Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
WHAT IS FHRI?
WHAT IS FHRI?
(FHRI) is an independent, non-governmental, non-partisan and
(FHRI) is an independent, non-governmental, non-partisan and
VISION
VISION
A human rights
and civic culture as a foundation for peace, stability,
A social
humanjustice
rightsand
andsustainable
civic culture
as a foundation
for peace, stability,
democracy,
development
in Uganda.
democracy, social justice and sustainable development in Uganda.
MISSION
MISSION
To enhance
respect and observance of human rights practices and
Topromote
enhancebest
respect
and observance
of human
rights practices and
civic values,
practices
through training
education,
civic values,
promote
best practices
through training education,
research, advocacy,
ICTs
and strategic
partnerships.
research, advocacy, ICTs and strategic partnerships.
MANDATE
MANDATE
To promote
respect for human rights and civic values
To citizens
promotewith
respect
for human
rights and civic values
To empower
human
rights knowledge
To
empower
citizens
with
human
rights knowledge
and skills to demand defend their rights
and
to demand
defend policy
their rights
To advocate
forskills
human
rights-friendly
and legislative
To
advocate
for
human
rights-friendly
policy and legislative
framework that can foster respect for human dignity.
framework that can foster respect for human dignity.
CORE VALUES
VALUES
Equal CORE
opportunity
Equal
Result-oriented opportunity
Result-oriented
Team work
Team work
Excellence
Excellence
Timeliness
Timeliness
June
2016
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This
report
is
a
publication
of
the
Foundation
for
Human
Rights
Initiative
(FHRI).
FHRI
is
an
independent,
non-governmental,
non-partisan
and
not-for-profit
human
rights
advocacy
organisation.
The
organisation
seeks
to
enhance
knowledge,
respect
and
observance
of
human
rights,
and
promote
exchange
of
information
and
best
practices
through
training,
education,
research,
legislative
advocacy
and
strategic
partnerships.
This
report
was
made
possible
through
the
contributions
of
several
individuals,
groups
and
government
institutions
who
provided
information
to
our
research
team.
These
contributions
include
but
are
not
limited
to:
government
officials,
civil
society
organisations,
academia
and
the
media.
We
are
most
grateful
to
the
Democratic
Governance
Facility
(DGF)
and
UN
Office
of
the
High
Commissioner
for
Human
Rights
(OHCHR)
without
whose
support
the
publication
of
this
report
would
not
have
been
possible.
They
are,
however,
in
no
way
responsible
for
the
accuracy
or
content
of
this
report.
PROJECT
TEAM
Author:
Ms
Lizet
Vlamings
Research
team:
Ms
Faridah
Lule
Ms
Josephine
Kankunda
Mr
Rashid
Bunya
Editor:
Dr
Livingstone
Sewanyana
CONTENTS
CONTENTS
ACRONYMS
........................................................................................................................................
4
SUMMARY
..........................................................................................................................................
5
KEY
FINDINGS
.....................................................................................................................................................
5
RECOMMENDATIONS
.........................................................................................................................................
7
METHODOLOGY
...............................................................................................................................
9
BACKGROUND
...............................................................................................................................
10
CHAPTER
ONE:
RIGHT
TO
VOTE
..............................................................................................
13
1.1
INTRODUCTION
....................................................................................................................................
14
1.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
............................................................................................................................
14
1.3
THE
RIGHT
TO
VOTE
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
........................................................
15
1.4
CONCLUSION
.........................................................................................................................................
25
CHAPTER
TWO:
RIGHT
TO
FREEDOM
OF
EXPRESSION
...................................................
26
2.1
INTRODUCTION
....................................................................................................................................
27
2.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
............................................................................................................................
27
2.3
FREEDOM
OF
EXPRESSION
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
.............................................
29
2.4
ACCESS
TO
INFORMATION
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
..............................................
38
2.5
CONCLUSION
.........................................................................................................................................
41
CHAPTER
THREE:
RIGHT
TO
FREEDOM
OF
PEACEFUL
ASSEMBLY
..............................
43
3.1
INTRODUCTION
....................................................................................................................................
44
3.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
............................................................................................................................
44
3.3
FREEDOM
OF
ASSEMBLY
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
.................................................
45
3.4
CONCLUSION
.........................................................................................................................................
54
CHAPTER
FOUR:
RIGHT
TO
LIFE
.............................................................................................
55
4.1
INTRODUCTION
....................................................................................................................................
56
4.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
............................................................................................................................
56
4.3
RIGHT
TO
LIFE
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
..................................................................
56
4.4
CONCLUSION
.........................................................................................................................................
59
CHAPTER
FIVE:
RIGHT
TO
LIBERTY
AND
SECURITY
OF
THE
PERSON
.......................
60
5.1
INTRODUCTION
....................................................................................................................................
61
5.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
............................................................................................................................
61
5.3
RIGHT
TO
LIBERTY
AND
SECURITY
OF
THE
PERSON
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
..
61
5.4
CONCLUSION
.........................................................................................................................................
70
CHAPTER
SIX:
ELECTORAL
VIOLENCE
...................................................................................
71
6.1
INTRODUCTION
....................................................................................................................................
72
6.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
............................................................................................................................
72
6.3
ELECTION
VIOLENCE
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
.......................................................
73
6.4
CONCLUSION
.........................................................................................................................................
82
CHAPTER
SEVEN:
ACCESS
TO
JUSTICE
...................................................................................
83
7.1
INTRODUCTION
....................................................................................................................................
84
7.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
............................................................................................................................
84
7.3
ACCESS
TO
JUSTICE
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
..........................................................
85
7.4
CONCLUSION
.........................................................................................................................................
90
CHAPTER
EIGHT:
CONCLUSION
AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
...........................................
91
8.1
CONCLUSION
.........................................................................................................................................
92
8.2
RECOMMENDATIONS
...........................................................................................................................
92
ACRONYMS
ACME
AIGP
CCEDU
CEO
CEON-U
DP
DPC
DR
EC
ED
EU
EU
EOM
FDC
FHRI
DISO
GISO
HRNJ-U
ICCPR
IGP
ISO
LDU
MP
NIR
NRM
NVR
OHCHR
POMA
PWDs
RDC
SPC
UBC
UCC
UDHR
UHRC
UPDF
UPF
UK
UN
WLEDE
ACRONYMS
4
HUMAN
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
A CALL FOR ACTION
SUMMARY
SUMMARY
This
report
presents
the
findings
of
an
8
months
inquiry
carried
out
by
the
Foundation
for
Human
Rights
Initiative
(FHRI)
into
the
human
rights
situation
during
the
2016
election
period
in
Uganda.
This
report
analyses
the
legal
framework
in
place
to
protect
and
promote
human
rights
related
to
the
conduct
of
elections
and
participation
in
public
affairs;
it
documents
human
rights
violations
throughout
the
2016
election
period
from
the
start
of
the
campaign
period
in
October
2015
up
to
May
2016,
thereby
covering
the
pre-,
during,
and
post-election
environment;
and
provides
a
comparative
analysis
with
the
human
rights
situation
during
the
general
elections
held
in
2006
and
2011.
This
report
focuses
on
the
rights
to
vote
and
to
participate
in
public
affairs,
freedoms
of
expression
and
assembly,
the
right
to
life,
liberty
and
security
of
the
person,
and
access
to
justice.
Uganda
is
party
to
several
key
international
and
regional
human
rights
instruments
that
safeguard
these
rights,
most
notably
the
International
Covenant
on
Civil
and
Political
Rights
and
the
African
Charter
on
Human
and
Peoples
Rights.
These
instruments
have
been
domesticated
in
the
Constitution
of
the
Republic
of
Uganda,
1995.
While
in
theory
the
government
seems
committed
to
protecting
and
promoting
civil
and
political
rights,
in
practice,
a
lack
of
procedural
safeguards
and
political
will
to
protect
and
promote
these
rights
has
resulted
in
a
narrowing
of
civic
space
and
meaningful
citizen
participation.
KEY FINDINGS
Right
to
vote
The
2016
elections
were
replete
with
disenfranchisement
of
voters,
most
notably
due
to
late
delivery
of
polling
materials
in
Kampala
and
Wakiso
districts,
and
disenfranchisement
of
potential
voters
including
persons
who
turned
18
between
May
2015
and
February
2016,
detainees
and
Ugandans
in
the
diaspora.
The
right
to
vote
was
furthermore
infringed
upon
by
alleged
widespread
voter
bribery,
multiple
voting,
stuffing
of
ballot
boxes
with
pre-ticked
ballots
and
altering
of
results.
Freedom
of
expression
Space
for
the
media
to
operate
freely
was
restricted
with
an
increasing
number
of
attacks
on
journalists
during
the
2016
election
period
over
100
reported
cases
between
October
2015
and
February
2016,
primarily
at
the
hands
of
the
Uganda
Police
Force
(UPF).
The
freedom
of
the
media
was
further
restricted
by
the
closure
of
a
number
of
radio
stations,
including
Mbarara-based
Endigyito
Radio
on
21st
January
2016
two
days
after
hosting
Go
Forward
presidential
candidate
Amama
Mbabazi;
interference
by
state
institutions
in
the
programming
of
some
broadcasters,
including
the
Monitor
Publications
being
taken
to
the
Media
Council
by
the
President
for
printing
a
photo
depicting
Besigye
with
larger
crowds
than
President
Museveni;
arrests
of
social
media
critics
such
as
Charles
Rwomushana
and
Robert
Shaka;
the
shutdown
of
social
media
on
Election
Day
and
during
the
swearing
in
of
President
Museveni
on
12th
May
2016;
and
a
ban
on
all
live
media
coverage
of
FDCs
defiance
campaign
activities.
Access
to
information,
despite
commendable
initiatives
being
introduced,
also
remains
wanting.
Adequate
access
to
information
on
all
candidates
and
party
manifestos
was
difficult
to
obtain
for
voters
due
to
unequal
media
coverage,
with
the
NRM
and
to
a
lesser
extent
FDC
and
Go
Forward
receiving
the
largest
share
(40%
in
the
major
newspapers
and
46%
on
television).
In
addition,
information
on
the
election
process,
and
in
particular
the
election
results,
was
not
made
accessible
to
the
public
in
a
sufficiently
transparent
manner
to
enjoy
the
confidence
of
the
electorate.
Freedom
of
assembly
During
the
consultation
meetings
in
the
pre-campaign
period,
the
right
to
freedom
of
assembly
was
severely
restricted,
most
notably
the
arrest
of
presidential
candidate
Amama
Mbabazi
en
route
to
Mbale
on
9th
July
2015,
which
the
Supreme
Court
called
unjustified,
highhanded
and
contrary
to
the
Presidential
Elections
Act
in
its
ruling
of
the
Presidential
Election
Petition,
No.
1
of
2016.
The
freedom
of
assembly
was
more
protected
during
the
campaign
period
to
the
extent
that
presidential
and
parliamentary
candidates
were
largely
able
to
organize
campaign
rallies
peacefully.
However,
widespread
intimidation
and
interference
at
opposition
rallies
was
recorded,
with
NRM
members
and/or
supporters
reportedly
disrupting
opposition
campaign
rallies
on
several
occasions,
such
as
in
Ntungamo,
Fort
Portal,
Mukono,
Hoima,
Iganga
and
Serere
districts.
The
interference
in
the
campaigns
of
opposition
members
affected
their
ability
to
market
their
manifestos
and
ideas
effectively.
In
the
post-election
environment
the
freedom
of
assembly
was
further
restricted,
following
an
interim
order
issued
by
Deputy
Chief
Justice
Stephen
Kavuma
on
29th
April
2016,
banning
all
demonstrations,
processions
or
other
public
meetings
known
to
be
part
of
FDCs
defiance
campaign.
Right
to
life
Excessive
use
of
force
by
security
officers
continues
to
result
in
incidental
loss
of
life.
At
least
three
persons
died
as
a
result
of
excessive
use
of
force
by
security
forces,
in
Kampala,
Iganga
and
Kasese.
The
violence
and
loss
of
life
in
the
days
before
Election
Day,
undoubtedly
contributed
to
an
environment
of
fear.
Despite
statements
by
police
that
lethal
crowd
control
methods
are
only
used
as
a
last
resort,
too
often
does
the
police
resort
to
live
bullets
to
disperse
public
gatherings.
Right
to
liberty
and
security
of
the
person
The
right
to
liberty
and
security
of
the
person
seems
to
be
increasingly
curtailed
with
police
overzealously
arresting
persons
under
the
guise
of
public
order
management,
and
later
releasing
them,
often
without
charges.
That
this
often
happens
to
opposition
members
and/or
supporters
or
journalists
covering
opposition
activities
casts
further
doubt
on
the
appropriateness
and
lawfulness
of
these
arrests.
The
most
blatant
violation
of
the
right
to
liberty
during
the
2016
election
period
was
the
preventive
detention
of
presidential
candidate
Dr
Kizza
Besigye
at
his
home
for
43
days
between
19th
February
and
1st
April
2016,
and
again
in
the
days
prior
to
the
swearing
in
of
President
Museveni
on
12th
May
2016.
Despite
police
arguing
that
they
were
only
monitoring
his
movements,
Dr
Besigye
argued
differently,
not
being
allowed
to
leave
his
home
and
only
being
able
to
receive
visitors
after
approval
from
police,
which
tantamounts
to
preventive
detention.
Electoral
violence
Mistrust
of
the
citizens
in
the
election
process
and
between
citizens
and
security
forces,
has
led
to
increased
tensions
and
incidences
of
violence
in
the
2016
election
period.
The
passing
out
of
an
estimated
11
million
crime
preventers
(approximately
256
times
the
size
of
the
UPF)
shortly
before
the
elections
fuelled
this
environment
of
mistrust
and
possible
violence
further.
The
timing
of
the
mass
recruitment
of
crime
preventers
was
highly
suspicious,
especially
since
no
adequate
regulatory
framework
had
been
set
up
yet.
Though,
the
anticipated
large-scale
violence
did
not
materialize
during
or
immediately
following
the
election
period.
Access
to
justice
A
lack
of
confidence
in
the
complaints
desk
of
the
Electoral
Commission
(EC)
and
the
absence
of
a
time
frame
within
which
the
EC
must
handle
complaints,
hampered
timely
and
adequate
access
to
justice
for
electoral
related
disputes.
