The arrest of Dr. Besigye seems to have woken up many Ugandans to Museveni’s stand on who can lead Uganda: only himself.

The Vice Chancellor for Uganda Christian University in Mukono, Rev Canon Dr. John Senyonyi has advised parents to establish a good relationship with their children.

Dr. Senyonyi said that this is because parenting can only be more enjoyable when a positive parent-child relationship is established.

He told Ultimate Media that in parenting a toddler or a teenager, good communication is the key to building self-esteem as well as mutual respect.

Dr. Senyonyi said that the relationship one has with their child determines the quality of communication with them.

The Don, who is said to be one of the successful parents in Uganda, says that children need good parental relationship with both their father and mother. “Although mothers make good boys, fathers make men,” he said to urge fathers to take necessary steps to ensure a good relationship with their children.

Senyonyi says that a relationship with a Father is the greatest influence in the moral formation of a child and that an absentee father affects the child in diverse ways. He said that involvement of fathers is important in the up bringing of a child.

Opposition leader Rtd Col. Dr. Kizza Besigye has written replying President Yoweri Museveni’s last week speech on his (Besigye’s) arrest and trial. Museveni said the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) leader created the problems resulting in his arrest for himself and that the Government can only have principled and not opportunistic resolution of the situation. In a letter dated Friday December 17, 2005, Besigye wrote from Luzira Prison where he has been remanded ans sent a copy to Ultimate Media.

“President Yoweri Museveni’s statement that appeared in The Sunday Vision of December 11, 2005 is characteristic of his dishonesty. There are many provokingly untrue and shamelessly misrepresented points. However, I will only address three of them:

1. That the NRM (read Museveni) has been firm in dealing with wrongdoers: It is an indisputable fact that under the Museveni regime, ‘wrongdoers’ are not treated equally as demanded by the Constitution. In Uganda, there are three criminal Justice systems:

• a) One for Museveni loyalists.
• b) One for the general public.
• c) One for Museveni’s political opponents, imaginary or real.

Numerous commissions of inquiry have compiled evidence and recommended prosecution of senior military, public and political leaders. The Museveni loyalists, far from being arrested and prosecuted, have been promoted and praised for ‘liberating’ our country!

On the other hand, crimes have been invented for members of the political opposition, who are promptly arrested, tortured and detained for long periods before the DPP (Director of Public Prosecutions) ‘loses interest’ in the cases. Some people have been in prison for more than five years, without trial. My wife, Winnie Byanyima, was arrested three times, and the charges were either dropped or dismissed by Court. This is Museveni’s “firmness with wrongdoers”.

2. Principled reconciliation: In Museveni’s world, “principled reconciliation” can only happen when the “wrongdoer first admits his/her mistake”. Obviously, he cannot understand that reconciliation is not about managing “wrongdoing”, but rather about managing opposed or conflicting situations towards an amicable solution. That is why reconciliation is usually managed by mediators or facilitators, who help the conflicting parties to appreciate each other’s position and to move towards a harmonious solution. Naturally, in the process of reconciliation, wrongdoing on either side may be found and accordingly managed; without losing the primary goal of creating a harmonious understanding known as ‘reconciliation’.

For that matter, the DPP, the Courts of Law and the Military Court Martial cannot be the appropriate agents for reconciliation. I advise President Museveni to seriously consider the statement by religious leaders of UJCC (Uganda Joint Christian Council) published in The Daily Monitor of December 14, 2005 and the offer they make.

3. The cases of Kizza Besigye: When I came back to Uganda to face the so-called criminal charges against me, I did not ask or expect to be treated preferentially by the justice system or by anyone in authority in respect of the charges that have been preferred against me.

I only ask, and EXPECT to be treated fairly and in accordance with the law and its due process. As a matter of fact, I rejected ‘preferential treatment’, which came in the form of an offer by President Museveni, to remove me from prison “immediately” and put me under “house arrest” at my residence.

