betty Amogi proposing and working for the constitutional amendment, who gives the state easier access to land. Because of this, UPC Leader Jimmy Akena has tried to promote the Land Amendment, but wasn’t meet with love.
“As Mr Akena was trying to explain the merits of the amendment, hundreds of people who felt the area legislator was not making sense in his presentation shouted him down. “If we do not want to listen, I can sit down. I will sit but you give me this one minute…If you ignore [to understand] what is existing, you are not going to help yourselves,” Mr Akena said. The former Otuke District councillor, Ms Dina Bua, said it was “useless” to give Mr Akena more opportunity to talk about land matters. Mr Akena said: “I have heard somebody saying that this law is not relevant. This is the law of the land today.” (Oketch, 2017).
This here is the proof of the fall of the UPC. When Akena, the leader who ousted Olara Otunnu, are now heckled in Lira. Certainly, he sees now how the people understand the newly proposed law. That will make the land more accessible for the government to takeover. Akena are now really a stooge of the NRM. He is under the umbrella of UPC, but that is just convenient. Still, his acts and his words could have been ordered and sanctioned by Museveni.
There is now no difference between the NRM and UPC now, I called them a few months ago NRM-Lite, but that was to soft. They are far-stretched organization connected with the NRM and following the NRM way right now. Sounding and acting alike, there is not really different between Akena and Museveni, the only difference are the NRM are running it all from the State House. Akena are now trying to show his loyalty and making sure NRM see the need for him. Peace.
Reference:
Oketch, Bill – ‘MP Akena booed during debate on land amendment bill’ (14.07.2017) link:http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/MP-Akena-debate-land-amendment-bill-Lango-Obote/688334-4056988-9ieqj1/index.html

No-one has the powers to decide when their where born, that happen because their parents fornicated or it was Gods will that you we’re born. Still, President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, who was born in Ntare, Rwanda in 1944, plans to change his “date of birth” (DOB). Because, if doing so, he doesn’t need to amend the 1995 Constitution, that puts an age-limit on the President!
“Kampala — No bill seeking to remove the 75-year age limit on the presidency has been tabled but the head-butting around the issue is intense. When, on Aug. 07, President Yoweri Museveni’s staff posted a photo on his Face Book page mentioning him and a date in 1947, opponents to lifting the age-limit sprung into a Twitter frenzy. That is a ploy by the president to amend his birth date from 1944 to 1947, many of them claimed, thereby reducing his age by a solid three years, which would then make him legible to contest in 2021 without having to amend the constitution. In reality, they were calling in the fire brigade to switch off a light bulb” (Matsiko, 2017).
You can see, the man doesn’t have any quarrels or issues with misusing his powers, to even change his birthday, a day given to him like anyone else. He wants to amend his age so he can continue to rule, since he knows there will be issues with changing the article 102(b). No matter what, he still play around like he is an eternal god if doing so. He changes his past, rewrites it to fit himself and will use all tricks to become eligible for another election and 8th Term in office. Since he is just in his 7th term, but officially 5th.
I will say if he changes his date of birth, he is officially a “son of a bitch” or a SOB. Since, he uses all sort of maneuvers and put in gear his loyal minions in the National Resistance Movement (NRM) or NRM-O, even NRM Poor Youth to trigger their praise of the old-man. He will hire anyone who can be a shield and say it was their idea, but the State House clearly, sanctioned this sort of idea. This isn’t for building the state, but keeping President Museveni forever.
This is just insane, but fits the program of Museveni of late, it is all about his possible continuation of office. Not for some real progress, the steady progress of the republic. That comes in-second.. or in third. Since, now President Museveni is an SOB if he changes his DOB. Peace.
Reference:
Matsiko, Haggai – ‘Uganda: The New Museveni Age-Limit Plan’ (14.08.2017) link: http://allafrica.com/stories/201708140067.html

It is strange how this becomes a thing, how these sort of things suddenly means so much. That is because someone loves to rewrite history and also his own. Since the Age Limit of the Presidential Candidate is fixed in the 1995 Constitution and Article 102(b). Which states the age that a President can have when running. For the old liberation hero, or liberator are trying to liberate himself from his past and his age. So he can run without amending the constitution, even if he has already pigeon-holding it.
Article 102 states: “A person is not qualified for election as President unless that person is—
(a) a citizen of Uganda by birth;
(b) not less than thirty-five years and not more than seventy-five years of age; and
(c) a person qualified to be a member of Parliament” (Constitution of 1995).
So in Mbarara, St Luke Kinoni Church of Uganda, the archives there are settling that Yoweri Museveni was baptized on the 3rd August 1947. In the first edition of the Mustard Seed he himself remembers: “The third childhood memory I retain was when we were baptised, along with Mzee Amosi Kaguta and Esteeri Kokundeka, on the 3rd of August 1947, at Kikoni Rwampara. By that time, I was almost three years” (Yoweri Museveni, Sowing the Mustard Seed, 1997). If his memory is correct when writing in 1996/1997, then he would be born about 1944 and would be 73 years old in 2017.
Well, there are documents proving it difficult to know his age. He got married on the 25th August 1973 at Christ Church at Turnham Green in London. Where he married his wife Janet Museveni. At this document. At this document he was an Army Officer and bachelor at the age of 27 years. That means he was born in 1946. This would mean that with this document and some easy calculation, say that the President is 71 years old.
The the latest official document is the birth certificate of Mohoozi Kainerubaga Tubuhaburwa who was born on the 24th April 1974, where Yoweri Museveni was the father and the mistress Hope Rwaheru. At this document it said his birthplace was Tare, Rwanda, but also said he was 30 years old. Another different was his occupation, he was an Operative in the Uganda State Research Bureau. This means again he was born in 1944. To settle him again to be 73 years old.
So there is a few lies somewhere as the documentation of his life is seemingly showing different ages and times. So he is twice said to be born around 1944, while his marriage certificate from United Kingdom says something else. What is inspiring is that on 25th August 1973 in the United Kingdom as he got married to Janet he was 27 years old, but by the birth of his son Muhoozi, he became 30 years old at the Loitokitok General Hospital, Coast Province in the Republic of Kenya, on the 24th April 1974. All of this is inspiring how the President could be 27 years old in United Kingdom and in Kenya, in the year after become 30 years of age. Also, either he was an operative at the Uganda State Research Bureau or he was Army Officer. This again proves how the records are differing in quick phase.
His documentation even says he was born in Tare, Rwanda, so if it wasn’t for the coup d’etat and the bush-war. Than he would have been dismissed for his birthplace, but none will challenge him on that. Then again to be running for 2021. He would no matter how you see it be older than 75 years, by both admissions. Since you have to add the years in-between 2016-2021. So with being either 71 or 73. Means you will add 4 years to the tally. It means if he was 71 years old, means he is 75 years old in 2021 and the other 77 years old. Which means he is to old to run!
But it is allowed to question the paperwork and difference in it, as it is in such short time, such massive differences! Peace.