Access
to
justice
by
way
of
a
6
presidential
election
petition
lodged
at
the
Supreme
Court
was
also
hampered
by
several
factors,
most
notably
insufficient
time
for
the
petitioners
to
collect
evidence
and
the
inability
of
the
Supreme
Court
to
adequately
inquire
into
the
alleged
electoral
irregularities.
The
alleged
theft
of
the
petitioners
evidence
in
the
Presidential
Election
Petition
No.
1
of
2016
and
alleged
arrests
and
intimidation
of
witnesses
is
likely
to
lead
to
increased
fear
of
persons
to
swear
affidavits
in
support
of
future
election
petitions,
thereby
further
hampering
possibilities
of
effective
access
to
justice.
RECOMMENDATIONS
To
the
government:
1. Introduce
comprehensive
electoral
and
political
reforms
to
strengthen
the
electoral
laws
in
Uganda
necessary
for
the
holding
of
free
and
fair
elections
that
would
garner
the
trust
of
the
ordinary
citizen.
2. Investigate
the
root
causes
of
the
recurrent
violence
and
killings
in
the
Rwenzori
region
with
a
view
to
devising
a
lasting
solution.
3. Respect
and
uphold
the
independence
and
impartiality
of
the
other
arms
of
government
and
constitutional
institutions
such
as
the
Electoral
Commission
and
Uganda
Communications
Commission.
To
Parliament:
1. Amend
S.
15
of
the
Electoral
Commission
Act,
Cap.
140
to
introduce
a
time
limit
within
which
the
Electoral
Commission
must
resolve
complaints.
2. Amend
Article
104(2)
and
(3)
of
the
Constitution
of
the
Republic
of
Uganda,
1995
(as
amended
in
2005)
and
S.
59
(2)
and
(3)
of
the
Electoral
Commission
Act,
Cap.
140
to
extend
the
time
for
lodging
an
election
petition
from
10
to
30
days
and
for
the
Supreme
Court
to
determine
the
petition
at
least
60
days
after
the
declaration
of
results.
3. Amend
S.
19(1)(b)
of
the
Electoral
Commission
Act,
Cap.
140
to
allow
persons
below
18
years
to
register
for
the
National
Voters
Register,
provided
the
person
turns
18
before
Election
Day.
4. Amend
the
electoral
laws
to
make
provisions
for
persons
in
detention,
particularly
those
in
pre-trial
detention,
and
Ugandans
in
the
diaspora
to
exercise
their
right
to
vote.
To
the
Electoral
Commission:
1. Ensure
timely
delivery
of
voting
materials
to
all
polling
stations
nationwide.
2. Ensure
transparency
at
every
stage
of
the
electoral
process,
including
recruitment
and
training
of
election
officials,
resolution
of
disputes,
distribution
of
materials,
counting
and
tallying
of
ballots
and
declaration
of
results.
3. Ensure
adequate
and
timely
disposal
of
electoral
complaints
in
a
transparent
manner.
To
the
Uganda
Police
Force:
1. Refrain
from
selective
implementation
of
the
Public
Order
Management
Act,
2013
and
instead
regulate
and
facilitate
the
enjoyment
of
the
right
to
freedom
of
peaceful
assembly
in
accordance
with
Article
29(1)(d)
of
the
Constitution
of
the
Republic
of
Uganda,
1995.
2. Refrain
from
using
excessive
force
in
regulating
public
gatherings
and
effecting
arrests,
and
ensure
that
police
officers
are
equipped
with
sufficient
non-lethal
crowd
control
equipment
such
as
rubber
bullets
and
tear
gas,
but
even
these
should
only
be
applied
proportionately
and
only
when
absolutely
necessary.
3. Ensure
accountability
for
all
police
officers
involved
in
human
rights
violations
and
partisan
behaviour
recorded
during
the
election
period.
7 7
4. Provide
for
the
regulatory
framework
for
crime
preventers,
in
particular
relating
to
their
recruitment,
training,
mandate
and
accountability.
To
the
Directorate
of
Public
Prosecutions:
1. Prosecute
all
persons
suspected
to
have
committed
electoral
offences
to
curb
impunity
of
perpetrators
and
electoral
malpractices.
2. Prosecute
all
security
officers
involved
in
human
rights
violations
including
but
not
limited
to
excessive
use
of
force,
extrajudicial
killings,
and
arbitrary
arrests.
To
the
Uganda
Communications
Commission:
1. Respect
and
promote
the
freedom
of
expression
in
Uganda,
avoiding
arbitrary
closure
of
social
media.
2. Enable
a
conducive
environment
for
the
media
to
operate
free
from
intimidation
and
harassment,
refraining
from
arbitrary
closure
of
media
houses
or
threats
to
withdraw
licences.
To
the
judiciary:
1. Uphold
the
independence
of
the
judiciary,
avoiding
issuing
arbitrary
orders
that
undermine
the
rule
of
law.
To
all
political
players:
1. Desist
from
engaging
in
the
commercialisation
of
politics
characterised
by
malpractices
such
as
voter
bribery,
stuffing
ballot
boxes
with
pre-ticked
ballots
and
altering
of
results,
among
others.
To
the
media:
1. Ensure
equal
media
coverage
of
all
candidates,
ruling
party
and
opposition
alike.
To
the
general
public:
1. Refrain
from
engaging
in
unlawful
behaviour,
including
inciting
or
participating
in
violence.
8
HUMAN
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
A CALL FOR ACTION
METHODOLOGY
METHODOLOGY
This
report
presents
the
findings
of
an
8
months
inquiry
carried
out
by
the
Foundation
for
Human
Rights
Initiative
(FHRI)
into
the
human
rights
situation
during
the
2016
election
period
in
Uganda,
between
October
2015
and
May
2016.
It
focuses
on
violations
of
the
rights
to
vote
and
to
participate
in
public
affairs,
freedoms
of
expression
and
assembly,
the
right
to
life,
liberty
and
security
of
the
person,
and
access
to
justice.
A
review
of
the
relevant
international
and
regional
human
rights
instruments
as
well
as
national
laws,
policies
and
guidelines
was
conducted
to
analyse
the
legal
framework
and
human
rights
safeguards
in
place
and
the
legal
reforms
that
have
taken
place
since
2006.
In
addition,
a
review
of
media
reports,
election
observer
reports
and
human
rights
reports
of
the
2006,
2011
and
2016
election
periods
provided
further
information
on
human
rights
violations
during
elections
in
Uganda.
FHRI
interviewed
33
individuals,
including
senior
representatives
from
the
Electoral
Commission,
Uganda
Police
Force,
Uganda
Peoples
Defence
Force,
Uganda
Communications
Commission,
political
party
members,
presidential,
parliamentary
and
mayoral
election
candidates,
civil
society,
the
media,
academia
and
human
rights
victims.
All
interviews
were
conducted
face-to-face,
mostly
in
private.
The
names
of
some
eyewitness
have
been
omitted
from
the
report
for
security
concerns.
FHRI
verified
information
received
from
witnesses
and
media
reports
with
relevant
authorities
to
ensure
reliability
of
the
information.
9 9
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The
18th
February
2016
general
elections
marked
the
third
multi-party
elections
in
Uganda.
The
first
multi-party
elections,
held
in
February
2006,
followed
from
a
referendum
in
2005
that
opened
political
space
for
political
parties
to
compete
in
elections.
Between
1986
-
when
President
Yoweri
Museveni
came
into
power
and
2005,
Uganda
was
governed
under
the
Movement
system;
a
system
where
candidates
were
elected
based
on
individual
merit
rather
than
political
affiliation.
Political
parties
were
allowed
to
continue
in
existence,
but
all
political
activities
by
the
parties
were
prohibited. 1
Though
the
Movement
system
was
supposedly
all-inclusive,
it
was
in
essence
a
one-party
state,
contrary
to
the
Constitution.2
The
transition
from
the
Movement
system
to
multi-party
politics
increased
political
participation.
Since
the
return
to
a
multi-party
political
system,
the
Electoral
Commission
has
facilitated
the
operation
and
participation
of
political
parties,
while
at
the
same
time
being
scrutinized
for
lacking
independence
and
impartiality.
As
a
result,
the
electoral
process
has
continued
to
lack
the
freeness
and
fairness
necessary
to
fully
realise
a
multi-party
political
system.
The
2006
and
2011
elections
were
generally
more
peaceful
than
the
2001
elections
that
experienced
widespread
acts
of
violence,
but
marred
with
irregularities
and
misconduct.
The
2006
elections,
for
instance,
experienced
unequal
media
coverage
in
favour
of
the
incumbent,
disenfranchisement
of
voters,
vote
buying
and
bribery,
ballot
stuffing,
intimidation
and
harassment
tactics
by
security
forces
against
the
opposition,
and
use
of
prosecution
as
a
tool
for
discrediting
the
legitimacy
of
opposition
leaders
and
disabling
them
from
campaigning
effectively.3
Main
opposition
presidential
candidate,
Dr
Kizza
Besigye,
challenged
the
2006
election
outcome
citing
sizeable
differences
between
results
from
poling
stations
and
voting
districts,
voter
disenfranchisement,
and
tampering
with
the
voters
register,
among
others.
The
Supreme
Court
ruled
that
the
principle
of
free
and
fair
elections
was
compromised
by
bribery
and
intimidation
or
violence
in
some
areas
of
the
country
and
that
the
principles
of
equal
suffrage,
transparency
of
the
vote,
and
secrecy
of
the
ballot
were
undermined
by
multiple
voting
and
vote
stuffing
in
some
areas. 4
Despite
declaring
that
the
elections
were
not
free
and
fair
and
malpractices
affected
the
results,
the
Supreme
Court
Justices
voted
4
against
3
to
uphold
the
results
of
the
election
outcome
on
the
basis
that
the
irregularities
did
not
substantially
alter
the
outcome
of
the
election.
The
2011
elections
faced
similar
controversy.
The
Electoral
Commission
was
criticized
for
disenfranchising
voters
due
to
irregularities
in
the
voters
register,
the
National
Resistance
Movement
(NRM)
was
heavily
criticized
for
the
use
of
state
resources
for
1 Article 270 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995 (as repealed), prohibited political parties
10
from
opening
and
operating
branch
offices,
holding
delegates
conferences
and
public
rallies
and
sponsoring
or
campaigning
for
candidates
for
elective
posts.
2
Article
75
of
the
Constitution
of
the
Republic
of
Uganda,
1995
prohibits
Parliament
from
enacting
a
law
establishing
a
one-party
State.
3
For
instance
the
arrest
and
prosecution
of
Dr.
Kizza
Besigye
in
2005
limited
his
ability
to
campaign.
It
was
widely
viewed
as
designed
to
harass
and
intimidate
him
in
the
run-up
to
the
2006
election.
Other
cases
of
prosecutions
were
the
murder
charges
against
two
FDC
Members
of
Parliament
(MPs)
who
were
subsequently
acquitted
by
the
High
Court.
This
had
the
same
effect
of
limiting
the
time
the
candidates
had
for
campaigning.
Report
of
the
Commonwealth
Observer
Group,
Uganda
Presidential
Elections,
18th
February
2011.
4
Rtd.
Col.
Dr.
Kizza
Besigye
v
Electoral
Commission,
Yoweri
Kaguta
Museveni
(Election
Petition
No.1
Of
2006),
Supreme
Court
of
Uganda,
30th
January
2007.
HUMAN RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
10
FOR ACTION
A CALL
campaign
purposes,
and
vote
buying
and
bribery
were
widely
observed.5
In
addition,
heavy
security
deployment
of
both
the
police
and
the
army
was
noted
during
the
2011
elections.
The
effect
of
military
deployment
during
the
2011
general
elections
was
widely
discussed
and
while
commendable
to
forestall
any
possible
violence,
such
heavy
deployment
often
scares
voters
away
from
the
polls,
especially
in
rural
areas.
As
a
result
of
these
and
other
controversies,
on
24th
February
2011,
Dr
Kizza
Besigye
called
upon
opposition
supporters
to
peacefully
protest
the
results
of
what
he
asserted
to
be
sham
elections.6
This
resulted
in
the
Walk
to
Work
demonstrations
throughout
2011.
The
government
controversially
declared
that
these
walks
constituted
an
unlawful
assembly,
and
committed
quelling
any
demonstration,
including
the
Walk
to
Work
movement.
This
resulted
in
violence
both
from
a
number
of
demonstrators
as
well
as
security
agents.
There
were
reports
of
people
throwing
stones
at
security
agents
and
setting
fire
to
debris.7
Security
forces
responded
to
this
with
excessive
use
of
force,
resulting
in
the
death
of
at
least
nine
persons,
none
of
whom
were
actively
involved
in
the
violence.8
A
general
trend
since
2006
to
date
points
to
a
shrinking
and
intolerant
political
environment
where
opposition
candidates
are
increasingly
restricted
to
interface
with
their
supporters.
Of
particular
concern
is
polices
excessive
use
of
force,
obstruction
and
dispersal
of
opposition
rallies,
and
intimidation
and
arrests
of
journalists
and
opposition
politicians.
For
instance,
Dr
Kizza
Besigye,
Musevenis
strongest
opponent,
has
been
arrested
over
43
times
since
the
2011
elections
with
none
of
the
charges
preferred
against
him
being
conclusively
heard
in
the
courts
of
law. 9
Another
major
issue
of
concern
remains
the
credibility
of
the
Electoral
Commission
(EC)
to
be
independent
and
impartial
as
established
by
the
Constitution.
A
landmark
decision
in
2005
by
the
EC
to
nominate
Dr
Kizza
Besigye
while
in
prison,
against
the
explicit
advice
of
the
Attorney
General,
cast
a
wave
of
hope
on
the
independence
of
the
EC.
While
this
was
interpreted
by
many
as
a
sign
of
independence
and
impartiality
of
the
EC,
the
continued
appointment
of
the
chairperson
and
commissioners
to
the
EC
by
the
president,
continues
to
cast
suspicion
on
its
functionality.
Furthermore,
prior
to
the
2016
elections,
the
EC
Chairman
stated
that
FDC
presidential
candidate
Dr
Kizza
Besigye
is
not
presidential
material,
and
that
if
he
had
the
powers
he
would
not
have
nominated
Dr
Besigye
as
presidential
candidate,10
indicating
a
lack
of
impartiality.
To
strengthen
the
independence
and
impartiality
of
the
EC
and
enhance
the
electoral
process
in
Uganda,
various
actors
including
civil
society,
government
and
opposition
activists
made
a
number
of
electoral
proposals.
