Calm finally returned to Kampala at around 3 PM after the military police took charge of the security in the city after the rioters overpowered the police. The shops in the city remained closed the whole day as a show of solidarity for the demonstration and fear for robbery.

By 3.30 PM, the military police was still using force to chase people from the streets so that they return to their homes. Armored vehicles popularly called the Mambas were by this time still traversing the streets in an effort to discipline any rioter.

The military police resorted to using live bullets and batons to disperse people who were seen in groups on the streets, some of them throwing stones at the police which was overpowered before the military was called in.

The demonstration which begun as a peaceful march later turned violent after a misunderstanding between the demonstrators and the police. The demonstrators carried placards reading, “Indians remembers the 1971 saga” and others waved tree branches.

The demonstrators are against the proposed giveaway of part of Mabira natural forest reserve to the Mehta group of companies to expand sugarcane growing. Mehta is an Indian who has been in Uganda doing the sugar production business since the 1960s.

“People were demonstrating peacefully when there was a misunderstanding with the police. All of a sudden they opened fire,” Frank Muramuzi, and environmental activist said although the police dispute the allegations.

“The demonstration was peaceful but some hooliganism came later and people started throwing stones at police thus prompting the use of force,” a police officer at the scene told The Uganda Today.

The violence started when an Indian national knocked down a radio journalist working with a local radio station Radio One as he covered the demonstration. The accident ignited the anger of the demonstrators who claimed the Indians were ‘anti-Uganda’.

As the Radio One journalist was being taken to hospital, the angry mob ascended on the Indian, who had reportedly knocked down the journalist, and beat him to death, according to unconfirmed reports. Three more people are also feared dead in the riot.

However police could only confirm two deaths. According to police, a suspected looter was shot dead by security guards and a stray bullet hit a passer-by. Ultimate Media can confirm the death of one Ugandan whose body lay in blood on Luwuum Street.

The police who were this time using live bullet could not confirm the death of the Indian but there are reports that there have been several attacks on Asians, leaving two people in hospital and a Hindu temple for the Indians damaged. The police had to rescue about 40 men from a Hindu temple after it was attacked by a mob.

“We were inside the temple and the protesters started attacking us from outside,” 50-year-old Dipaul Patel told Reuters news agency. “It was very frightening,” it quotes Patel as saying.

At the central police station in the Center of Kampala City, some Indians were seeking police protection. The Uganda Peoples Defence Forces was brought in with armored vehicles to protect the Indian community that had sought refuge at the police.

There are reports that the army escorted Mehta and a host of other Indians to Entebbe International Airport to escape any possible attack from the rioters. Some shops have been abandoned and there is fear that the employees would have a field day in case their employers left the country.

This will not be the first time such an incident would be happening. In the 1970s, Ugandan Asians were expelled from the country and they were beginning to return to the country following a blue eye welcome from President Yoweri Museveni.

Meanwhile, the anti Mabira demonstrators spearheaded by Save Mabira Crusade, a network of civil society organizations, individuals, MPs and religious leaders against the giveaway of Mabira forest have managed to present a petition to Speaker of the Ugandan Parliament Edward Ssekandi who promised to give the matter priority.

The demonstration comes after several warnings to government and the Mehta group to withdraw they plans of degazetting Mabira. The Kabaka of Buganda Kingdom where the forest reserve is located has promised to give his land to Mehta to save Mabira forest.

The Anglican Church in Uganda has also promised to give Mehta group land on which the company can plant sugarcane to save Mabira forest, one of the remaining eco-tourism sites in Uganda. The Mehta group insists in being given Mabira forest because of its economic advantages.

But environmentalists argue that the cutting of Mabira forest could cause serious environmental impact to the country which is already facing reduced water levels in its lakes notably Lake Victoria, which the environmentalists blame on degradation.

The environmental protection groups have since petitioned over the matter of Mabira give away. According to the Spokesperson of The Environment Action Network (TEAN) Phillip Karugaba, giving out Mabira for sugarcane is treasonable. TEAN says the move threatens existence of rare species of trees and birds in the 30,000-hectare forest. Despite the warning, the government remained unmoved by the threats.