This was partly because I thought it was irregular and inevitably shrouded with many uncertainties. I also rejected Museveni’s preferential treatment that if I should sign amnesty papers, I would immediately be discharged of all my cases, including rape! The Government of Uganda knows that I have a significant team of lawyers who would be aware of the Amnesty Law. Why then, would it be the Government, the law enforcer, pressurising me to apply for amnesty? Does President Museveni consider this a legitimate role of political leaders in handling criminal matters?

My concern and the concern of many people and organisations that have made public expressions are the following:

1. Timing and management of my cases

• i) The cases I am charged with were allegedly committed between 1997 and 2003. Until November 14, 2005, no charges against me had ever been brought before any court, this in spite of the fact that I have publicly and repeatedly demanded over the past five years that if there were any charges against me, they should be put before court and that I was prepared to face the law.

President Museveni’s letter to his Cabinet just before my return stated that “there were long-standing criminal charges that would be brought against” me if I came back, although the DPP had just denied any knowledge of impending cases against me.

• ii) The Uganda Government knew exactly where I was living in South Africa; if I was plotting to overthrow it, why wouldn’t they complain to the friendly government of South Africa. Indeed, shortly before my return to Uganda, President Museveni boasted that if his government needed me to answer any charges, they could easily ask for my extradition from South Africa. So why did he not arrange to extradite me, if I had “long-standing criminal charges” known to his government all those years?
• iii) My co-accused were arraigned in court more than a year ago. I only became part of their case on November 15, 2005. All this suggests that these cases were not managed transparently and in accordance with the established legal process.

This concern is further accentuated by the fact that I was arrested while very busy doing political work in preparation for the oncoming presidential elections. Further, every effort has been made to deny me bail.

2. Trial by Military Court Martial
Through our lawyers, we opposed trial by the Military Court Martial because:

• i) The UPDF Court Martial is not an independent and impartial court to which people have a constitutional right. It is really a service court intended to enhance discipline among errant, serving soldiers. It is therefore inherently not intended to be impartial because:
  1. It is headed by the Commander-in-Chief, who is the President.
  2. All the Court Martial members, including the prosecutor, are senior UPDF officers, appointed by the President and operating under his continuing and direct command. He deploys them, promotes them etc.
  3. It is to him that an aggrieved soldier appeals in case of delays of their trial, etc. There is therefore no way this court can be impartial to a person seeking to replace the President. Certainly, I would never willingly subject myself to the jurisdiction of the UPDF Court Martial and expect justice through it. On the other hand, I would be prepared to battle any number of charges in a civilian court.
• ii) We believe the Court Martial action was intended to defeat the ends of justice to deny us bail. This was precisely the reason for the “Black Mambas” abomination and why the High Court hearing of my bail application was delayed so that I could be charged and remanded by the Military Court Martial, first! If the military prosecutor had fresh evidence necessitating fresh charges, why couldn’t they just pass it on to the DPP to institute these further offences against me.
• iii) The Court Martial case is based on exactly the same facts as those for the treason case before the High Court. Therefore, we are being tried in two courts for the same alleged acts.
• iv) The Military Court Martial was established to regulate the discipline of soldiers, deriving authority from Article 210 of the Constitution. It is not right to try civilians who have nothing at all to do with UPDF under its court, more so, when it violates their fundamental right to appear before an independent court or tribunal.
• v) The Court Martial is not authorised to try the case of terrorism with which we have been charged in that court (that of illegal possession of firearms being an alternative charge). Section 6 of the Anti-terrorism Act, 2002 states as follows: 

  “The offense of terrorism and any other offences punishable by more than 10 years’ imprisonment under this Act are triable only by the High Court and bail in respect of those offences may be granted only by the High Court”.

  It is for those reasons that we have petitioned the Constitutional Court and High Court for appropriate action.