However,
delay
by
the
government
to
table
electoral
reforms
and
Parliaments
failure
to
debate
most
of
the
critical
electoral
reforms
including
the
appointment
process
of
the
EC,
shows
a
lack
of
political
will
on
the
side
of
government
to
fulfil
this
commitment.
5 Foundation for Human Rights Initiative, The Long Road to Realizing Labour Rights in Uganda, Report for
6 Ibid., p. 85.
7 Human Rights Watch. Uganda: Walk to Work Group Declared Illegal. Retrieved on 22 July 2015 from
http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/04/04/uganda-walk-work-group-declared-illegal
8 Foundation for Human Rights Initiative, The Functioning of Multi-party Democracy in Uganda, Report for
11 11
In
the
absence
of
the
desired
electoral
reforms
and
in
light
of
the
high
level
splits
within
the
NRM,
tensions
were
high
as
the
2016
election
period
started
with
eight
presidential
candidates,
including
the
incumbent
President,
Yoweri
Museveni,
former
Prime
Minister,
Amama
Mbabazi,
and
Forum
for
Democratic
Changes
(FDC)
Dr
Kizza
Besigye,
who
has
stood
in
the
last
three
presidential
elections.
12
12
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
CHAPTER ONE
RIGHT TO VOTE
1.1
INTRODUCTION
The
Universal
Declaration
of
Human
Rights
(UDHR)
provides
that
the
will
of
the
people
shall
be
the
basis
of
the
authority
of
government;
this
will
shall
be
expressed
in
periodic
and
genuine
elections
which
shall
be
by
universal
and
equal
suffrage
and
shall
be
held
by
secret
vote
or
by
equivalent
free
voting
procedures.11
In
Uganda,
the
right
to
vote
is
a
constitutional
right.
According
to
Article
59
of
the
Constitution
of
the
Republic
of
Uganda,
1995
(hereafter
referred
to
as
the
Constitution),
every
citizen
of
Uganda
of
eighteen
years
of
age
or
above
has
a
right
to
vote
and
the
State
shall
take
all
necessary
steps
to
ensure
that
all
citizens
qualified
to
vote
register
and
exercise
their
right
to
vote.
In
addition,
Article
1
of
the
Constitution
provides
that
all
power
belongs
to
the
people
and
all
authority
in
the
State
emanates
from
the
people
of
Uganda;
and
the
people
shall
be
governed
through
their
will
and
consent.
Under
article
1
[article
1(4)
of
the
Constitution],
the
quality
of
the
election
is
determined.
It
should
be
regular,
free
and
fair.
So
Article
1
sets
the
test.
But
how
do
you
meet
that
test?
That
means
you
have
a
credible
voters
register,
the
voting
process
must
be
transparent,
free
and
fair.
So
if
you
remove
those
elements
from
an
election,
my
argument
would
be
that
election
would
be
no
longer
the
election
that
was
envisaged
under
the
Constitution.
I
would
argue
that
the
fact
that
you
dont
have
a
credible
voters
register,
that
the
entire
electoral
process
is
tampered
with,
then
the
election
has
failed
to
meet
the
test
that
is
set
under
the
Constitution.12
1.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
Despite
these
constitutional
guarantees,
Ugandans
right
to
vote
has
not
always
been
respected
in
past
elections.
In
2006,
there
was
widespread
disenfranchisement
of
voters.
The
Supreme
Court,
for
instance,
found
that
the
Electoral
Commission
had
erred
during
the
conduct
of
the
2006
elections
when
it
disenfranchised
voters
by
deleting
their
names
from
the
voters
register
or
denying
them
the
right
to
vote,
in
counting
and
tallying
of
results,
by
bribery
and
intimidation
or
violence,
and
by
multiple
voting
and
ballot
stuffing.13
On
Election
Day,
a
significant
number
of
voters
were
turned
away
because
their
names
were
missing
from
the
register
despite
them
having
registration
and/or
voter
cards.14
Other
causes
of
disenfranchisement
of
voters
were
the
relocation
of
polling
stations
shortly
before
elections
without
clear
communication,
delays
in
opening
of
polling
stations,
unqualified
and
incompetent
electoral
officials,
voter
bribery,
and
intimidation
by
security
forces.15
In
the
2011
elections,
though
the
Democracy
Monitoring
Group
found
an
improvement
in
the
national
voters
register
compared
to
2006,
it
also
still
found
many
irregularities,
resulting
in
disenfranchisement
of
voters.16
On
Election
Day,
many
voters
could
not
find
the
polling
station
where
they
were
registered
due
to
the
restructuring
exercise
of
polling
stations
prior
to
the
election
and
insufficient
voter
education
on
the
same.
11
Article
21(2)
of
the
Universal
Declaration
of
Human
Rights,
1948.
12 FHRI interview with Godber Tumushabe, Associate Director, Great Lakes Institute for Strategic Studies
13 Rtd. Col. Dr. Kizza Besigye v. Electoral Commission and Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, Presidential Election
14 Foundation for Human Rights Initiative, Electoral Reforms in Uganda, Report for the period of July
16 It found that 95% of voters listed were proven to exist, however it also found that the limit of 800 voters
per
polling
station
was
exceeded
in
17.7%
of
cases,
and
they
estimated
over
4,000
duplicate
entries,
more
than
5,000
voters
over
110
years
of
age,
and
registration
levels
in
some
areas
exceeding
the
estimated
eligible
population.
See:
Uganda
Presidential
and
Parliamentary
Elections:
Commonwealth
Secretariat,
2011,
p.
14.
14
14
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
17 According
to
the
Commonwealth
Observer
Group
it
was
not
possible
to
quantify
the
number
of
disenfranchised
voters,
but
the
numbers
were
significant
enough
to
cause
concern.
See:
Commonwealth
Observer
Group,
Uganda
Presidential
and
Parliamentary
Elections,
2011,
p.
29.
18
Electoral
institute
for
Sustainable
Democracy
in
Africa,
Technical
Assessment
Team
Report
Uganda,
2011,
p.
38.
19
Election
Observation
Delegation
to
the
Presidential
and
Parliamentary
Elections
in
Uganda:
European
Parliament,
2011,
p.
18;
and
European
Union
Election
Observation
Mission:
Final
Report
on
the
Uganda
General
Election,
2011,
p.
39.
20According
to
the
2014
census,
the
total
population
of
Uganda
stood
at
34.6
million
persons
in
2014.
Of
these
34.6
million
persons,
98.5%
or
34.1
million
persons
possess
Ugandan
citizenship.
Of
these
34.1
Ugandan
citizens,
45%
or
15.3
million
persons
are
aged
18
years
or
older.
21
Daily
Monitor,
Voters
complain
of
missing
names,
by
Richard
Otim,
19th
February
2016,
p.
13.
22
FHRI
interview
with
Dr
Badru
Kiggundu,
Chairperson
Electoral
Commission,
on
13th
May
2016.
15
CHAPTER ONE
RIGHT TO VOTE
15
compiled
before
2011,
he
said
it
had
been
chewed
by
the
computer.
Documents
can
be
chewed,
it
can
be
affected
by
a
virus.23
The
new
NVR
was
further
disputed
on
grounds
that
the
method
used
extracting
names
from
the
NIR
did
not
comply
with
the
constitutional
requirement
that
the
EC
independently
compiles,
maintains,
revises
and
updates
the
voters
register.24
According
to
Kiggundu,
however,
this
was
well
within
the
ECs
mandate:
Five
institutions
were
brought
together,
5
MDs
[Managing
Directors]
were
brought
together
to
establish
a
common
database,
which
can
subsequently
be
of
use
to
any
other
institution.
We
thought
for
us
it
would
be
very
good
to
put
that
variable
of
knowing
where
people
would
want
to
vote
from,
well-knowing
that
when
time
comes
for
us
to
compile
the
register
we
would
just
pick
from
that.
You
remember
the
constitution
says
that
we
are
mandated
to
compile
the
register
but
people
misunderstand
compiling.
When
you
read
the
dictionary,
compile
does
not
mean
that
you
have
to
start
from
raw
data
or
by
capturing
the
personal
information
and
capturing
their
photos
again
which
have
been
captured
before,
no
compiling
is
generic.
The
mandate
of
these
multiple
institutions
put
together
is
to
establish
what
will
be
classified
as
a
national
data
bank.25
The
Supreme
Court,
in
its
ruling
on
the
Presidential
Election
Petition
No.
1
of
2016,
also
argued
that
the
use
of
data
compiled
by
the
National
Identification
and
Registration
Authority
on
whose
Governing
Board
the
Electoral
Commission
is
a
member
to
compile
the
NVR
did
not
in
any
way
negate
the
duty
of
the
Electoral
Commission
under
the
Constitution
to
independently
compile
and
update
a
voters
register. 26
Nicholas
Opiyo,
Executive
Director
of
Chapter
Four,
however,
disagrees
with
the
ruling
by
the
Supreme
Court:
The
Supreme
Court
has
in
their
ruling
in
my
view
erroneously
confirmed
that
there
was
no
problem
with
that
[using
data
from
the
National
ID
Project].
But
you
see,
the
process
of
compiling
a
register
for
purposes
of
voting
is
clearly
laid
out
in
the
Electoral
Commissions
Act
and
clearly
stipulated
in
the
Constitution.
To
embark
on
any
other
process
than
that
is
to
do
what
is
unlawful
and
unconstitutional.
So
the
reliance
on
the
National
ID
database
to
compile
a
voter
roll
was
in
my
view
unlawful.27
1.3.2
Disenfranchisement
of
vulnerable
groups
Despite
the
constitutional
provision
that
every
citizen
of
Uganda
of
eighteen
years
of
age
or
above
has
a
right
to
vote,
several
groups
in
society
have
been
effectively
denied
this
right
or
find
severe
obstacles
in
exercising
their
right
to
vote,
including
detainees,
women,
youth,
persons
with
disabilities
and
Ugandans
in
the
diaspora.
Detainees
Detainees
in
Uganda
have
not
been
allowed
to
participate
in
the
voting
exercise
throughout
history.
This
is
of
particular
concern
due
to
the
high
numbers
of
persons
in
pre-trial
detention
whose
trials
have
not
yet
commenced
and
are
therefore
presumed
to
be
innocent.
In
2015,
for
instance,
there
were
45,314
inmates
of
which
25,068
were
23
Ibid.
25 FHRI interview with Dr Badru Kiggundu, Chairperson Electoral Commission, on 13 th May 2016.
26
Amama
Mbabazi
v.
Yoweri
Kaguta
Museveni,
Electoral
Commission,
and
the
Attorney
General,
Presidential
Election
Petition
No.
1
of
2016,
Supreme
Court
of
Uganda,
31 st
March
2016.
27
FHRI
interview
with
Nicholas
Opiyo,
Executive
Director,
Chapter
Four,
on
11th
April
2016.
16
16
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
being
held
in
pre-trial
detention.28
The
Electoral
Commission
has
not
made
any
special
provisions
to
guarantee
the
constitutional
right
to
vote
for
those
in
detention,
as
it
argues
it
does
not
have
the
mandate
to
do
so.
29
According
to
Kiggundu:
Of
all
the
countries
I
have
visited
where
there
is
voting,
it
is
only
South
Africa
that
incorporates
prisoners
in
voting
and
it
is
not
as
open
as
it
is
to
the
population.
First
of
all
these
people
have
a
criminal
background
and
for
you
to
access
them,
you
have
to
be
very
worried
as
if
they
are
not
human
beings.
So
there
are
conditions
that
must
be
set
up
to
enable
people
in
prisons
to
vote.
We
talked
about
it
and
even
looked
at
the
management
aspects.
How
about
the
patients
in
Prison?
If
the
concern
is
about
prisoners,
can
we
make
special
arrangements
for
the
patients
in
hospitals?
Many
of
them
were
registered
before,
so
can
voting
rights
be
extended
to
patients?
So
the
priority
to
me
would
be
patients
[rather]
than
prisoners.
In
fact
when
we
talked
about
that
issue
of
prisoners
to
some
people
in
government,
they
were
saying
that
for
somebody
being
incarcerated
in
prison,
someone
had
to
pay
a
price
with
their
civil
rights.
You
have
killed
someone,
why
would
we
extend
civil
rights
to
you
yet
you
have
denied
some
one
existence.30
This,
however,
fails
to
take
into
account
the
large
number
of
persons
in
pre-trial
detention
who
have
not
yet
been
convicted.
Youth
11th
May
2015
was
the
cut-off
date
for
persons
to
be
included
in
the
NVR.
This
meant
that
persons
who
turned
18
between
11th
May
2015
and
18th
February
2016
were
officially
eligible
to
vote
but
not
included
in
the
register
and
therefore
unable
to
exercise
their
right
to
vote.
It
has
been
argued
that
there
is
need
for
continuous
registration:
I
think
there
has
to
be
a
continuous
process
of
compiling
a
voters
register,
because
the
law
says
it
[the
Electoral
Commission]
must
compile
that
register
on
a
continuous
basis
for
the
purposes
of
voting.
So
that
when
people
turn
18
two
months
before
the
elections,
they
can
vote.
So
there
has
to
be
a
process
of
continuous
registration.31
According
to
the
Electoral
Commission
this
cut-off
date
is
necessary
for
printing
and
dissemination
of
the
NVR
in
a
timely
manner.32
The
Electoral
Commission
Act
provides
that
the
commission
shall
update
it
to
a
date
appointed
by
statutory
instrument.33
As
persons
below
18
years,
even
when
they
are
turning
18
before
Election
Day,
are
not
allowed
to
register,
this
effectively
disenfranchises
all
those
who
turn
18
between
the
end
of
the
updating
exercise
and
Election
Day.
There
is,
therefore,
need
to
amend
the
Electoral
Commission
Act
to
allow
persons
below
18
to
register,
provided
that
their
particulars
are
only
included
in
the
NVR
if
they
turn
18
before
Election
Day.
Women
At
the
time
of
writing
of
this
report,
no
statistics
were
available
on
the
number
of
women
who
exercised
their
right
to
vote.
According
to
data
compiled
by
FHRI/WLEDE
observers
in
20
polling
stations,
the
ratio
of
male
to
female
voters
was
4648:4471,
indicating
that
men
and
women
exercised
their
right
to
vote
fairly
equal,
with
male
28
FHRI,
Human
Rights
and
Poverty:
Eradicating
Extreme
Poverty
in
Uganda,
2015,
Kampala,
p.