A journey from Kampala as you drive to the eastern parts of Uganda through Mabira forest, gives you enough reason to believe the government when it says that Uganda is Gifted by Nature -a country promotional campaign Uganda launched last year, costing billions of shillings, hoping to promote the country’s tourism potential. Travelling from Kampala to Jinja, one often sees the thick green forest on both sides of the road after Lugazi town. Mabira is a moist, tropical forest covering approximately 29,964 hectares (an equivalent of about 60,000 football fields), and is famous for its tourist, climatic as well as cultural importance -especially to the Buganda kingdom. But now Ugandans are trying to come to terms with the fact that part of this forest reserve may soon have to make room for a sugar plantation, drastically changing one of the few remaining protected areas and tourist attracting gems in the country.

Forest land for sugarcane growing?
In August 2006, President Yoweri Museveni ordered the National Forestry Authority (NFA) to do a study into the feasibility of clearing 7,100 hectares, nearly one fourth of Mabira Forest, in order to facilitate the expansion of sugar growing by Sugar Corporation of Uganda (SCOUL) which is owned by the Mehta Group. The Mehta Group had earlier applied to the President’s office to expand its sugar-cane production to bolster the group’s Lugazi sugar products.

The Mehta group approached President Museveni, with an argument that part of the forest had been degraded and had inferior tree types, which could not produce valuable timber anyway. The company promised they would employ more people, address the prevailing sugar scarcity in Uganda and contribute more revenue to the country’s coffers if given part of the forest.

The cabinet ministers of Uganda recently agreed to de-gazette part of Mabira forest to allow SCOUL to plant more sugarcane, despite sustained opposition to the Mabira give away by the public. Although Ugandan Prime Minister, Apollo Nsibambi denied earlier this past week that his government had agreed to give the 71, 000 hectares of Mabira to SCOUL, many sources claim that it is a done deal.

Why the fuss about Mabira?

Many Ugandans, environmentalists, NGOs and even government agencies like NFA have opposed the government’s move arguing that the forest is a potential tourism destination that hosts endangered animal species, as well as 300 bird species like the Nahan’s Francolin and the Papyrus Gonolek, which are popular with bird watchers. Mabira forest is the epitome of forests in Uganda. Not just because it is a big forest but its name locally means ‘big forest’. NFA spokesperson Gaster Kiyingi says Mabira is one of the biggest natural forests in Uganda, acting as a water catchment area for the Lake Victoria and Lake Kyoga basins. Lake Victoria is the largest fresh water lake in the world and the source of river Nile, the longest river in the world.

Mabira forest is a source of many rivers, livelihood of surrounding communities, a home to many rare bird species, plants and animals, and therefore a boost to eco-tourism in the country. Mabira forest receives more than 62% of all tourists visiting forest reserves in the country. Eco-tourism is the second largest foreign exchange earner and the potential for Mabira forest as tourist destination cannot be over-emphasized.

The NFA study initially commissioned by President Museveni concluded that the ecological and economic losses from destroying part of Mabira would be devastating. The report says the plan endangers 312 tree species, 287 bird species and 199 butterfly species. Nine species found only in Mabira and nearby forests risk becoming extinct. The report says that economic losses as a result of the destruction of part of the reserve include lost revenue from logging and eco-tourism, the main source of tourist revenue in Uganda.

Mabira’s great importance to Uganda
Kiyingi says that further depletion of Mabira forest will reduce the water flow of the surrounding streams and rivers and change rain patterns region wide, which in turn will negatively affect agriculture, cattle keeping, electricity supply and thus all economic activities in Uganda. The Ugandan government has given low water levels in Lake Victoria as the reason behind the country’s current electricity crisis, and one would expect the nation’s leaders to know better than to destroy the major source of water into Lake Victoria.

Environmentalists say that with the water levels in Lake Victoria already low, destroying part of Mabira forest is likely to lower electricity production, and proposed hydroelectric projects such as Bujagali, the River Sezibwa power plant, will be meaningless. In addition to potential disturbances to the microclimate, destruction of Mabira could also violate major global conservation agreements to which Uganda is a signatory, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992). This requires the country to establish and maintain protected conservation areas.