  President Museveni claims that the use of the Military Court Martial to try civilians has helped deal with crime since civil courts were overstretched. This assertion is an insult to Ugandans. Some people have been waiting in prison for over four years for their cases to be disposed of by the General Court Martial since 1999. From the information I have received while in prison, people who were arrested by Wembley and VCCU (Violent Crime Crack Unit) operations since 2002 are 560 people, of whom 448 have not yet been tried:

• 250 people are in Kigo Farm Prison.
• 130 people are in Luzira Upper Prison.
• 60 people are in Makindye Military Police cells.
• 98 people have been released on GCM bond after paying a bribe of between sh500,000 and sh2,500,000.
• 12 detainees have died in prisons, mainly from untreated torture injuries.
• Only 10 people have had their cases disposed of by the GCM. 

  The 440 people pending GCM trial, whose names and details I have compiled have been in prison for one to four years, yet Section 190 of the UPDF Act provides that a person triable under military law who has been detained in custody for 90 days before commencement of her/his trial shall be freed all the 440 illegally detained men have families; most with very young children.

  These families have fallen into destitution as a result of the GCM, to which the President of Uganda is happy to divert cases from civil courts. Such is President Museveni’s sense of justice!

  President Museveni is wrong. As a prisoner of conscience, I neither seek nor expect preferential treatment from him or from anybody else. I will willingly fight the political battle both politically and in the Civil Courts of Law, and I am confident that the truth will set me free, but I will never subject myself to his idea of “preferential treatment” or his dubious and impartial GCM.

  I may be imprisoned but the political issues I have raised and my resolve to fight for freedom will never be imprisoned. Let’s all work to keep hope alive.

  For God and my country.

  No UR 898/05

After today’s meeting between the Electoral Commission and the six Presidential candidates, opposition candidates in the 2006 elections have blamed the Electoral Commission for playing in favour of the incumbent, President Yoweri Museveni.

Independent candidate Dr. Chris Bwanika says by setting the election date on 23rd February, the Electoral Commission is denying the opposition candidates enough time to traverse the country and campaign.

“President Yoweri Museveni has been going around the country on tax payers money, campaigning. Now for us we have only two month to start and go through the whole country on limited funds. It is not fair. The EC should extend the election date to March 12 2005,” Bwanika told Journalists after the meeting.

The Vice President of the Forum for Democratic Change, Salaam Musumba who represented the party at today’s meeting echoed the same concerns, given the fact that their Presidential candidate, Rtd. Col. Dr. Kiiza Besigye may have to be reporting to court in some days, that is if he is ever released on bail.

Dr. Besigye appeared in Court before Justice John Bosco Katusi on Monday December 19, 2005 and the case of Treason he is alleged to have committed will come again for mention on January 5th 2006. He will however appear in Court to answer the case of alleged rape on January 2nd 2006.

Dr. Besigye who was supposed to appear in the military Court Martial at the same time did not show up there and it is not clear how his case will go on in the Court Martial, which is still holding on remand after the High Court granted him bail.

The Presidential candidates have all been given vehicles for their campaigns. The vehicles will be driven by Electoral Commission Appointed chauffeurs, a move that has had some of the candidates complaining.

The other issue candidates in Presidential and parliamentary elections are facing has to do with whether or not a member of a political party should stand for election as an independent candidate. Al Hajji Nassar NTege Ssebaggala has been threatened with suspension form the Democratic Party for deciding to stand as an independent candidate.

Democratic Party President, John Ssebaana Kizito on Saturday warned Haji Nassar Ntege Ssebaggala against using the Democratic party colours and slogans during campaigns.

Ssebaana who is standing for the national presidential seat with Ssebaggala says the party will sue Ssebaggala if he goes ahead to use DP colours of Green and White and the party motto in his campaigns.

Ssebaana told Journalists at the party’s campaign office in Kabusu, Kampala on Saturday that Ssebaggala has gone against the party constitution by deciding to stand as an independent candidate after being defeated in the party primary elections.

The issue of members of political parties standing as independents continues to raise controversy in all political parties with President Yoweri Museveni recently saying his NRM will suspend whoever stands as an independent candidate.