185.
29
International
Foundation
for
Electoral
Systems
(IFES),
Elections
in
Uganda
2016
General
Elections,
Frequently
Asked
Questions,
2016,
pp.
1-2.
30
FHRI
interview
with
Dr
Badru
Kiggundu,
Chairperson
Electoral
Commission,
on
13th
May
2016.
31
FHRI
interview
with
Nicholas
Opiyo,
Executive
Director,
Chapter
Four,
on
11th
April
2016.
32
Information
provided
by
the
Electoral
Commission
on
24th
May
2016.
33
Section
19(7)
of
the
Electoral
Commission
Act,
Cap.
140.
17
CHAPTER ONE
RIGHT TO VOTE
17
voters
being
slightly
more
active
than
female
voters.34
Possible
explanations
could
be
the
long
waiting
times
at
polling
stations,
due
to
which
many
women
with
infant
children
and
pregnant
women
went
back
home
and
were
unable
to
vote.35
In
addition,
incidences
of
violence
may
have
deterred
women.
For
instance,
in
Kasese
an
incident
of
a
woman
rounded
up
and
bundled
onto
a
truck,
was
likely
to
invoke
negative
attitudes
among
female
voters.36
Persons
with
Disabilities
Although
Uganda
has
ratified
the
UN
Convention
on
the
Rights
of
Persons
with
Disabilities,
the
government
has
not
taken
sufficient
legislative
and
administrative
steps
to
fully
enable
persons
with
disabilities
(PWDs)
to
vote
without
discrimination.
The
Convention
provides,
among
others,
that
voting
procedures,
facilities
and
materials:
are
appropriate,
accessible
and
easy
to
understand
and
use;
protect
the
right
of
PWDs
to
vote
by
secret
ballot;
and
allow
for
assistance
in
voting
by
a
person
of
their
own
choice.37
To
ensure
voting
for
PWDs
by
secret
ballot,
disability
organisations
have
proposed
braille
ballot
papers,
however
the
Electoral
Commission
has
not
accommodated
such
requests:
We
have
tried
to
engage
the
EC
before
and
they
said
that
they
know
that
very
many
people
do
not
know
brail
and
they
cannot
waste
money
to
brail
the
ballot
papers.
We
told
them
that
under
the
circumstances
that
they
do
not
know,
what
steps
are
you
taking?
We
know
that
in
some
countries
like
Ghana,
they
do
not
use
brail
but
they
come
up
with
shapes,
symbols
or
something
that
is
identical
and
they
take
time
to
educate
the
visually
impaired
about
the
shapes.
These
are
shapes
that
can
be
felt
[physically]
to
identify
the
candidates
by
shape.
These
issues
came
up
in
2006,
2011
and
they
still
came
back
in
2016.
So
nothing
much
has
changed.38
According
to
Kiggundu:
We
have
looked
at
it
and
my
first
exposure
was
in
Ghana
and
we
have
done
a
study
on
it.
We
almost
went
for
it
this
time
around
but
some
of
these
people
do
not
want
to
be
identified.
So
when
the
opportunity
is
granted,
they
might
not
come
out
in
full
strength
to
vote.
We
are
still
shy,
but
it
is
technology
that
we
know.
Maybe
future
commissions
will
try
to
roll
it
out
but
there
is
not
enough
knowledge
because
many
of
them
would
rather
be
part
of
the
population.
Even
then
when
they
are
there,
they
are
given
priority
to
vote
first
in
the
regular
polling
stations
just
like
mothers,
elderly
and
you
know
we
do
not
want
to
create
possibilities
of
multiple
voting
because
you
might
prepare
for
them
a
register
to
vote
from
the
other
facility
and
all
of
a
sudden
he
turns
up
here.39
As
a
result,
blind
persons
can
only
vote
through
another
person.
The
electoral
process
does
allow
PWDs
to
be
assisted
by
a
person
of
their
own
choice.
This,
however,
still
leads
to
challenges
partly
due
to
insufficient
voter
education:
34 FHRI and WLEDE, Observation of February 18th 2016 election day processes focusing on the participation
18
18
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
The
biggest
challenge
was
that
some
people
would
come
with
no
one
to
assist
them.
The
law
says
that
the
polling
officials
are
not
supposed
to
assist
anyone
to
vote
and
the
challenge
would
be
that
this
person
would
be
sent
back
to
look
for
someone
of
their
choice
to
come
with
to
assist
him
or
her.
Something
needs
to
be
done
around
that,
either
the
information
has
to
be
sent
out
earlier
so
that
all
visually
impaired
and
the
elderly
are
educated
during
these
civic
and
voter
education
to
be
informed
that
they
need
to
come
with
people
of
their
choice
to
avoid
that
back
and
forth.40
Another
challenge
due
to
insufficient
sensitisation
for
PWDs
was
the
use
of
the
newly
introduced
biometric
machines:
The
biometric
machine
to
both
visually
and
hearing
impaired
people
was
a
challenge.
Where
I
voted
from,
in
Mbiko,
I
think
the
civic
education
did
not
reach
the
people
at
the
grass
roots,
so
deaf
people
would
come
without
sign
language
interpreters
and
yet
they
were
required
to
use
the
biometric
machines.
So
passing
on
information
by
the
polling
assistant
to
explain
how
it
is
used
became
very
difficult.
Even
visually
impaired
people
could
not
use
it.41
On
a
more
positive
note,
disability
organisations
noted
in
general
that
PWDs
were
allowed
to
vote
without
having
to
line
up
and
polling
centres
were
more
physically
accessible
compared
to
previous
elections.42
Ugandans
in
the
diaspora
Currently,
there
is
no
legal
framework
in
place
to
support
voting
for
Ugandans
who
reside
abroad.
According
to
Electoral
Commission
Chairman,
Badru
Kiggundu,
the
Commission
is
concerned
that
Ugandans
abroad
do
not
have
the
opportunity
to
elect
their
leaders,
but
with
the
current
laws
in
place
does
not
have
the
mandate
to
organise
an
election
for
Ugandans
in
the
diaspora. 43
According
to
Vice
President
Edward
Ssekandi,
the
government
is
planning
to
put
in
place
a
legal
framework
to
extend
voting
rights
and
participation
in
the
local
electoral
process
to
Ugandans
in
the
diaspora. 44
1.3.3
Disenfranchisement
due
to
material
and
technical
shortcomings
Many
voters
and
observers
reported
disenfranchisement
due
to
material
or
technical
shortcomings,
in
particular
delays
in
delivery
of
voting
materials
and
opening
of
polling
stations.
Polling
stations
were
scheduled
to
open
at
7am.
However,
FHRI
and
WLEDE
40 FHRI interview with Esther Kyozira, Programme Manager Disability and Human Rights, National Union of
43 Daily Monitor, Ugandans in in Diaspora wont vote, says Kiggundu, by Stephen Wandera, 13th
19
CHAPTER ONE
RIGHT TO VOTE
19
observers
noted
delays
in
voting
procedures
at
85%
of
the
polling
stations
observed.45
CEON-U
noted
that
at
8am,
only
59%
of
polling
stations
had
opened.46
Delays
in
voting
were
particularly
problematic
in
Kampala
and
Wakiso
districts
where
voting
at
certain
polling
stations
started
as
late
as
3pm
due
to
delays
in
arrival
of
materials.
The
Electoral
Commission
argued
that
the
reasons
for
delays
at
polling
stations
in
Wakiso
and
Kampala
districts
were
delays
in
printing
due
to
new
designs
of
the
declaration
of
results
(DR)
forms
and
the
prioritization
of
remote
polling
stations:
The
management
of
the
DR
form
is
not
an
easy
thing.
It
is
one
of
the
most
sensitive
documents
that
go
in
the
ballot
box.
This
time
around
we
even
had
to
inculcate
a
special
design
in
the
DR
form.
So
many
features
were
put
in,
something
that
affected
our
printing
rate.
[A]nd
we
had
to
start
with
the
farthest
district
because
of
territorial
difficulties,
communication
difficulties.
I
dont
know
if
any
one
of
you
has
been
to
Buku.
You
may
have
to
go
through
Kenya.
So
we
think
of
the
furthest
districts
ahead
of
Kampala,
because
Kampala
even
if
it
is
early
in
the
morning
you
can
run.
We
have
this
country
ringed:
outer
ring,
intermediate
ring
and
the
center.
But
even
in
the
center,
not
all
was
affected.
I
remember
we
delivered
materials
in
Nakawa
around
2am
and
in
the
central
around
the
same
time.
So
every
time
you
introduce
features
to
control
forms
like
the
DR,
something
is
bound
to
happen.
We
lost
about
two
days
in
printing
because
of
the
new
designs.47
The
Supreme
Court,
however,
argued
in
its
ruling
of
the
presidential
election
petition
that
the
failure
to
deliver
polling
materials
to
polling
stations
within
such
close
proximity
to
the
[Electoral]
Commission
was
evidence
of
incompetence
and
gross
inefficiency
by
the
electoral
body.48
Long
queues
at
a
polling
station
in
Kampala
during
the
presidential
election
on
18th
February
2016
The
significant
delays
in
certain
polling
stations
resulted
in
the
decision
by
the
Electoral
Commission
to
extend
the
close
of
polling
stations
from
4pm
to
7pm,
and
for
certain
45 FHRI and WLEDE deployed 118 election day observers at 118 polling stations in 57 districts. See: FHRI &
WLEDE,
Preliminary
Statement
2016
General
Elections
Election
Day
Observation
Opening
of
Polling
Stations,
20th
February
2016.
46
CEON-U,
Preliminary
Findings
on
Opening
and
Set-up
Process,
issued
on
18th
February
2016,
p.
1.
47
FHRI
interview
with
Dr
Badru
Kiggundu,
Chairperson
Electoral
Commission,
on
13th
May
2016.
48
Amama
Mbabazi
v.
Yoweri
Kaguta
Museveni,
Electoral
Commission,
and
the
Attorney
General,
Presidential
Election
Petition
No.
1
of
2016,
Supreme
Court
of
Uganda,
31 st
March
2016.
20
20
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
polling
stations
even
extended
voting
to
the
next
day.
However,
many
voters
had
lost
confidence
in
the
process,
and
many
of
these
polling
stations
registered
a
low
voter
turn
up.
For
instance,
Crispy
Kaheru,
coordinator
of
Citizens
Coalition
for
Electoral
Democracy
in
Uganda
(CCEDU),
warned
that
such
delays
may
lead
to
disenfranchisement
as
voters
walk
away
from
polling
stations
and
chances
of
people
returning
after
leaving
are
low.49
Basalirwa
Asuman,
President
of
Justice
Forum
(JEEMA)
noted
the
same:
You
know
the
voting
process,
someone
will
wake
up
very
early
in
the
morning
to
go
and
vote,
and
then
go
and
do
some
other
work.
If
somebody
comes
to
a
polling
station
at
7[am]
and
wants
to
vote,
and
waits
up
to
10[am],
because
he
has
to
work,
he
will
go
away
because
you
have
delayed.
Your
inaction
has
led
that
person
not
to
vote.
Such
cases
were
there.50
It
has
been
widely
argued
that
the
delays
in
Wakiso
and
Kampala
districts
were
deliberate,
being
strongholds
of
the
opposition:
Having
spoken
to
people
who
were
involved
in
the
process,
it
was
a
process
of
voter
suppression
in
areas
where
there
was
high
opposition
support,
in
particular
the
areas
of
Kampala
and
Wakiso
that
had
nearly
2
million
voters
that
were
seen
to
be
opposition
strongholds.
Having
voting
delayed
in
some
places
for
more
than
6
hours
and
some
places
more
than
8
hours,
quite
obviously
affected
turn
out.
People
who
came
and
lined
up
and
went
away
and
just
gave
up
because
they
could
not
line
up
the
whole
day.
If
you
look
at
the
figures
of
the
people
w ho
turned
up
to
vote
in
the
areas
of
Kampala
and
Wakiso,
you
see
a
very
low
turn
up
of
voters
compared
to
registered
voters.
So
it
did
have
the
effect
of
suppressing
votes
in
Kampala
and
Wakiso,
areas
which
were
seen
to
be
strongholds
of
the
opposition.
It
is
inconceivable
that
the
Electoral
Commission
could
deliver
voting
materials
in
Mbarara
which
is
4
hours
west
of
Kampala
and
fail
to
deliver
voting
materials
in
Ggaba,
which
is
20
minutes
away
from
the
Electoral
Commission.
It
is
just
inconceivable.
It
was
calculated
to
suppress
voters.51
Hon.
Winnie
Kiiza,
FDC
Member
of
Parliament,
experienced
the
same
in
Kasese
district,
another
opposition
stronghold:
Some
materials
came
even
at
midday.
Some
stations
started
late
because
the
ones
[polling
officials]
who
had
been
put
at
the
polling
station
to
control
the
machines
were
not
able
to
operate
the
machines.
In
some
areas
it
was
deliberate,
and
I
would
say
in
Kasese
specifically.
People
have
always
known
where
the
opposition
is
popular.
So
in
delaying
to
bring
us
the
materials,
I
do
not
just
take
it
quietly
or
innocently.
I
know
it
was
intended.
There
are
people
who
missed
out
on
voting.
Those
who
had
come
early.
We
had
told
our
people
to
come
very
early
in
the
morning.
You
cannot
just
stay
at
a
polling
station
from
morning
until
evening.
People
had
other
work
to
do
on
that
same
day.
So
those
who
had
come
early
in
the
morning
prepared
to
vote,
cast
the
first
vote
and
go
do
other
work;
they
left.
At
the
end
of
the
day
they
did
not
vote.52
49 Daily Monitor, EC extends poll hours due to delays, by Solomon Arinaitwe, 19th February 2016, p. 9.
50 FHRI interview with Basalirwa Asuman, Party President of JEEMA (Justice Forum) and Counsel for Go
51
FHRI
interview
with
Nicholas
Opiyo,
Executive
Director,
Chapter
Four,
on
11th
April
2016.
52
FHRI
interview
with
Hon.
Winifred
Kiiza,
Woman
MP
Kasese
district,
on
15th
April
2016.
21
CHAPTER ONE
RIGHT TO VOTE
21
sudden
cancellation
of
the
voting
for
their
directly
elected
Member
of
Parliament
due
to
a
mix
up
in
the
particulars
of
the
candidate
on
the
ballot
papers.