The Government of Uganda and its development partners, especially the European Union (EU), have invested heavily in the forest since 1990 to restore previously degraded areas. The NFA says the forest is recovering and 10 years are not enough for such a forest to regenerate and be fully stocked with valuable timber and other biodiversity resources. They also argued that Mabira forest is very important to the Baganda for many reasons. The Baganda believe that Mabira forest is the home of the Buganda’s gods of rain and food. The Baganda also traditionally believe that if a strong hurricane emerges from the east, this forest will help block it and it will not make it to the Kabaka’s palace at Mengo. Additionally, the forest has thousands of trees (small and big), which the Baganda and other tribes traditionally use to harvest medicine during pregnancy and childbirth.

What alternatives are available?

While it may be understandable that the Ugandan government is trying to secure an adequate sugar supply as well as economic development of the country by giving part of Mabira to SCOUL, other investors have already committed money to the forest targeting its tourism potential. The Alam Group, assisted by its partners in the Netherlands, is already building an eco-lodge worth $2m (3.6bn Uganda shillings) in Mabira to harness the forest’s tourism potential.

The Alam Group, which is another heavy investor in Uganda, is not happy with the Mabira give away. “In any hardwood forest in the country, this action should not be allowed,” said Zahid Alam, who is building an eco-lodge in Mabira forest. Some people have asked the sugar company to find alternative land outside the forest, or consider out growing (buying sugarcane from Ugandans neighboring Lugazi town where the SCOUL factory is located, who would earn much more than those the company would employ after planting more sugarcane in Mabira). The NFA had recommended that SCOUL allows individual growers to supplement its sugarcane requirements, or rent land from private landowners in the area around Mabira. All these pleas seem to be falling on deaf ears.

What is more worrying for Ugandans is the fact that the Ugandan Parliament is likely to pass the effort by the Executive to de-gazzette part of Mabira for sugar planting. The ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) has a strong majority in Parliament. The NRM has 212 MPs in the 332 strong Parliament, while 40 are independents, 10 represent the Uganda people’s Defense Forces (an arm of the Executive) and only 57 MPs are in opposition. The NRM recently warned NRM MPs to uphold strong ‘discipline’ and avoid voting against the party position in Parliament.

Will the Ugandan government yield to public pressure?
So what can Ugandans do to save Mabira, a forest that has been dear to many Ugandans since time immemorial? Some Ugandans opposed to the forest give away are using other strategies including SMS asking people to shun sugar manufactured by SCOUL and several NGOs have organized news conferences opposing the government’s intended move. Renowned environmentalist and opposition Conservative Party President, John Ken Lukyamuzi has threatened to stage a demonstration on May 1, 2007 as Uganda marks the International Labor Day unless the Ugandan government reverses the decision.

“Losing these forests, particularly the Mabira Forest Reserve, would have enormous repercussions for both people and wildlife in Uganda.” said Achilles Byaruhanga, Executive Director of Nature Uganda (Bird Life in Uganda). Byaruhanga says that Mabira Forest Reserve is listed by Bird Life International as an Important Bird Area (IBA). The forest contains over 300 species of bird, including the Endangered Nahan’s Francolin Francolinus nahani.

The forest also supports nine species of primate, a recently identified new mangabey sub-species in Uganda, Lophocebus albigena johnstoni and a new species of Short-tailed Fruit Bat. “The fact that we are still discovering new species of large animals in this forest is a pointer to its value for biodiversity. As a result, we are working hard to ensure the Ugandan government understands that holding onto these sites is of utmost importance, both in terms of conserving biodiversity and in terms of poverty reduction and economic growth” Byaruhanga emphasizes.

The Ugandan government still has a chance to maneuver
Despite Prime Minister Nsibambi’s assurance that government will seek Parliament’s approval before giving out the land to SCOUL, there are fears that instead of an outright lease of the forest to the sugar company, the Government of Uganda may decide to grant them a license to use the forest, just like timber loggers are given licenses.

In late 2006, news of the proposed license issuance by the Ugandan government was first reported in the national media. There followed wide criticism and public protest when it was reported later that the government had sacked the entire board of the NFA, after they unanimously refused to carry forward these license requests. A few days later Olav Bjella, the Director of the NFA, resigned citing disagreement with government over the allocation of more forest land to private companies. The NFA says that studies have shown that the potential revenue from tourism alone at Mabira was in excess of the costs of managing the reserve. Mabira Forest Reserve is located within 50 km from Kampala, the capital city of Uganda, and is surrounded by four major towns used by tourists.