However, many members of political parties have vowed to contest as independents. For example, ministers who were defeated in the recently concluded NRM party primary elections met on Thursday in a meeting chaired by Samson Mayende (Minister of State for Higher Education) and the majority agreed to go ahead and compete as MPs in their constituencies despite the president’s directive.

Public Servants warned on partisan politics

Many of the candidates will have to do their campaigns without the legal active support of civil servants. The Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Local Government, Vincent Sekono has warned public servants in the local governments (districts) to desist from engaging in partisan politics following the launch of campaigns for the 2006 elections.

Sekono was on Saturday speaking during a workshop for urban local authorities at Hotel Equatoria in Kampala.

He says that all local government public servants should demonstrate utmost neutrality in the coming elections and ensure that the political ground is level for all those competing in elections. Sekono says public servants are required by law to remain non- partisan and to promote the rights and freedom of all Ugandans through their service.

He also warns public servants against implementing politically motivated policies as passed by Local Councils, since the law will punish the public servants as implementers in case the policies are partisan and abuse rights of some Ugandans.

Army promises not to be partisan

The Chief of Uganda People’s Defense Forces has said that all members of security agencies are going to remain neutral in the elections. He says that no member of the armed forces is supposed to hold a party card or campaign for a political party

Meanwhile, Bwanika has said he has the best manifesto to lead Uganda out of the persistent poverty that is affecting the majority of Ugandans.

In an interview with Ultimate Media on Saturday, Bwanika who is standing as an independent candidate said that his candidature is centered on development issues.

Bwanika says that while some of the Presidential candidates are promising to get Ugandans jobs abroad, he wants to make Uganda a global work station where a lot of work for other countries is done in Uganda thereby generating employment.

Bwanika who says he will officially launch his campaign on Tuesday in Rakai says that if elected President, he will spend a bigger percentage of the national budget on Agriculture, which employs more than 80 percent of Ugandans.

He says this will make Uganda a global food basket. Bwanika says he will also make Uganda a global tourist centre and enable Uganda to take advantage of being in the middle of the Great lakes Region by making the country the hub of economic activity supplying mostly demanded goods and services in the region. Dr. Bwanika holds a Masters degree in veterinary medicine and has been a lecturer at Makerere University. He left last year and started his own consultancy farm. He is also a pastor.

Dr. Besigye can be nominated, but only in person. He is required to appear in Namboole stadium on Wednesday December 14, 2005 and be nominated, and not nomination papers to be taken to him in Luzira Prison for signing as his party had asked.

Uganda’s leading opposition party, Forum for Democratic Change has vowed to take the government to Courts of Law if their jailed President, Col. Dr. Kizza Besigye is denied a chance to get nominated and contest for the national Presidency in the 2006 elections.

This follows a letter by the Attorney General, Prof. Kiddu Makubuya advising the government, and the Electoral Commission in particular, to stop the nomination of Dr. Besigye because he has been arrested for links with “serious crimes”. The Attorney General, who is the government’s chief legal advisor, wrote a letter saying Dr. Besigye should not be nominated since he has been arrested for links with PRA and Kony rebels and he (Dr. Besigye) has refused to categorically renounce rebellion. Prof. Makubuya argues that although Besigye has denied any links with the rebels groups, it will be bad for the country if he is nominated and the Courts later find him guilty of the crimes of treason, misprision of treason and rape that Dr. Besigye is alleged to have committed.

Prof. Ogenga Latigo, FDC’s Deputy President says that Dr. Besigye cannot be stopped from contesting in elections since he hasn’t been convicted of any crime. He says they will sue the government if the advice of the Attorney General to stop Dr. Besigye from getting nominated is followed. Prof. Latigo says that they are going to do everything possible to ensure that Dr. Besigye is nominated as scheduled on December 14th 2005.

Prof. Latigo says the government is treating Dr. Besigye as if he is guilty before trying him, yet the national laws provide that everyone is innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. He says that the cases against Dr. Besigye are fabricated and aimed at stopping him from contesting for the presidency.