See:
Daily
Monitor,
Voting
shunned
after
MP
poll
is
cancelled,
by
Monitor
Team,
19th
February
2016,
p.
11.
54
In
Apac
and
Alebtong
districts
the
biometric
machines
failed
to
work
at
most
polling
stations.
At
Acela
PAG
Church
polling
station
in
Akura
sub-county,
Alebtong
district,
voting
was
delayed
for
more
than
five
hours
as
the
electronic
machines
failed
to
identify
767
voters
during
the
presidential
and
parliamentary
elections.
See:
Daily
Monitor,
Biometric
machines
fail
to
verify
Lango
voters,
by
Bill
Oketch,
19th
February
2016,
p.
16.
55
Daily
Monitor,
Army
presence
scares
away
Masindi
voters,
by
Monitor
Team,
19th
February
2016,
p.
12.
56
The
Observer,
How
the
February
18
general
election
was
rigged,
by
Sadab
Kitatta
Kaaya,
29th
February
1st
March
2016,
p.
4.
57
FHRI
interview
with
Mwambutsya
Ndebesa,
Lecturer
of
History
at
Makerere
University,
on
19th
April
2016.
58
FHRI
interview
with
Asan
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Uganda,
on
15th
April
2016.
22
22
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
CEON-U
observers
reported
voter
bribery
in
53%
of
the
constituencies
observed.59
According
to
the
observers,
voter
bribery
was
particularly
widespread
among
NRM
parliamentary
candidates
agents,
with
48%
of
observers
reporting
this
vice. 60
The
most
common
forms
of
bribery
reported
were
giving
out
money,
sugar,
soap,
and
clothes
in
exchange
for
votes.61
CEON-U
further
reported
mismanagement
of
electoral
materials
in
Gulu,
among
other
places.
In
Acet
trading
centre,
Omoro
constituency,
Gulu
district,
10
ballot
boxes
were
found
in
a
shop
by
police.
The
suspect
and
ballot
boxes
were
taken
to
Gulu
Central
Police
Station
for
further
investigations.62
At
Awere
in
Gulu
district,
voters
alleged
that
they
were
being
given
pre-ticked
ballot
papers
in
favour
of
NRM
MP
candidate
Jacob
Oulanyah.63
In
Rakai,
the
district
returning
officer,
Daniel
Baguma,
noted
on
19th
February
2016,
that
he
had
received
information
from
one
of
his
presiding
officers
that
armed
men
raided
a
polling
station
at
Kibuuka
in
Lwamaggwa
sub-county
and
stuffed
pre-ticked
ballots
in
the
ballot
box.
According
to
Baguma,
the
armed
men
first
fired
bullets
in
the
air
to
disperse
onlookers.
When
it
was
safe
for
them
they
opened
the
ballot
boxes
and
stuffed
them
with
pre-ticked
ballots
in
favour
of
NRM
candidates.
This
was
not
the
only
incident
in
Rakai
district.
Results
from
Kaleere
polling
station
in
Dwaniro
sub-county
showed
that
605
people
had
voted,
yet
the
register
has
only
205
voters.
Similarly,
results
from
Kyakatuuma
polling
station
in
Kakuuto
sub-county
returned
a
total
of
349
votes
against
294
registered
voters,
while
Lusonji
polling
station
in
Lwamaggwa
sub-county
tallied
714
votes
against
708
registered
voters
and
Migo
polling
station
in
Lwamaggwa
sub-
county
had
a
total
tally
of
400
votes
compared
to
389
registered
voters.64
The
DR
forms
do
not
indicate
the
total
number
of
voters
registered
at
the
polling
station.
These
discrepancies
between
total
registered
voters
and
votes
cast
are
therefore
not
always
recorded.
To
enhance
reliability
of
results
this
would
be
a
valuable
addition
to
include
in
the
DR
forms
in
future
elections.
Nicholas
Opiyo,
Executive
Director
of
Chapter
Four,
argues
that
advanced
access
to
the
register
by
NRM
candidates
has
resulted
in
many
of
the
discrepancies
in
the
registers
found
at
the
constituency
level:
Every
ruling
party
candidate
who
goes
into
election,
goes
into
election
with
what
they
call
a
packing
list,
which
is
a
copy
of
the
register
of
your
constituency.
So
they
have
prior
access
to
the
register,
showing
population
distribution,
polling
stations
that
have
the
bigger
number
of
voters.
So
the
NRM
party
always
has
a
packing
list
which
is
a
photo
copy
of
the
register.
It
is
one
and
the
same,
for
all
of
their
candidates
going
into
elections,
even
before
they
are
nominated.
It
is
usually
this
register
that
is
used
to
gerrymander
elections
in
constituencies.
There
is
no
doubt
about
it
that
is
what
happened
in
the
past
election.
NRM
candidates
were
given
this
register,
like
was
done
to
crime
preventers,
and
they
were
used
to
gerrymander
elections,
and
in
some
cases
in
my
view
to
rig
elections,
including
removal
of
peoples
names
from
the
register,
even
without
following
the
right
procedure
for
removal
of
names.
Because
if
I
am
to
remove
someones
name
from
59
CEON-U,
May
2016,
op.
cit.
p.
55.
60
Ibid.
61
Ibid.,
p.
116.
62
Ibid.,
p.
117.
63
Ibid.
64 The Observer, Where votes outnumbered voters, by Sadab Kitatta Kaaya, 22nd-23rd February 2016, p. 7.
23
CHAPTER ONE
RIGHT TO VOTE
23
the
register,
there
is
a
whole
tribunal
for
that
purpose.
That
tribunal
is
appointed
by
the
Chief
Justice.
You
put
that
tribunal
together.
You
must
have
a
hearing
why
somebodys
name
should
be
removed,
if
they
were
dead.
So
without
recourse
to
that
procedure,
many
people
have
found
their
names
missing
from
the
register.
And
it
was
really
a
result
of
the
NRM
team
and
the
crime
preventers
having
advanced
access
to
the
register,
and
using
it
for
their
own
purposes
to
disenfranchise
opposition
leaning
candidates
or
individuals.65
There
were
even
reports
of
altering
results
in
full
view
of
security
forces.
For
instance,
a
polling
official
in
Sembabule
district
reported
that
they
caught
persons
changing
the
declaration
form
in
the
presence
of
the
District
Police
Commander
(DPC),
and
that
the
soldiers
and
police
present
were
actually
protecting
the
persons
who
were
altering
the
results.66
According
to
Charles
Ssebyala,
LC
III
Chairman
for
Luweero
town
council,
soldiers
at
Kaweweta
army
barracks
in
Nakaseke
district,
stood
in
line
and
picked
an
already-
ticked
ballot
from
an
officer
in
plain
clothes.
Gen.
Benon
Biraaro
experienced
a
similar
situation:
In
Nyabushozi
my
contacts
called
me
and
told
me
that
they
went
to
the
poll
and
they
had
finished
voting
by
11
or
midday.
Why?
They
were
stuffing
and
the
people
who
went
at
midday
were
told
that
we
know
your
party
and
we
have
voted
for
you
and
the
people
were
shy
and
did
not
insist.67
At
Ruhoko
Health
Centre
II
Polling
Station
in
Ntungamo
district,
voters
were
requested
to
line
up
according
to
the
MP
candidate
they
support:
I
found
they
had
made
two
lines
for
voters,
yet
it
is
not
allowed.
I
tried
to
investigate
why
they
had
done
so
and
even
the
voters
were
angry
asking
why
they
were
making
two
lines.
According
to
the
information
that
we
got,
the
presiding
officer
was
corrupted
or
compromised
and
he
asked
people
to
line
in
accordance
to
the
people
they
support
so
he
would
chose
from
one
line
he
is
favouring.
The
lines
were
targeting
the
MP
candidates.68
This
was
only
one
among
many
incidents
reported
in
Ntungamo
district.
It
was
further
noted
that
the
NRM
MP
candidate,
Yona
Musinguzi,
was
pre-ticking
ballot
papers:
At
Nyamisha
polling
station
nobody
was
voting
apart
from
the
MP
[Yona
Musinguzi]
and
his
supporters.
They
were
ticking
and
taking
(sic)
the
ballot
papers
in
the
ballot
box.
Even
some
polling
assistants
were
slapped
for
refusing
to
hand
over
ballot
papers.
Hon.
Yona
slapped
one
of
the
poling
assistants
twice.69
The
Electoral
Commission
did
interfere
by
nullifying
results
from
several
polling
stations
in
Ntungamo
district
where
irregularities
had
taken
place:
65 FHRI interview with Nicholas Opiyo, Executive Director, Chapter Four, on 11th April 2016.
66 The Observer, How the February 18 general election was rigged, by Sadab Kitatta Kaaya, 29th February
67 FHRI interview with General Benon Biraaro, former presidential candidate for the Farmers Party, on 24th
March 2016.
68 FHRI interview with Edward Natamba, Ntungamo district coordinator CEON-U long-term observers, on
69 Ibid.
24
24
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
There
is
one
polling
station
called
Catholic
Social
Centre,
he
[Yona
Musinguzi]
went
there
and
took
a
ballot
box,
so
they
nullified
the
station.
He
did
the
same
to
Ruhoko
Health
Centre
II
where
he
initially
shot
bullets.
He
came
back
in
the
evening,
dispersed
people
and
took
another
ballot
box
but
he
did
not
know
that
he
had
not
taken
the
declaration
forms.
The
forms
remained
there
and
when
they
reached
Rukungiri
Road,
they
realized
that
they
had
not
taken
the
declaration
forms
and
they
dumped
the
box.
That
was
where
they
retrieved
the
box.
The
district
register
nullified
results
from
three
polling
stations.
He
nullified
results
from
the
Catholic
Social
Centre,
from
Nyamisha
where
Hon
Yona
fought
us
from,
and
from
Kahunga
I
Primary
Polling
Station.
At
Kahunga,
the
registrar
himself
found
over
20
Yona
supporters
ticking
ballot
papers
from
the
polling
station.70
1.3.6
Secrecy
of
the
vote
Another
element
of
the
right
to
vote
is
secrecy
of
the
vote,
which
is
particularly
important
in
a
political
environment
where
opposition
activists
and
supporters
have
often
been
targeted
and
been
subjected
to
intimidation
and
harassment.
Secrecy
of
the
vote
was
largely
adhered
to
during
the
2016
elections.
However,
in
a
significant
number
of
polling
stations,
secrecy
of
the
vote
was
not
safeguarded.
For
instance,
the
European
Union
Election
Observation
Mission
(EU
EOM)
noted
that
in
11
per
cent
of
observed
polling
stations,
the
lay
out
compromised
secrecy
of
the
vote.71
1.4
CONCLUSION
The
2016
elections
witnessed
a
number
of
violations
of
the
right
to
vote,
most
notably
due
to
late
delivery
of
materials
in
Kampala
and
Wakiso
districts,
described
by
the
Supreme
Court
as
evidence
of
incompetence
and
gross
inefficiency
by
the
electoral
management
body.
A
number
of
potential
voters
were
disenfranchised
during
the
voting
exercise,
in
particular
persons
who
turned
18
between
May
2015
and
February
2016,
detainees
including
those
in
pre-trial
detention
and
Ugandans
in
the
diaspora.
The
right
to
vote
was
furthermore
infringed
by
widespread
voter
bribery,
multiple
voting,
stuffing
of
ballot
boxes
with
pre-ticked
ballots
and
altering
of
results.
Other
factors
hampering
the
full
realization
of
the
right
to
vote
were
a
highly
disputed
NVR
with
many
persons
complaining
about
missing
names,
and
intimidation
by
security
forces
scaring
away
voters
from
the
exercise.
It
can
therefore
be
concluded
that
the
administration
of
elections
still
has
a
long
way
to
go
in
order
to
fully
realise
the
right
to
vote
for
all
eligible
Ugandans,
in
particular
in
ensuring
that
voting
starts
on
time
to
avoid
persons
walking
away
due
to
long
queuing
times,
and
ensuring
that
everyone
has
the
ability
to
cast
their
votes
in
an
environment
free
of
fear,
intimidation
and
bribery.
70
Ibid.
71
EU
Election
Observation
Mission,
Uganda
Presidential,
Parliamentary
and
Local
Council
Elections,
Preliminary
Statement,
Kampala,
20th
February
2016,
p.
11.
25
CHAPTER ONE
RIGHT TO VOTE
25
CHAPTER TWO
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF
EXPRESSION
[P]rotection of the right to freedom of expression is of great significance
to democracy. It is the bedrock of democratic governance. Meaningful
participation of the governed in their governance, which is the hallmark
of democracy, is only assured through optimal exercise of the freedom of
expression.
- Hon. J.N. Mulenga, Supreme Court Justice Constitutional Appeal No. 2 of 2002
2.1
INTRODUCTION
The
right
to
freedom
of
expression
includes
the
freedom
to
seek,
receive
and
impart
information
and
ideas
of
all
kinds,
regardless
of
frontiers,
either
orally,
in
writing
or
in
print,
in
the
form
of
art,
or
through
any
other
media
of
his
choice.72
The
Constitution
guarantees
every
person
the
right
to
freedom
of
speech
and
expression
which
shall
include
freedom
of
the
press
and
other
media.73
The
Constitution
further
provides
that
every
citizen
has
a
right
of
access
to
information
in
the
possession
of
the
State
or
any
other
organ
or
agency
of
the
State
except
where
the
release
of
the
information
is
likely
to
prejudice
the
security
or
sovereignty
of
the
State
or
interfere
with
the
right
to
the
privacy
of
any
other
person.74
2.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
Despite
the
liberalisation
of
the
media
in
Uganda
and
the
constitutional
guarantees
to
freedom
of
expression
and
freedom
of
the
media,
freedom
of
expression
and
independence
and
impartiality
of
the
media
have
been
under
threat,
especially
during
election
periods.
With
the
return
to
multi-party
politics
and
in
the
lead
up
to
the
2006
elections,
freedom
of
the
press
deteriorated
significantly
(Figure
1).75
Again,
in
2011
another
spike
can
be
noted,
and
Uganda
has
slowly
been
moving
towards
a
situation
where
the
press
is
categorised
as
not
free
(score
61
or
higher).