Other economic losses involved in giving away Uganda’s forests are thought to include lost revenue from selective logging, a local impact on livelihoods and possibly from changing climate; the forests help maintain central Uganda’s wet climate removing them could bring about drier weather negatively impacting on crop yields, conservationists have argued.

In a recent public debate, organised by Nature Uganda, the former chairperson of the National Forestry Authority accused government ministers of failing to advise President Museveni. “We have ministers who cannot advise Museveni correctly because they fear him. This is not helping the country,” John Kaboggoza says.

But the Ugandan government insists it will not give away the forest, unless it is proved the benefits of such a move greatly outweigh the ecological and economic benefits. “Museveni cannot give away Mabira without consultations,” says Kagimu Kiwanuka, the Minister for Economic Monitoring, when visiting the forest reserve last month. But the current NFA Board Chairman, Baguma Isoke said this week that it is not right to put economic figures and financial comparisons to Mabira, because the ecological, and daily livelihood gained from the forest are enormous and cannot be financially measured.

Byaruhanga says that the Government has completely ignored all opportunities of finding alternative land. Agriculture only occupies 48% of Uganda’s arable land, the other 52% is left under utilized, including some of the land occupied by the Sugar Corporation of Uganda Limited (SCOUL). “The proposal to give part of the forest to SCOUL is a result of inability by the company to utilize all the land at its disposal. A company should not be rewarded with a rich natural resource for its inefficiency,” he says in a statement earlier this week.

Ray of Hope through Kabaka Mutebi
The Mabira forest giveaway has awoken many Ugandans to the real costs of disappearing forests. The epitome of such realization and concern came on Friday March 23^rd 2007 from the Buganda kingdom monarch who has offered to give part of his land in Kyaggwe, Mukono district (near Lugazi) to SCOUL to save the forest. According to the Information Minister of the Buganda Kingdom, Medard Ssegoona, the Kabaka is willing to give an equivalent of 7,100 hectares to SCOUL to save Mabira. The Kabaka (Buganda Kingdom) owns 155 square miles in Mukono.

“In light of what is going on about Mabira, the Buganda Kingdom is willing to offer part of its land in Kyaggwe (Mukono) to save the vital Mabira forest. SCOUL or the Government of Uganda can apply for the land on a lease basis,” Ssegoona told journalists on Friday this week.

The bigger picture: Population pressure and its adverse effects on forests.
The Mabira forest saga and other giveaways of forests to potential developers is just part of the of disappearing forests in Uganda. Apart from outright handing over of forests by the Ugandan government to investors, the country’s growth is set to keep piling more pressure on forests, given the increasing population in Uganda. With Uganda’s population growing at about 3.4% per annum, Ugandans are set to become a liability to themselves and their motherland. With 7.1 births per woman, Uganda is only second to Niger (7.9 births per woman) worldwide on the birth rate scales. The UN estimates that Uganda will have 130 million people by 2050, almost five times the current population (28 million, 2006 estimate).

According to the NFA 2006 annual report, encroachment on forests is on the rise in Uganda. In the central forest reserve where Mabira is located, the number of people building houses, farming or grazing livestock in protected forests has increased from 180,000 in 2005 to 220,000 in 2006, a 23% increase. Proposed central forest reserves are Banga Central Forest Reserve (184hectares), Towa (1,506 hectares), Gala (894 hectares) Namatembe (241 hectares) and Mugoye (945 hectares).

As people search for solutions to fuel, food, building and indeed income generation, Uganda’s forests are incurring a heavy toll. According to NFA, illegal timber cutting has increased in many forests, many times with the support of local politicians. About 97% of Ugandans use firewood and charcoal for cooking, all of which can only be available with the destruction of a forest (trees).

Many people are aware that deforestation brings about drought and climatic change for the worse, and of the fact that forests help in preventing global warming. Many are also aware that destroying forests in the end will mean limited rainfall, less water in the rivers and lakes, and that agriculture, along with cattle keeping will be negatively affected. But more and more people, including now, those running Uganda, seem to be finding voluntary and involuntary reasons to destroy the remaining forests.

For the last five months or so, the government has been giving out prime pieces of land in Kampala and neighboring areas to investors.