There are worries that this twist of not allowing Dr. Besigye to be nominated is bound to make the already contentious political transition period more volatile and may divide the country in many ways than can be imagined.

One of Besigye’s lawyers, Yusuf Nsibambi on Saturday told an FDC rally at the Clock Tower in the Ugandan capital, Kampala that they were considering petitioning the High Court to stop nominations and elections if Dr. Besigye is not nominated.

FDC refuses to elect new presidential Candidate.

Despite pressure from the government and some of the members of FDC stemming from the unlikely timely release of Dr. Besigye, the party’s top brass has vowed not to name another Presidential candidate. According to an opinion poll by The New Vision, the government owned daily and leading newspaper in Uganda, if elections were held today, Dr. Besigye’s FDC would win by 42% of the vote followed by NRM (ruling government) with 33%, UPC 10%, Democratic party 9% and the rest of the parties sharing the remainder. All parties have however refused these figures, all including FDC, saying the poll underestimated their real support in the electorate.

Dr. Besigye’s bail more uncertain than ever.

Any hopes of Dr. Besigye being released even on bail were dashed Monday December 12, 2005 morning when High Court Judge Remmy Kasule ruled that Besigye’s bail application, including that in the Military Court Martial, will be decided after the Constitutional Court pronounces itself on the case.

Dr. Besigye’s lawyers petitioned the Constitutional Court asking it to clarify whether the Military Court Martial has jurisdiction to try Dr. Besigye since he is not an army officer and whether it is legal for Besigye to be tried in two different courts for crimes based on the same or related allegations.

Dr. Besigye was arrested and charged with Treason, Misprisions of Treason and Rape by the High Court. He is alleged to have raped Joanita Kyakuwa in 1997. Though this is a capital offence, it has not generated much attention partly because of the length of time the alleged victim has taken to report the alleged crime, and the fact that it was brought on the same day Dr. Besigye was being charged with treason.

The day when his bail application was heard and granted, the Military Court Martial based at Makindye, East of Kampala also charged him with terrorism and possession of illegal arms basing on the same charge sheets in the High Court. The Court Martial remanded Besigye and set Monday December 19th 2005 at 9:00am local time when his case will come up for mention.

Dr. Besigye due for trial in two different courts same day, same time.

However, the High Court today also announced that Dr. Besigye’s case of Treason, Misprision of treason and rape charges will be heard on Monday December 19, 2005 at 9:00am before Justice John Bosco Katiusi. It is not clear which Court Dr. Besigye will go to first on in which particular court he will be tried.

High Court Judge Remmy Kasule today re-stated his earlier halting of Besigye’s Trial in the Military Court Martial but the Military Court Martial chaired by Gen. Elly Tumwine says they have the same jurisdiction as the High Court and cannot therefore be ordered by the High Court. The Constitutional Court has however ruled that the Military Court Martial is a constituent Court of the High Court of Uganda.

Electoral Commission decides Besigye should be nominated in person.

The EC Secretary, Sam Rwakoojo says that after considering the advice given to the commission by the Attorney General and Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, Prof. Kiddu Makubuya, and that given by Minister of State for Constitutional Affairs, Adolf Mwesigye, the EC has decided that Dr. Besigye can be nominated, but only in person. He is required to appear in Namboole stadium on Wednesday December 14, 2005 and be nominated, and not nomination papers to be taken to him in Luzira Prison for signing as his party had asked. It is not clear whether Dr. Besigye can or will be allowed by authorities to go and be nominated from Prison where he has been remanded by the Military Court Martial. The fact that two government ministers gave varying views on Besigye’s nomination has not helped matters.

Adolf Mwesigye wrote to the EC advising them that he did not see any problem with allowing Besigye to be nominated as a candidate in the 2006 elections since he has not been convicted of any crime and is not serving a sentence of any court in Uganda. Then, a few days later, Prof. Makubuya wrote to the Commission advising it not to allow Dr. Besigye to be nominated.