Figure
1:
Press
Freedom
Index
Uganda
(2005-2015)
60
55
52
50
45
54
53
53
54
57
54
58
55
56
57
44
40
35
2005
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
(Source:
Freedom
House
Press
Freedom
Index)
In
2005/2006,
during
the
campaign
period,
the
police
reportedly
interfered
with
commercial
broadcasting
on
four
separate
occasions,
including
confiscation
of
a
tape
from
WBS
Television
of
an
FDC
campaign
documentary,
interference
in
a
paid-for
talk
show
of
Radio
Pacis
in
Arua,
prohibiting
Radio
Veritas
in
Soroti
from
broadcasting
coverage
of
election
day
because
it
was
airing
unverifiable
election
violations
collected
72
Article
19(2)
of
the
International
Covenant
on
Civil
and
Political
Rights,
1966.
73
Article
29(1)(a)
of
the
Constitution
of
the
Republic
of
Uganda,
1995.
74
Ibid.,
Article
41(1).
75 Scores 0-30 indicate an environment with free press, 31-60 a partly free environment and 61-100 an
CHAPTER TWO
27
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
27
from
callers,
and
the
jamming
of
KFM
radios
frequency
for
releasing
unofficial
results
collected
by
observers.
These
actions
were
taken
by
security
forces
without
consideration
of
a
complaints
procedure
such
as
referring
the
matter
to
the
Broadcasting
Council
or
Electoral
Commission. 76
In
addition,
journalists
faced
widespread
interference
and
harassment,
most
notably
arrests
and
criminal
charges
relating
to
sedition
and
promoting
sectarianism. 77
Government
interference
was
particularly
noted
in
relation
to
the
trial
of
Dr
Besigye.
On
23 rd
November
2005,
the
Ministry
of
Information
issued
a
directive
prohibiting
media
houses
from
running
any
stories
on
Besigye.78
Following
the
trend
recorded
in
2006,
the
period
in
the
run
up
to
the
2011
elections
saw
a
downward
spiral
in
respect
of
the
freedom
of
expression.
Overzealous
security
officers
and
RDCs
on
numerous
occasions
threatened
and
issued
orders
to
media
aimed
at
preventing
publication
and
broadcasting
of
stories
related
to
opposition.79
For
instance,
Bunyoros
Kibaale-Kagadi
Community
radio
(KDR)
was
taken
off-air
shortly
after
an
opposition
candidate
was
hosted,
and
the
owners
of
Radio
Rhino
and
Voice
of
Lango
in
Lira
district,
were
interrogated
by
police
for
having
hosted
civil
society
activists
seeking
to
expose
corruption
scandals. 80
The
EU
Election
Observation
Mission
reported
40
election-related
incidents
affecting
media
freedom,
most
notably
physical
attacks
on
journalists. 81
This
led
to
self-censorship
and
hence
a
decline
in
criticism
of
the
government
by
the
media.
Access
to
information
In
2005,
the
Access
to
Information
Act
was
enacted.
The
Act
aims
to
enforce
the
constitutional
provision
guaranteeing
the
right
of
access
to
information
through
inter
alia
promoting
transparency
and
accountability
in
all
organs
of
the
State
by
providing
the
public
with
timely,
accessible
and
accurate
information.82
In
2011,
the
Act
was
fully
operationalised
with
the
adoption
of
the
Access
to
Information
Regulations.
The
Regulations,
however,
have
been
criticized
for
making
accessing
information
in
possession
of
the
state
unnecessarily
costly
and
cumbersome,
undermining
the
practical
significance
of
Article
41
of
the
Constitution
and
the
Access
to
Information
Act.83
The
government,
however,
did
introduce
a
number
of
initiatives
that
ease
access
to
information.
For
instance,
in
August
2014,
the
government
launched
Ask
Your
Government
Uganda
an
online
website
designed
to
help
members
of
the
public
obtain
information
from
public
authorities.84
The
website
allows
the
public
to
submit
requests
to
a
variety
of
government
institutions
and
agencies.
The
website
also
allows
one
to
view
requests
and
answers
previously
provided
to
make
information
readily
available.
It
76
European
Union
Election
Observation
Mission
Uganda:
Final
Report
on
the
Presidential
and
Parliamentary
Elections,
2006,
p.
29.
77
Human
Rights
Watch,
In
Hope
and
Fear:
Ugandas
Presidential
and
Parliamentary
Polls,
February
2006,
pp.
19-20.
78
Ibid.,
p.
20.
79
FHRI,
The
Long
Road
to
Realizing
Labour
Rights
In
Uganda,
op.
cit.,
p.
78.
80
European
Union
Election
Observation
Mission,
2011,
op.
cit.
p.
27.
81
Ibid.
82
Section
3(d)
of
the
Access
to
Information
Act,
2005.
83
The
Regulations
require
applicants
to
pay
a
number
of
fees
that
go
beyond
the
specific
charge
for
copying
and
preparing
information.
Most
notably,
applicants
must
pay
a
non-refundable
access
fee
of
UGX
20,000.
This
is
a
substantial
investment
for
most
citizens,
particularly
since
the
applicant
risks
losing
the
entire
sum
if
the
request
is
not
granted.
Furthermore,
Schedule
2
of
the
Regulations
provides
15
different
forms
to
be
used
in
the
process
of
requesting
information.
This
threatens
to
make
requesting
information
unnecessarily
cumbersome.
Also,
the
forms
require
applicants
to
fill
in
their
names
and
address,
eliminating
the
option
of
submitting
anonymous
requests.
84
Askyourgov.ug
28
28
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
is
doubtful
that
sensitive
information
will
be
disseminated
through
this
channel,
but
it
is
nonetheless
a
commendable
initiative
to
improve
access
to
information.
2.3
FREEDOM
OF
EXPRESSION
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
CHAPTER TWO
29
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
29
Alfred
Ochwo,
a
journalist
with
the
Observer
Newspaper
who
was
taking
photographs
of
the
arrest
of
Hon.
Ssemujju
Nganda
was
also
arrested
on
15th
October
2015.
Alfred
narrated
that
while
he
was
doing
his
work
covering
Ssemujjus
arrest,
police
officers
ordered
his
arrest:
They
ordered
me
to
hand
over
my
camera,
which
I
did
not.
This
enraged
them.
Two
grabbed
me
and
bundled
me
onto
the
back
of
the
police
patrol
truck
and
drove
off
to
Naggalama
Police
Station
at
a
terrific
speed.
They
[Naggalama
police
officers]
ordered
me
to
remove
my
shoes,
but
before
I
could
ask
what
my
crime
was,
the
officer
in
charge
of
the
cells
kicked
me
in
the
legs
and
forcefully
removed
my
shoes,
shouting:
You
want
to
disobey
us
here?90
Although
Alfred
was
detained
at
Naggalama
police
station
following
the
arrest,
he
was
never
requested
to
make
a
statement
nor
charged.
Instead,
he
was
later
driven
back
to
Kampala.91
Police
also
assaulted
journalists
who
were
streaming
live
telecasts
of
the
detention
of
Hon.
Ssemujju
Nganda
at
Kira
Road
Police
Station
in
Kampala.
One
of
the
journalists,
Joseph
Sabiiti
narrated
the
ordeal:
The
police
did
not
want
us
to
cover
the
events.
They
confronted
us
and
pushed
us
from
the
police
premises
all
through
across
the
road.
They
used
force
and
body
amours
to
push
us.
They
wanted
to
destroy
our
gadgets
and
interfere
with
our
live
coverage.92
Robert
Ssempala,
National
Coordinator
of
HRNJ-U,
responded
to
the
violence
as
follows:
The
uncalled-for
and
unsubstantiated
accusations
are
intended
to
blackmail,
criminalise
and
intimidate
the
media.
The
allegations
are
further
aimed
at
instilling
self-censorship
among
independent
media
houses
and
above
all,
to
silence,
stifle
and
suffocate
freedom
of
expression.93
On
10th
December
2015,
journalists
covering
Kizza
Besigye
came
under
fire
from
police
in
Moroto
under
the
command
of
DPC
George
Obio,
leaving
the
equipment
of
the
NTV
crew
destroyed.
The
NTV
journalists
were
filming
a
roadblock
that
had
been
erected
to
prevent
Dr
Besigye
from
travelling
to
Tapac
sub-county.
DPC
Obia
argued
that
it
was
military
equipment
that
could
not
be
filmed
without
permission.
He
threatened
the
journalists
to
bring
the
cameras
or
I
am
going
to
destroy
everything,
before
he
attacked
the
journalists
and
destroyed
their
camera.
Moroto
Regional
Police
Commander,
Richard
Aruk,
apologized
for
his
colleagues
actions.94
On
27th
February
2016,
a
group
of
journalists
was
arrested
near
Besigyes
Kasangati
home,
as
they
waited
to
cover
an
anticipated
visit
by
former
Prime
Minister
Amama
Mbabazi.
The
arrest
was
ordered
by
Kasangati
DPC
James
Kawalya.
NTV
cameraman
Abubaker
Zirabamuzaale
and
reporter
Suhail
Mugabi
were
bundled
into
a
police
van,
90 The Observer, Observer journalist arrested for covering Ssemujjus arrest, by Alfred Ochwo, 16th October
2015, p. 3.
91 Ibid.
92 Ibid.
93
The
Observer,
Police
holds
Besigye,
Ssemujju,
scribes,
by
Edris
Kiggundu
and
Justus
Lyatuu,
16th
October
2015,
p.
3.
94
Daily
Monitor,
Police
attack
journalists
on
campaign
trail,
by
Steven
Ariong
and
Eriasa
Mukiibi,
11th
December
2015,
p.
4.
30
30
before
the
cops
attacked
Daily
Monitors
Eriasa
Mukiibi
and
Abubaker
Lubowa.
According
to
The
Observers
Nicholas
Bamulanzeki,
He
[Kaweesi],
told
us
that
they
would
not
allow
us
to
cover
anything
at
Besigyes
place
because
they
had
intelligence
information
that
both
Besigye
and
Mbabazi
had
a
sinister
plan.
After
about
40
minutes,
Kaweesi
released
the
journalists
but
warned
them
that
the
road
leading
to
Besigyes
residence
is
a
no
go
zone.95
Remmy
Bahati
narrated
her
experience
of
covering
events
at
Besigyes
residence
to
FHRI:
On
1st
March
2016
I
was
deployed
to
cover
General
Mugisha
Muntu,
Ingrid
Turinawe
and
Hon
Cecilia
Ogwal
who
had
gone
to
see
Besigye.
So
when
we
reached
there,
the
police
like
it
has
always
been,
did
not
want
journalists
to
cover
anything
at
Besigyes
residence.
So
we
insisted
and
camped
somewhere,
still
they
told
us
to
go
away
but
we
did
not.
I
was
reporting
the
events
live
on
TV.
The
police
were
targeting
me
because
they
wanted
to
stop
the
live
broadcast.
So
they
chased
me
and
finally
they
caught
up
with
me,
overpowered
me
and
arrested
me.
I
was
arrested
together
with
Ingrid
and
they
were
basically
torturing
Ingrid
and
me.
For
Ingrid,
her
blouse
was
torn
and
she
was
virtually
bare
chest.
They
tortured
us,
those
police
officers
in
the
van,
by
pulling
our
hair,
beating
us
and
fondling
our
breasts.
We
stayed
in
the
van
for
like
an
hour.
It
was
very
hot.
After,
they
took
us
to
Kasangati
Police
Station96
She
added
that
she
was
threatened
at
the
police
station:
Kaweesi
came
for
me
from
the
cells
and
told
me
to
go
and
stop
reporting
about
the
opposition,
and
if
we
insist,
something
bad
might
happen
to
us.
He
actually
said,
I
quote:
you
journalists,
we
always
tell
you
on
several
occasions
to
stop
covering
this
because
it
is
not
good
for
the
country,
it
intends
to
incite
violence.
So
if
you
insist,
journalists
will
start
disappearing
and
no
one
will
ever
know
your
whereabouts.97
AIGP
Asan
Kasingye
denies
that
the
police
actively
target
journalists,
and
condemned
all
acts
of
torture
and
physical
attacks
by
police
against
journalists:
In
my
own
assessment,
there
is
no
targeted
action
by
the
police
against
journalists
whatsoever.
We
do
not
target
journalists.
We
actually
give
SOPs
[Standard
Operating
Procedures]
to
our
police
officers
on
how
they
can
work
hand
in
hand
with
journalists.
Now,
you
may
have
isolated
incidences
where
a
police
officer,
or
police
officers,
target
somebody.
There
was
an
incident
in
Old
Kampala,
where
the
DPC
assaulted
a
journalist
in
a
very
bad
way.
We
took
him
to
court.
So
you
cannot
say
it
is
the
police
that
targeted,
no
Mutabazi
targeted
as
an
individual,
as
a
DPC,
and
you
must
answer.
He
was
in
our
uniform,
but
we
never
told
him
to
do
that.
This
is
something
that
we
need
not
only
to
handle
during
elections,
but
we
need
to
start
training
our
police
officers
that
journalists
are
our
friends.
They
have
actually
helped
the
police
in
law
enforcement.
We
are
partners.
Where
it
happened,
we
are
really
very
sorry
about
that.
We
need
to
continue
sensitizing
them,
but
I
deny
any
accusation
that
says
the
police
were
targeting
journalists.98
95
The
Observer,
Besigye
held
after
city
church
service,
by
Sadab
Kitatta
Kaaya,
29th
February
1st
March
2016, p. 6.
96
FHRI
interview
with
Remmy
Bahati,
Political
Reporter
NBS
TV,
on
30th
March
2016.
97
Ibid.
98 FHRI interview with Asan Kasingye, Assistant Inspector General of Police and Director of Interpol Uganda,
CHAPTER TWO
31
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
31
Kasingye,
however,
also
noted
that
journalists
behave
irresponsibly
at
times,
and
that
they
should
follow
police
directives
and
go
to
court
in
cases
where
journalists
feel
their
freedoms
are
being
violated:
If
they
[police]
say
you
cannot
cross
this
area
and
go
to
the
other
area.
I
think
your
duty
is
to
report
as
it
is:
We
reached
at
a
certain
point
A,
we
wanted
to
go
to
point
B,
but
security
stopped
us,
so
we
cannot
even
see
what
is
happening
in
point
B.
But
you
do
not
come
and
start
fighting
the
police
because
you
want
to
be
in
point
B.
I
think
also,
therefore,
journalists
must
work
hand
in
hand
with
the
police.
They
must
comply
with
police
directives.
They
can
ask
why,
but
they
should
not
be
seen
to
fight
security
because
they
have
to
go
to
point
B.