It started with the give away of land in Nakasero formerly housing Uganda Broadcasting Corporation TV and the land of Shimoni Demonstration Primary School and Teachers College. This land was given to investors who are set to build multi-million hotels, partly in preparation for the Common Wealth Heads Of Government Meeting (CHOGM) slated for November 20^th to 26^th 2007 in Uganda.

As some sections of the public were still complaining about giving away this land, there were reports that President Yoweri Museveni’s government were planning to give land currently occupied by Luzira Prison, Nsambya Police Barracks, among others to investors who requested to put up modern housing estates. Of recent, the give away of part of Mabira forest to Mehta to expand their sugar plantation has generated a lot public concern. But President Museveni has vowed to give away more land to investors if he is convinced about the benefits accruing from such land.

Museveni said on Friday that giving land to investors will improve the Ugandan economy and provide jobs to many Ugandans and put the land to more adequate use. The president’s stand has however been received with mixed feelings from Ugandans, with some accusing him of selling the country while others are praising him for his foresightedness.

The Uganda Today’s John Isingoma interviewed a cross section of people in Kampala about the President’s giving away of land to investors. Below are their views.

Grace Kibuka, 28, Researcher:
“If the president is following legal procedures while distributing the land, I think it is okay because most of this land has been underutilized. However, for purposes of environmental conservation, the president should consult NEMA(National Environment Management Authority) and the National Forest Authority to understand the ecosystem of certain pieces of land before it is given away. A case in point here is the Mabira forest, which the president is about to give away. So, to me I would look at professionalism, consultation and planned development rather than the president using authority to do whatever he wishes.”

Neo Semanda, 21, photocopier attendant:
“It is not a bad idea for the president to distribute land in Kampala for development purposes as long as he weighs the advantages and disadvantages. If there are more advantages then he is right to give the land for better development. For example, look at the problem of electricity in the country. They say it’s due to lake Victoria drying up. But you hear the president is planning to give part of Mabira forest, yet forests are very important in rainfall formation, which could be a solution in the electricity crisis. Am confused at whether sugar canes are more beneficial than electricity.”

Muzamil Kwebiha, teacher:
“First of all I don’t think the president has misallocated land. What he has done is giving it to the big investors who are going to develop the land and even create jobs. Take the example of Shimoni School, in exchange for a five star hotel. It is definitely a good deal and I salute the president. Besides he has not thrown Shimon to the street but relocated and built others structures in Kololo. Development comes with some changes, which the people should bear with.”

Tina “Tana”, tea woman in Kampala:
“Land distribution for development is no problem. But the president is giving the land to foreigners. The foreigners are going to give the created jobs to their fellow foreigners and Ugandans will lose out. Me am suggesting that the president should give the land to potential Ugandan investors. On Shimoni land, the president by giving away the school, shows that he does not care about education anymore. For Mabira forest, am opposed to the president because cutting it down for sugar cane growing will destroy the environment of the country.”

Fred Isingoma, Urban planner:
“The president is right when he says some land in Kampala has been unproductive. For example land where UTV was located was underutilized and by replacing it with a hotel of international stature is good for Uganda. However, for a school like Shimoni, it’s hard to tell in the short run. But since the school has been given another piece of land and the government is going to construct new structures, let us hope it is a good idea. I don’t agree with the president on Mabira forest though. Cutting that forest is going to come with worse affects than the benefits from the sugar canes due to the disruptions in the ecosystem.”

Jimmy Naika, university student:
“Land distribution to investors is not bad. But the way president Museveni does it is not right because he is giving land to foreigners who are going to rob this country. I would rather he gives the land to Ugandans who have money to put up the same investments. The fact is he is distributing land exclusively to foreigners. It is likely that he is the one behind these people. In the Shimoni case the president contradicts himself. He says he wants UPE(Universal Primary Education) to succeed and yet he is displacing good schools, which are affordable even by the poor to locations where only the rich can afford transporting their children.

William Bidayo, university student:
“Distributing land to investors in Uganda is not fair at all because it is not going to benefit the local people. The problem is that when foreigners come in Uganda they come with their people and they are the ones who do the jobs created by such investments. Then the government starts boasting of creating jobs when the Ugandans are suffering on the streets without jobs. I therefore urge the government to put in laws regulating the number of people the foreigner investors employ in their businesses.”