This is expected to have been a hard decision for the EC as there is equal pressure from the government, the opposition and the donor community on Dr. Besigye’s candidature in the forthcoming presidential elections with some sections insisting he should not be allowed to be nominated and others saying he must be nominated.

Government urged to respect rights of all.

Meanwhile, the National Coordinator of the Human Rights Network, Mohamed Ndifuna has called upon the government to fulfill its obligation to respect, protect, defend and promote the basic rights and freedoms of all the people of Uganda. He was speaking on Saturday at a function to mark the end of the international human rights week at the Constitutional Square in Kampala.

The human rights week in Uganda, which started on December 5th, was held under the theme “upholding human rights during the political transition”.

Ndifuna says that as Uganda transits from the movement to multi-party politics, many parts of the legal framework are not in line with the new political environment and are open to abuse.

He says there is strong patronage of institutions of the government to the extent that many of the institutions remain accountable to current regime rather than the democratic institutions of the government like Parliament and Courts of law.

He says many people’s rights and freedom have as a result been trampled upon and he called on the government to respect and to protect the rights of all Ugandans.

A peaceful end to the war in northern Uganda may still be a dream even after the Lords Resistance Army rebels offered a ceasefire and to talk peace with the government last week.

The Deputy Commander of the Lords Resistance Army Vincent Otti speaking by telephone on a talk show on K-fm, a Kampala based radio station, on Friday December 2nd said that the LRA was ready for renewed peace talks with the government to end the war.

However, the district Chairmen of Gulu, Kitgum and Pader districts on Monday morning scoffed at offers by the LRA to have another round of peace talks with the government.

Col Walter Ochola from Gulu, Edwin Komakech from Pader and Nathan Odwe from Kitgum have said that the rebels are just buying time to reorganize themselves.

The districts of Gulu, Pader and Kitgum are the most affected by the 19-year war in northern Uganda which has claimed many lives and left over 1.6 million people displaced.

“My self I have spent a lot of money by sending airtime to Otti when ever he expresses interest in talks but he turns around and uses the same airtime to co-ordinate ambushes on innocent people,” Ochola said.

Addressing journalists in Kampala on Monday December 5th, Ochola said that Otti and Kony are not interested in talking peace because they have been committing atrocities on their own people.

“Otti is in Congo where he wants to establish a base and make attacks again, which indicates that he is not interested in talking peace,” he added.

Kitgum district chairman Nathan Odwe said that the rebels are not serious since they have wasted several offers for peace talks with the government even after government assured them that it would meet their demands.

“This is a ploy used by the rebels to escape fire when ever they are cornered by government forces but they are small in number only making a few attacks here and there to threaten that they are a strong group,” Odwe said. “When they start asking for peace talks that is one way by which remnants who are dispersed regroup and start to reorganizing to look for food, raiding villages and camps.”

He added that the government has given the rebels various attempts to peace supported by chief peace broker, Betty Bigombe but the rebels have failed to be serious with what they say.

Pader district chairman Edwin Yakobo Komakech re-echoed the concerns, saying that these attempts will not succeed owing to past experience where the rebels failed to agree with government.

He says that despite the opportunities of even fronting the destination for the talks the rebels are playing tricks to free themselves from the International Criminal Court charges and arrest warrants issued for them.

Such pronouncements by the top leaders of the three districts are bound to make a new quest for a peaceful end to the more difficult.

Cut aid given to northern Uganda
Meanwhile Northern Uganda will benefit from the six million euros of aid, which was cut off from the Uganda government by the Dutch government.

The media this weekend in Kampala reported that the Dutch government had cut off aid amounting to six million euros to Uganda citing some governance issues.

Aid cut which is a sign of no confidence in the government had raised eyebrows of many Ugandans especially those in poverty stricken areas like northern Uganda.