No,
report
that
you
have
been
told
not
to
go
there.
We
do
not
know
why
as
journalists
you
are
supposed
to
be
there.
Why?
You
can
even
sue
by
the
way,
and
say
why
are
they
stopping
us?
But
to
fight,
to
be
seen
fighting,
I
dont
think
that
is
right.99
Geoffrey
Wokulira
Ssebagala,
CEO
of
Unwanted
Witness,
however,
is
more
sympathetic
to
the
plight
of
journalists:
What
do
you
expect
if
the
individual
knows
that
there
is
no
fair
justice?
What
do
you
expect
to
see
if
the
individual
is
being
inhumanly
treated,
yet
you
are
expected
to
be
independent?
Who
is
independent?
The
person
who
is
arresting
is
a
police
officer
who
is
acting
on
orders.
The
person
who
has
been
harassed
by
a
police
officer
is
going
to
a
judge
who
is
a
cadre
judge.
So
what
do
you
expect?
I
see
a
sign
of
a
failing
state
because
people
are
completely
tired.
They
do
not
see
independence
because
the
entire
three
arms
of
government
are
facing
the
challenge
of
independence
and
credibility.
The
entire
justice,
law
and
order
sector
is
not
independent.
So
you
will
find
people
behaving
the
way
they
want
because
they
are
completely
suffocated.100
2.3.1
Closure
of
media
houses
In
addition
to
attacks
on
journalists,
the
freedom
of
the
media
was
also
restricted
through
the
closure
of
media
houses.
Reportedly,
the
Uganda
Communication
Commission
(UCC)
closed
and
seized
equipment
from
13
radio
stations
in
January
2016.
According
to
the
UCC,
these
media
houses
were
closed
for
non-compliance
with
regulations:
We
gave
notice
to
all
those
media
houses
that
after
expiry
of
this
notice
because
of
the
failure
to
respond
to
our
several
reminders
to
comply
with
the
UCC
requirements
of
which
amongst
them
is
that
you
have
to
pay
your
licence
fees,
spectrum
fees
and
if
you
do
not,
we
will
close
you
down.
So
they
should
not
hide
under
the
political
environment
not
to
comply
with
their
obligations.101
For
instance,
on
21st
January
2016,
Mbarara-based
Endigyito
Radio
was
closed
by
the
UCC.
UCC
officials
entered
the
offices
and
asked
to
check
on
something
at
the
masts.
Subsequently
they
switched
off
both
frequencies
and
confiscated
the
transmitters.
According
to
a
station
employee,
the
UCC
officials
claimed
that
they
confiscated
the
transmitters
over
alleged
non-payment
of
38m
UGX
in
fees.
However,
according
to
the
owner
of
Endigyito
Radio
and
Kitagwenda
County
MP,
Nuru
Byamukama,
if
they
were
99
Ibid.
100
FHRI
interview
with
Geoffrey
Wokulira
Ssebagala,
CEO
Unwanted
Witness,
on
16th
May
2016.
101
FHRI
interview
with
Fred
Otunnu,
Director
Corporate
Affairs,
Uganda
Communications
Commission
(UCC),
on
29th
April
2016.
32
32
demanding
taxes
they
would
not
have
taken
the
machines.
The
radio
was
closed
two
days
after
hosting
Go
Forward
presidential
candidate,
Amama
Mbabazi.102
The
EU
Election
Observation
Mission
also
reported
opposition
candidates
being
denied
access
to
radio
broadcasts
or
stations
in
11
districts,
and
biased
coverage
against
FDC,
Democratic
Party
(DP)
or
Go
Forward
members
in
32
districts.103
The
same
was
also
noted
by
Nicholas
Opiyo,
Executive
Director
of
Chapter
Four:
There
were
several
incidents
especially
upcountry
where
it
is
not
widely
reported,
where
FM
stations
used
local
languages
to
reach
out
to
the
people.
There
have
been
other
incidents
that
were
reported
in
the
media
here
such
as
the
blockade
of
Amama
Mbabazi
to
access
the
radio
in
Tororo,
the
blockade
by
radio
Busoga
to
give
Kizza
Besigye
access
to
radio
in
Busoga.
But
there
were
several
other
incidents
upcountry
where
activists
were
just
stopped
from
being
on
radio
stations.
In
Lira,
for
example,
people
were
arrested
in
the
middle
of
the
talk
show
and
told
to
get
out.
In
Gulu,
activists
like
John
Olomero
were
stopped
from
accessing
Mega
FM
at
the
height
of
the
elections.
So
there
were
incidents
across
the
country
in
FM
stations
where
individuals
were
being
blocked
from
accessing
the
radio.104
In
addition,
the
government
also
interfered
with
the
programming
of
broadcasters:
We
also
saw
the
Monitor
Publication
being
dragged
to
the
media
council
by
President
Museveni
for
accusing
them
of
running
a
picture
depicting
him
of
not
having
so
many
people
and
running
Besigye
in
a
picture
that
depicted
that
he
had
so
many
people.
To
them
that
was
a
crime.
He
wrote
to
them
and
someone
came
to
answer
to
that.
Yet,
that
is
a
decision
of
the
paper
which
pictures
to
take
and
to
place
their
stories.
That
was
a
direct
infringement
of
a
freedom
by
the
media
to
conduct
its
professional
work.105
Furthermore,
on
30th
November
2015,
UCC
ordered
broadcasters
to
stop
hosting
former
presidential
press
secretary
and
presidential
adviser,
Tamale
Mirundi.
The
UCC
said
that
Mirundi
uses
abusive
language
which
is
against
the
law
and
threatened
to
revoke
the
broadcasting
licenses
of
stations
that
host
him.
It
was
addressed
to
Star,
Top
Pearl,
Alpha
and
Impact
radio
stations
as
well
as
Star,
Uganda
Broadcasting
Corporation,
Abizaayo
Broadcasting
Services
and
Nile
Broadcasting
Services
television
stations,
which
routinely
host
Mirundi.106
Fred
Otunnu,
UCC
Director
of
Corporate
Affairs,
noted:
The
UCC
Act
under
schedule
3
or
4
provides
minimum
broadcasting
standards
which
all
media
houses
ought
to
comply
with
and
certainly
the
conduct
of
Tamale
Mirundi
did
not
meet
the
minimum
standards
of
content
to
be
aired
to
the
public
because
of
abusive
language,
non-substantiated
comments
et
cetera.
So
the
onus
was
on
the
media
houses
to
ensure
that
the
people
they
host
have
facts
and
observe
the
decorum
of
using
public
air
space.
So
as
long
as
content
violates
the
minimum
standards,
it
ought
to
be
regulated
and
that
can
be
done
by
stopping
the
102
Saturday
Monitor,
Radio
closed
after
Mbabazi
talk
show,
by
Alfred
Tumushabe,
23rd
January
2016,
p.
4.
103
EU
Election
Observation
Mission,
2016,
op.
cit.,
p.
8.
104
FHRI
interview
with
Nicholas
Opiyo,
Executive
Director,
Chapter
Four,
on
11th
April
2016.
105
FHRI
interview
with
Robert
Ssempala,
Executive
Director,
Human
Rights
Network
for
Journalists
Uganda
(HRNJ-U),
on
22nd
April
2016.
106
Daily
Monitor,
UCC
bocks
Mirundi
from
TV,
radio,
by
Nelson
Bwire
and
Nelson
Wesonga,
2nd
December
2015,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/UCC-blocks-Mirundi-from-TV--radio/-
/688334/2980776/-/d3idi7/-/index.html.
CHAPTER TWO
33
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
33
person
who
unrepentantly
wants
to
use
the
same
or
you
can
hold
the
media
houses
responsible.107
Notwithstanding
the
necessity
of
the
media
to
report
responsibly,
the
right
to
freedom
of
expression
is
not
limited
to
correct
opinions,
sound
ideas
or
truthful
information
but
also
extends
to
statements
thought
by
others
to
be
false,
erroneous,
controversial
or
unpleasant,
as
the
Supreme
Court
ruled
in
Charles
Onyango
Obbo
and
another
v
Attorney
General.108
By
denying
certain
candidates
access
to
media,
one
effectively
denies
the
electorate
the
ability
to
make
an
informed
choice.
For
instance,
Nicholas
Opiyo
noted:
In
areas
like
Karamoja
for
example,
it
is
difficult
to
reach
everybody
because
of
the
bad
roads.
So
you
can
only
reach
them
through
radio
stations.
So
it
inhibited
those
candidates
from
getting
their
information
or
messages
across
to
people
who
would
not
be
able
to
attend
their
rallies
that
are
always
held
in
town
centres.
But
also
you
need
to
appreciate
the
role
that
local
language
FM
stations
play
across
the
country.
It
is
now
the
predominant
means
of
accessing
people
and
for
conveying
information
and
accessing
information.
Newspapers
do
not
have
a
wide
circulation.
In
terms
of
access,
local
language
FM
stations
is
now
the
main
medium
of
access
to
information
by
many
people.
So
to
deny
people
access
to
those
radio
stations,
is
to
deny
them
the
platform
to
convey
their
messages
to
the
wider
population.109
2.3.2
Interference
with
social
media
Increasingly,
people
not
only
access
information
through
traditional
media
outlets
such
as
TV,
radio
and
newspapers,
but
also
through
social
media
platforms
such
as
Facebook
and
Twitter.
The
space
on
social
media
platforms
seems
more
conducive
for
free
speech
and
critical
reporting.
For
instance,
Geoffrey
Wokulira
Ssebagala,
CEO
of
Unwanted
Witness,
noted:
The
media
in
general
was
not
independent.
We
were
only
left
with
online
space
or
online
social
media
like
Twitter,
Facebook
and
even
others
for
people
to
express
their
independent
opinion
because
the
traditional
media
was
intimidated.
That
is
why
even
the
internet
was
shattered
because
the
government
or
those
who
were
still
holding
public
offices
felt
a
bit
threatened
because
there
was
a
lot
of
criticism;
sharing
information
and
free
speech
really
flourished
online.110
This
has
resulted
in
new
measurements
to
restrict
freedom
of
expression.
Police
arrested
and
charged
several
political
activists
for
using
offensive
communication
on
social
media
platforms,
particularly
those
who
were
pro-opposition.
For
instance,
on
11th
January
2016,
police
indicated
that
they
were
investigating
Charles
Rwomushana,
a
former
intelligence
operative
with
the
Internal
Security
Organisation
(ISO),
for
publishing
hate
speech
on
his
social
media
platforms.
Rwomushana
was
arrested
on
8th
January
2016
on
separate
charges
of
circulating
a
photograph
with
features
of
a
dead
man
resembling
at
the
time
missing
Christopher
Aine.
Police
say
that
in
addition,
Rwomushana
has
been
inciting
hatred
against
members
of
the
Basongora
107
FHRI
interview
with
Fred
Otunnu,
Director
Corporate
Affairs,
Uganda
Communications
Commission
(UCC),
on
29th
April
2016.
108
Charles
Onyango
Obbo
and
another
v.
Attorney
General,
Supreme
Court,
(Constitutional
Appeal
No.
2
of
2002),
2004.
109
FHRI
interview
with
Nicholas
Opiyo,
Executive
Director,
Chapter
Four,
on
11th
April
2016.
110
FHRI
interview
with
Geoffrey
Wokulira
Ssebagala,
CEO
Unwanted
Witness,
on
16th
May
2016.
34
34
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
tribe
in
Western
Uganda,
but
did
not
disclose
details
on
the
hateful
statements
in
question.111
Robert
Shaka,
disguising
as
Tom
Voltaire
Okwalinga,
a
government
critic
on
social
media,
was
charged
on
20th
June
2015
for
using
offensive
communication
by
posting
statements
on
Facebook
regarding
President
Musevenis
health
condition.112
This
government
wrote
to
Facebook
owners
to
reveal
the
identity
of
Tom
Voltaire
Okwalinga.
They
have
also
written
over
other
issues
relating
to
releasing
background
information
of
social
media
users.
So
government
is
targeting
this
platform
because
as
much
as
they
have
managed
successfully
some
other
critical
and
free
independent
media
houses
(sic),
they
have
not
been
successful
on
the
front
of
social
media.
And
they
are
designing
all
means
possible
to
control
this
space,
which
is
certainly
a
blatant
abuse
of
freedom
of
expression
and
the
media.113
Even
more
alarming
was
the
shutdown
of
all
social
media
services
during
Election
Day
and
again
during
the
swearing
in
of
President
Museveni
on
12 th
May
2016.
On
18th
February
2016,
the
day
of
the
Presidential
and
Parliamentary
elections,
the
Uganda
Communications
Commission
(UCC)
directed
all
telecom
companies
to
switch
off
mobile
money
and
social
media
services.
Godfrey
Mutabazi,
UCC
Executive
Director,
confirmed
that
UCC
had
ordered
the
disabling
of
mobile
money
and
social
media
services
for
security
reasons.
President
Museveni
said
that
those
must
be
steps
taken
for
security.
You
know
some
people
misuse
social
media
platforms.
But
it
is
temporary
and
it
will
go
away.114
On
21st
February
2016,
the
UCC
explained
it
had
received
instructions
from
security
agencies
to
disable
access
to
social
media
sites
and
slow
down
internet
but
added
it
was
in
the
interest
of
the
wider
public,
their
safety
and
property.
In
the
UCC
statement,
Godfrey
Mutabazi,
UCC
Executive
Director,
quoted
section
5(1)(b)
and
(x)
of
the
UCC
Act
2013,
which
he
argued
empowered
the
regulator
to
direct
telecommunication
companies
and
internet
service
providers
to
curb
further
proliferation
of
harmful
content
on
the
internet
and
social
media. 115
According
to
Fred
Otunnu,
Director
Corporate
Affairs,
UCC:
This
was
the
best
alternative,
and
remember
blockage
of
social
media
is
not
only
akin
to
Uganda.
We
are
not
saying
that
it
is
the
best
way
of
going
around
doing
business,
but
it
becomes
desirable
if
the
situation
warrants
that.116
Otunnu
referred
to,
for
instance,
the
U nited
Kingdom
(UK)
considering
restricting
social
media
during
riots
following
the
2011
London
riots.
The
UK
government,
however,
decided
against
it
and
instead
chose
to
prosecute
those
persons
who
misused
social
media
to
incite
rioting.