Sarah Kyamagero, accountant:
“If the president is distributing land for investment to increase the national revenue collection, then it is very okay. I will take the example of Shimon land it was not bringing in good revenue, if any, so it is better for it to get shifted to create space for an investment that will bring revenue to the country.”

A lot of water has flown under the bridge since last Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling on the election petition. The issue of who will lead Uganda now has been settled.

President Yoweri Museveni will be sworn in on May 12th 2006 as Uganda’s President for the next five years after the Supreme Court dismissed the petition that was challenging his victory in the February 23rd presidential polls.

However, the opposition Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) insists that President Museveni will be an illegitimate leader since he is going to be president after a flawed election, since the Supreme Court said the lection was not held according to the law.

Even, then, 3 of the 7 judges ruled that the election results be annulled, but the majority (4) felt the irregularities did not affect the election outcome ‘substantially’.

FDC president, Dr. Kizza Besigye insists that the majority of Ugandans did not vote for Museveni on February 23rd, but Museveni and the electoral Commission stole the election in favour of long serving Museveni who is set to extend his stay at the helm of the country to 25 years in 2011 when the next presidential elections will be held.

President Museveni and his National Resistance Movement party insist that the dismissal of the petition is an indication that the will of the majority of Ugandans will carry the day for the next five years. According to Adolf Mwesigye, the Minister of State for Constitutional Affairs, the ruling shows that Museveni’s next five-year term is both legal and legitimate, since the majority of the judges confirmed that the results declaring Museveni as winner were valid.

But more than the feeling of comfort and discomfort from the ruling, some people are saying the ruling presents serious implications for Uganda’s democratic future.

Most people in the opposition say that few if any other election petition is likely to be filed after the Supreme Court ruling that was almost the same as the one of 2001.

Many have said that the Supreme Court ruling does not give losers morale to petition elections because of the demands of producing evidence that the elections were not free and fair with in 10 days and demanding that the petitioner convinces Court that the irregularities had a substantial effect on the election result.

The law on substantial evidence, which does not say how much will be substantial, and especially giving the petitioner 10 days to collect and present evidence from all over the country will continue to be a thorn in the neck of anyone or a party that wants to petition an election. Some people in the opposition say the law was made like that to ensure that no one ever wins an election petition.

But the Supreme Court judges say there is need for general law reform on most election laws to ensure easy tracking and presentation of election behavior by the election governing body. Otherwise if the law remains the way it is, one can almost expect a similar result since judges have no standard measure of what amount constitutes a substantial effect on the election results and which does not.

Dr. Besigye says if the law remains the way it is, many people may now resort to “other courts”, like the one Museveni chose after losing the 1980 electionsthat is going to the bush to wage a war. The FDC leader has however stated that neither he nor his party will consider removing the government by force of arms.

For now, the ruling hit most at the electoral commission. The FDC leadership on Monday called on the Electoral Commission to resign since the Supreme Court had found them incompetent and failing to conduct the elections in accordance to the Electoral Commission Act and the Presidential and Parliamentary Elections Act.

But more than requiring the electoral commission to resign, the important issue is how and if it is possible to have an electoral commission that does not play to the tune of the ruling government that appoints its membership.

Many people had earlier noted that it was impossible to have free and fair elections organized by an electoral commission appointed by the ruling government. To many, the Electoral Commission is more or less a pawn organ to ensure the incumbent retains his seat, and there have been allegations that they act on orders and guidelines from state house, leave alone the laws under which they are supposed to conduct elections always being enacted late or being in favour of the ruling government.

As in the 2001 situation, the government will more than likely dismiss the current electoral commission, after all seven judges found it incompetent. After the 2001 Supreme Court ruling which also expressed concern and condemned the electoral commission’s way of conducting the 2001 elections, the government dismissed the Aziz Kasujja led electoral commission “in public interest” only to give most of the former Electoral Commission members big jobs elsewhere. This is a scenario many political analysts are sure will come to pass, since the current electoral commission members will have “done their job” of running an election which the incumbent wins.

But Dr. James Nsaba Buturo, the Information Minister and government spokesman insists that the electoral commission did the best in the situation and that the government had full good will in electing the electoral commission. He says no election can be free from irregularities and the members of opposition parties want a perfect situation, which cannot be, achieved anywhere.