The chairperson Gulu District Col. Walter Ochola says that he has received communication from the Dutch government that the funds will be used to facilitate humanitarian work in the north through the UN humanitarian support programs.

“We should not worry because the money is still around our country; the latest letter I received from the Dutch embassy indicated to me that the aid will be re-channeled to northern Uganda,” Ochola said during Monday’s media briefing.

If Ugandans have been wondering why the government is levying more and higher taxes, a new report will tell them that Uganda is just among other African countries that have been found to levy the highest business taxes in the world.

These taxes have been found to have adverse effects on disadvantaged members of society, especially women as consumers and as small-scale entrepreneurs.

Apart from traders’ complaints of increased import taxes and regulations under the East African Customs Union, many Ugandans are burning under a regime of increased airtime, fuel and license taxes, which have led to increase in prices of many products.

The Doing Business in 2006: Creating Jobs report shows that such high taxes are behind the high youth unemployment rates. Simeon Djankov, Manager, Monitoring, Analysis and Policy Unit at the World Bank, is the lead author of the report.

The report released by the World Bank Group in mid September 2005 shows that on average, 62 percent of gross profits in many African countries are taxed away. These high taxes create incentives to evade, driving many firms into the underground economy, and do not translate to higher revenues for governments.

For example, business taxes in Mauritania are so high that evading 20 percent of them would increase a company’s gross profit by as much as 60 percent.

As if that is not enough, the report says that many African nations continue to thwart small and medium businesses with heavy legal burdens and piecemeal reforms, which complicate doing business. This finding compares with the performance of Eastern Europe, the fastest reforming region in the world, which is aggressively courting entrepreneurs with far-reaching reforms that streamline business regulations and taxes.

The report cosponsored by the World Bank and the International Finance Corporation, the private sector arm of the World Bank Group, finds that such reforms, while often simple, can create many new jobs.

“Jobs are a priority for every country, and especially the poorest countries. Doing more to improve regulation and help entrepreneurs is key to creating more jobs–and more growth. It is also a key to fighting poverty. Women, who make up three quarters of the work force in some developing economies, will be big beneficiaries. So will young people looking for their first job. The past year’s diverse range of successful reformers – from Serbia to Rwanda – are showing the way forward. We can all learn from their experience,” a news release sent to us quotes Paul Wolfowitz, President of the World Bank Group as saying.

The annual report, which for the first time provides a global ranking of 155 nations on key business regulations and reforms, finds that African nations impose the most regulatory obstacles on entrepreneurs and have been the slowest reformers over the past year. Meanwhile, every country in Eastern Europe improved at least one aspect of the business environment.

“Many African countries that desperately need new enterprises and jobs risk falling even further behind other countries that are simplifying regulation and making their investment climates more business friendly,” said Michael Klein, World Bank/IFC Vice President for Private Sector Development and IFC Chief Economist.

The report tracks a set of regulatory indicators related to business startup, operation, trade, payment of taxes, and closure by measuring the time and cost associated with various government requirements. It does not track variables such as macroeconomic policy, quality of infrastructure, currency volatility, investor perceptions, or crime rates.

What the report does show is how easy it is to do business in a particular country. For example, an entrepreneur in Mozambique must undergo 14 separate procedures taking 153 days to register a new business. In Sierra Leone, if all business taxes were paid, they would eat up 164 percent of a company’s gross profits. In Burundi, it takes 55 signatures and 124 days from the time imported goods arrive in ports until they reach the factory gate. Uganda is not among those countries reviewed in the report.

Overall, European nations were the most active in enacting reforms. The top 12 reformers in the past year, in order, were Serbia and Montenegro, Georgia, Vietnam, Slovakia, Germany, Egypt, Finland, Romania, Latvia, Pakistan, Rwanda, and the Netherlands.

However, the authors of the study did note exceptions in Africa. Rwanda is among the biggest reformers in the past year, with reforms of the courts, customs procedures, and upgrading the credit registry. Mauritius also reformed in several areas and is among the countries with the most business-friendly conditions, as is South Africa. Yet for every three African countries that improved business regulations, another one made them more costly.