“That is why the law must continue to require substantial evidence in order for the court to overturn an election,” Dr. Buturo says.

In his first statement after the Court dismissed his petition, Besigye warned that his petition is likely to be the very last Presidential Elections petition that the Supreme Court judges will ever preside over.

He may be facing treason charges, but Forum for Democratic Change leader, Col. (Rtd) Dr. Kizza Besigye has warned of possible use of violence following a Supreme Court ruling on the petition he filed challenging the February 23 presidential polls.

The High Court begun this week to hear the case in which Besigye and 22 others are accused of treason and concealment of treason, the charge they deny. The government alleges that after losing the presidential election and petition in 2001, Besigye started a rebel group.

In his first statement after the Court dismissed his petition, Besigye warned that his petition is likely to be the very last Presidential Elections petition that the Supreme Court judges will ever preside over.

“For this, history will hold their Lordships responsible because subsequent petitions are likely to be addressed to courts similar to the one in which President Museveni found confidence in 1981,” he said.

President Yoweri Museveni came to power in 1986 through a guerilla struggle that started following the fraud in the 1980 presidential elections in which the Democratic Party is said have won but the ruling Uganda People’s Congress at the time turned the result upside down.

Besigye said today, that all that has been achieved in over 20 years will be lost. “The long and short of this election, petition and judgement is that Uganda is right back to square one, after 25 years,” he said. The FDC leader said that there is no doubt that this judgement has re-enforced the already strong sense of apathy and despondency in the electoral and petition processes.

He said that the FDC Party adduced enough evidence in court to prove that the election was not conducted in accordance with the law, and that it was not free and fair. “It is unfortunate that their Lordships have once again not found it fitting to cancel the election that is glaringly invalid and certainly not free and fair, as required by the constitution.”

The FDC leader noted that the Constitution and legal framework are not only grossly unfair to the petitioner but favor perpetrators of electoral malpractices. “The petitioner has only ten days to prepare and lodge the petition compared with the Parliamentary Elections where the petitioner has 30 days within which to lodge a petition,” he said.

He said that in addition to the Presidential Elections Act being so grossly tilted in favor of the electoral offenders as demonstrated above, intimidation and harassment of petitioner’s lawyers and witnesses, especially upcountry had a significant impact on the final judgement.

Besigye however said that as a petitioner and as FDC, which sponsored his candidature, they are satisfied that they did what they had to do.

“We performed our duty as responsible citizens of this country. We exposed irregularities, electoral malpractices and offences; we exposed the constitutional and legal impediments to free and fair elections, we provided another opportunity to the Supreme Court to influence the tortuous democratization process in Uganda;” he said.

He said that the party is disappointed by the Supreme Court’s decision that the election which is not free and fair as required by Article One of the Constitution; one that was not conducted in accordance with the law or the principles laid down in the law can be allowed to stand.

“We shall therefore, not associate ourselves with or respect this decision. This decision clearly contradicts the very essence of our constitutional order; by in particular contradicting the spirit and letter of the constitution’s first Article,” said.

As a way forward, Besigye said that his party shall vigorously fight the unfair and undemocratic political dispensation in Uganda until the essential reforms are achieved as well as organize FDC right from the grassroots, to continue to grow and become a formidable party.

“We shall vigorously mobilize all Ugandans to channel the popular discontent towards action that will weaken and dislodge the dictatorship, through all legitimate means available. We shall be calling for boycotts, peaceful demonstrations and other political and legal actions. We shall show our people how to fight for their rights in a way that black mambas and tear gas can’t harm them,” he said in a statement.

He said that since the Court also expressed grave concerns regarding the involvement of the security forces in elections, intimidation, violence ad partisan harassment; massive disenfranchisement of voters; partisan conduct of electoral officials and lack of voter education, president Museveni’s government is illegitimate.

“The election of President Museveni is illegitimate and he can only form am illegitimate government. Even at this late hour, President Museveni can still redeem himself by stepping down and allowing our country a chance to have a legitimate government,” he advised.

He said that President Museveni should look around the world and see that there is no more room for impunity and that every dictator eventually faces his day of reckoning. “They should look and see the Charles Taylors, Slobodan Milosovechs and Saddam Husseins of this world,” he said in a five page statement.