Some of the reforms in African countries in the past year:

• Mozambique cut the property transfer tax from 10 to 2.4 percent of the property value, the largest cost reduction in the world.
• Kenya and Mauritius improved credit information sharing by amending their banking acts. This makes it easier for lenders to evaluate creditworthiness.
• Ghana, Senegal, and Tanzania revamped their tax codes and eased tax burdens on businesses.
• Rwanda abolished mandatory pre-shipment inspections. Cameroon set time limits on going through customs, reducing delays. Mauritius introduced risk analysis for inspections, also reducing delays at the customs office.
• In Mauritania, the Nouakchott port now operates around the clock, compared with only 60 hours a week previously.
• Burundi introduced a new summary procedure for debt recovery and allowed private bailiffs to operate, reducing delays in the courts.
• Rwanda created specialized court chambers for business and tax matters, reducing court delays.

Not all reforms were business-friendly:

• Madagascar increased the minimum capital requirement for starting a new business to $5,350, or 25 times the average annual income.
• Chad increased notary fees, and transfer and registration taxes to raise the total cost of registering property from an already steep 17 percent to 22 percent of the property value.

Doing Business in 2006 updates the work of last year’s report in seven sets of business environment indicators: starting a business, hiring and firing workers, enforcing contracts, registering property, getting credit, protecting investors, and closing a business. It expands the research to 155 countries and adds three new indicators, dealing with business licenses, trading across borders, and paying taxes.

The World Bank statement says the new indicators in this year’s report further reinforce the overwhelming need for reform, especially in poor countries like Uganda.

The report also shows that reforming the administrative costs of trading can remove significant obstacles to exporting and importing. Contrary to popular belief, customs paperwork and other red tape (often called “soft infrastructure”) cause the most delays for exporting and importing firms. Less than a quarter of the delays are caused by problems with “hard infrastructure” such as poor ports or roads.

“In Ethiopia, exporters have to get 33 signatures before their goods reach the port of exit. For manufacturers in Africa, the administrative burdens of trading can pose larger costs than tariffs and quotas. In Nigeria, for example, administrative costs can account for as much as 18 percent of the value of exports,” the report says.

The top 30 economies in the world in terms of the report’s ease-of-doing-business index, in order, are New Zealand, Singapore, the United States, Canada, Norway, Australia, Hong Kong/China, Denmark, the United Kingdom, Japan, Ireland, Iceland, Finland, Sweden, Lithuania, Estonia, Switzerland, Belgium, Germany, Thailand, Malaysia, Puerto Rico, Mauritius, the Netherlands, Chile, Latvia, Korea, South Africa, Israel, and Spain.

Other African countries with high ranks are Namibia (33), Botswana (40), Zambia (67) and Kenya (68). Nine of the 10 countries with lowest rank on this report’s ease-of-doing-business indicators are African: the Democratic Republic of Congo, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Chad, Sudan, Niger, Togo, Congo Republic, and Mali.

The report notes that all the top countries regulate businesses, but they do so in less costly and burdensome ways. The Nordic countries, all of which are on the top 30 list, do not regulate too little. Instead, they have simple regulations that allow businesses to be productive and focus intervention where it counts—protecting property rights and providing social services.

Just 8 percent of economic activity in Nordic countries occurs in unregistered (informal sector) businesses. The reason is that regulations are simple to comply with and businesses receive excellent public services for what they pay in taxes. For example, Denmark has the world’s best infrastructure. Norway ranks highest on human development indicators, with Sweden right behind it.

“In the Nordic countries, as well as the other top 30, reformers do not have to choose between making it easy to do business and providing social protection. They can do both,” said Simeon Djankov, an author of the report.

The Doing Business project is based on the efforts of more than 3,500 local experts – business consultants, lawyers, accountants, government officials, and leading academics around the world, who provided methodological support and review.