111 Daily Monitor, Rwomushana faces hate-speech charges, by Andrew Bagala, 12th January 2016, retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Rwomushana-faces-hate-speech-charges/-
/688334/3029510/-/1snjwiz/-/index.html.
112
Daily
Monitor,
Social
media
critics
case
set
for
trial,
by
Abubaker
Lubowa,
8th
January
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Social-media-critic-s-case-set-for-trial/-
/688334/3025118/-/s8k3ndz/-/index.html.
113
FHRI
interview
with
Robert
Ssempala,
Executive
Director,
Human
Rights
Network
for
Journalists
Uganda
(HRNJ-U),
on
22nd
April
2016.
114
New
Vision,
Ugandans
stranded
as
mobile
money,
social
media
are
blocked,
by
Chris
Kiwawulo
and
Mary
Karugaba,
19th
February
2016,
p.
9.
115
Daily
Monitor,
UCC
defends
social
media
blockade,
by
Ivan
Okuda,
22nd
February
2016,
p.
10.
116
FHRI
interview
with
Fred
Otunnu,
Director
Corporate
Affairs,
Uganda
Communications
Commission
(UCC),
on
29th
April
2016.
CHAPTER TWO
35
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
35
According
to
Ssempala,
the
UCCs
directive
to
block
social
media
violated
the
right
to
According
Ssempala,
the
UCCs
directive
to
block
social
media
violated
the
right
to
freedom
of
to
expression:
freedom
o
f
e
xpression:
was
absolutely
wrong.
It
took
many
Ugandans
by
surprise.
It
occasioned
a
It
It
was
absolutely
wrong.
It
took
many
Ugandans
by
surprise.
It
occasioned
a
grievous
harm
to
many
people
who
were
engaged
in
elections.
Some
officials
had
grievous
harm
to
many
people
who
were
engaged
in
elections.
Some
officials
had
hoped
to
use
mobile
money
to
send
money
for
transport
and
facilitation
to
their
hoped
mobile
money
to
money
Afor
transport
and
facilitation
agents.
to
So
use
they
got
stranded
in
tsend
he
process.
s
an
organisation
we
teamed
to
up
their
with
agents.
So
they
got
stranded
in
the
process.
As
an
organisation
we
teamed
up
with
Legal
Brains
Trust
to
go
to
court
over
this.
We
challenged
the
actions
of
the
UCC.
Legal
Brains
Trust
to
go
to
court
over
this.
We
challenged
the
actions
of
the
UCC.
UCC
is
not
independent.
It
has
on
a
number
of
occasions
come
out
when
the
UCC
is
not
has
on
a
about
number
of
occasions
come
President
or
independent.
the
IGP
have
cIt
omplained
a
certain
personality
in
tout
he
mwhen
edia
othe
r
a
President
o
r
t
he
I
GP
h
ave
c
omplained
a
bout
a
c
ertain
p
ersonality
i
n
t
he
m
edia
obut
r
a
particular
media
house.
They
are
not
initially
nurturing
the
media
to
grow
particular
media
house.
They
initially
nurturing
and
the
amedia
to
grow
but
they
are
using
their
position
to
are
stifle
not
media
independence
ct
on
partisan
lines,
they
a
re
u
sing
t
heir
p
osition
t
o
s
tifle
m
edia
i
ndependence
a
nd
a
ct
o
n
p
artisan
l
ines,
117
especially
from
the
politicians.
especially
from
the
politicians.117
Ssebagala
holds
a
similar
opinion:
Ssebagala
holds
a
similar
opinion:
The
international
legal
framework
provides
those
standards
clearly
and
one
of
The
legal
framework
provides
those
standards
clearly
and
one
of
them
international
unless
there
is
going
to
be
an
insurgency
or
a
coup
and
none
of
those
were
them
unless
there
is
going
to
be
an
insurgency
or
a
coup
and
none
of
those
were
about
to
happen
because
it
was
about
the
people
deciding,
criticising
or
auditing
about
to
happen
because
it
was
about
the
people
deciding,
criticising
or
auditing
manifestos
as
per
those
who
were
campaigning.
To
us
it
brings
in
the
aspect
of
the
manifestos
as
pof
er
the
those
who
were
campaigning.
To
ubecause
s
it
brings
in
twhen
he
aspect
of
the
independence
Communications
Commission
even
you
check
independence
of
the
Communications
Commission
because
even
when
you
check
there
is
no
written
directive
or
request
by
the
security
apparatus
to
the
UCC.
Even
there
is
no
written
directive
or
request
by
the
security
apparatus
to
the
UCC.
Even
if
it
is
the
President
it
has
to
be
written
and
whatever
reasoning
or
whatever
if
it
is
the
President
it
has
has
to
to
be
be
justifiably
written
and
whatever
or
Mutabaazi
whatever
ground
they
are
using
stated.
There
reasoning
is
no
way
ground
they
are
using
has
to
be
justifiably
stated.
There
is
no
way
Mutabaazi
[Executive
Director
UCC]
who
is
appointed
by
the
Minister
appointed
by
the
[Executive
who
appointed
by
the
Minister
appointed
by
the
118
President
is
Director
going
to
dUCC]
efy
such
an
is
order.
118
President
i
s
g
oing
t
o
d
efy
s
uch
a
n
o
rder.
AIGP
Asan
Kasingye,
however,
argued
that
it
was
necessary
for
national
security:
AIGP
Asan
Kasingye,
however,
argued
that
it
was
necessary
for
national
security:
This
was
the
first
election
ever
that
was
conducted
with
the
prevalence
and
This
was
the
first
melection
that
was
conducted
with
and
emergence
of
social
edia
in
Uever
ganda.
During
2011
we
had
not
the
seen
prevalence
social
media
of
emergence
o
f
s
ocial
m
edia
i
n
U
ganda.
D
uring
2
011
w
e
h
ad
n
ot
s
een
s
ocial
m
edia
of
this
magnitude,
of
Whatsapp,
Twitter,
Facebook,
all
this.
Now,
either
people
are
this
magnitude,
of
Whatsapp,
Twitter,
Facebook,
all
this.
Now,
either
people
are
learning
to
use
social
media
or
people
do
not
understand
how
social
media
learning
and
to
use
social
media
people
do
not
understand
how
media
social
can
media
operate,
as
a
result
in
a
or
democracy
like
ours
where
social
be
operate,
sometimes
and
as
a
result
in
a
to
democracy
like
ours
good
where
social
the
media
can
evil.
be
abused,
you
have
balance
the
social
against
social
abused,
sometimes
you
have
to
balance
the
social
good
against
the
social
evil.
Social
media
was
being
used
to
cause
insecurity.
It
was
being
used
to
instigate
Social
media
was
being
used
cause
insecurity.
It
was
being
used
to
of
instigate
violence.
It
was
being
used
to
to
cast
doubt
on
the
fairness
and
freedom
people
violence.
It
was
being
used
to
cast
doubt
on
the
fairness
and
freedom
of
people
expressing
their
right
to
vote.
So
security
weighed
the
social
good
against
the
expressing
vote.
So
p
security
social
good
social
against
the
social
evil,
atheir
nd
I
tright
hink
tto
hey
said
that
robably
weighed
it
is
not
rthe
ight
to
curtail
media
social
e
vil,
a
nd
I
t
hink
t
hey
s
aid
t
hat
p
robably
i
t
i
s
n
ot
r
ight
t
o
c
urtail
s
ocial
m
edia
but
I
think
would
(sic)
be
stopping
a
more
disastrous
situation
if
we
did
it
than
if
but
I
think
would
(sic)
be
stopping
a
more
disastrous
situation
if
we
did
it
than
if
we
left
it.119
we
left
it.119
The
government
and
security
forces
in
particular,
therefore,
seem
to
take
a
strong
The
government
and
choosing
security
forces
in
particular,
therefore,
seem
to
take
strong
preventive
approach,
to
restrict
fundamental
freedoms
in
order
to
a
prevent
preventive
approach,
choosing
to
restrict
fundamental
freedoms
in
order
to
prevent
possible
negative
outcomes,
rather
than
prosecuting
perpetrators
if
those
negative
possible
outcomes
negative
become
aoutcomes,
reality.
rather
than
prosecuting
perpetrators
if
those
negative
outcomes
b
ecome
a
reality.
117
F
HRI
interview
with
Robert
Ssempala,
Executive
Director,
Human
Rights
Network
for
Journalists
117
FHRI
(HRNJ-U),
interview
on
with
Ssempala,
Uganda
22ndRobert
April
2016.
118
Uganda
22Gndeoffrey
April
2W
016.
FHRI
(iHRNJ-U),
nterview
own
ith
okulira
Ssebagala,
CEO
Unwanted
Witness,
on
16th
May
2016.
118
FHRI
interview
with
Geoffrey
Wokulira
Ssebagala,
CEO
Unwanted
Witness,
on
16th
May
2016.
119
FHRI
interview
with
Asan
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Uganda,
on
15th
April
2016.
119
FHRI
ointerview
with
Asan
Uganda,
n
15th
April
2016.
36
36
36
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
CHAPTER TWO
37
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
37
have
not
had
all
these
cases
take
shape
in
Uganda.
The
journalists
that
have
been
attacked
have
squarely
been
attacked
because
they
give
coverage
to
opposition
related
activities
and
personalities.123
2.3.3
Ban
on
live
media
covering
FDCs
defiance
campaign
activities
On
29th
April
2016,
Deputy
Chief
Justice,
Stephen
Kavuma,
issued
an
interim
order
banning
all
defiance
campaign
activities.124
Following
this
court
order,
the
government
also
banned
all
live
broadcast
of
activities
under
the
defiance
campaign,
and
threatened
media
houses
to
revoke
their
licences
if
they
do
not
comply.
According
to
Information
Minister,
Gen.
Jim
Muhwezi,
promoting
what
the
court
has
stopped
is
illegal
and
unacceptable
and
will
not
be
tolerated
by
the
government.125
The
role
of
the
media,
however,
is
to
provide
independent
and
impartial
information
on
matters
of
national
importance.
Even
if
the
defiance
campaign
activities
would
amount
to
illegalities,
by
banning
the
media
from
reporting
on
unlawful
activities,
the
media
is
unable
to
provide
a
balanced
picture
of
the
events
taking
place
in
the
country.
Ssebagala
argued
the
ban
was
a
move
by
the
government
to
control
information
released
by
the
media
on
the
defiance
campaign:
I
think
it
was
ill-initiated
because
why
would
the
government
be
so
interested
to
ban
the
live
coverage
and
then
leave
the
content
which
is
edited?
To
me,
I
look
at
that
as
an
intention
that
the
government
was
interested
to
be
the
editor
at
the
end
of
the
day
because
they
know
they
have
an
upper
hand
when
it
comes
to
content
which
is
edited.
It
is
about
calling
the
owner,
threaten
the
owners
and
the
content
will
be
edited.
So
here,
live
coverage
gives
someone
a
clearer
view
of
what
is
happening
but
content
that
is
edited
is
subjected
to
quite
a
number
of
scrutiny
(sic).
If
you
are
really
a
supporter
of
the
regime
automatically
you
will
consider
that,
no,
this
one
is
going
to
taint
the
image
of
our
government,
but
at
the
same
time
the
same
leaders
are
going
to
call
and
say,
oh
there
was
a
bad
incident
let
us
call
the
media
owners
and
stop
them
from
airing
that
story.
So
for
me
I
think
it
was
a
big
set
back
for
free
expression
but
at
the
same
time
it
has
really
again
added
to
the
big
issue
the
media
is
facing.126
2.4
ACCESS
TO
INFORMATION
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
123 FHRI
interview
with
Robert
Ssempala,
Executive
Director,
Human
Rights
Network
for
Journalists
Uganda
(HRNJ-U),
on
22nd
April
2016.
124
See
Chapter
4
for
further
details
on
this
court
order.
125
Daily
Monitor,
Government
bans
live
broadcast
of
FDCs
defiance
campaign,
by
Nelson
Wesonga
and
Nelson
Bwire,
5th
May
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Government-bans-
live-broadcast-of-FDC-s-defiance-campaign/-/688334/3189888/-/yjo4cn/-/index.html.
126
FHRI
interview
with
Geoffrey
Wokulira
Ssebagala,
CEO
Unwanted
Witness,
on
16th
May
2016.
38
38
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
average).
The
Monitor
and
Independent
were
reportedly
most
fair
in
their
coverage
(see
figure
2).
Figure
2:
Cumulative
space
(%)
accorded
to
the
presidential
candidates
by
the
newspapers
from
September
to
16th
February
2016
(Source: CEON-U, A Unified, Comprehensive and Effective Election Observation, May 2016, p. 95)
A
similar
situation
could
be
observed
in
the
coverage
by
TV
broadcasters,
with
President
Museveni
receiving
approximately
46%,
Besigye
20%
and
Mbabazi
19%
of
television
time
among
the
major
TV
broadcasters
(see
figure
3).
The
news
programming
of
the
public
Uganda
Broadcasting
Corporation
(UBC)
TV
was
the
most
explicit
example
of
unequal
media
coverage,
with
the
NRMs
share
of
exposure
being
as
high
as
72.6%
(see
figure
3).
The
UBCs
radio
coverage
mirrored
that
of
the
TV.127
Figure
3:
Television
reportage
(time
in
%)
of
the
presidential
election
by
16th
February
2016
(Source: CEON-U, A Unified, Comprehensive and Effective Election Observation, May 2016, p. 96)
CHAPTER TWO
39
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
39
According
to
the
Supreme
Court,
UBC
failed
to
provide
equal
coverage
to
all
the
presidential
candidates
as
required
by
the
Constitution
and
the
law.
Although
the
candidates
may
not
have
asked
for
the
airtime
from
UBC,
it
was
incumbent
upon
the
UBC
to
show
that
it
did
offer
time
and
space
to
all
the
candidates.128
The
Supreme
Court
further
argued
that
the
recurrent
issue
of
unequal
media
coverage
calls
for
legal
reform
to
introduce
penalties
for
non-compliance
in
order
to
compel
public
media
houses
to
comply
with
the
law.
Several
arguments
have
been
fronted
for
this
continued
inequality
in
coverage.
For
instance,
AIGP
Kasingye
argues
that
it
is
caused
by
the
ownership
of
media
houses
and
in
particular
radio
stations
upcountry:
Many
of
these
radio
stations
across
the
country,
especially
in
the
countryside
are
owned
by
individuals
and
most
of
these
individuals
are
politicians.
You
find
somebody
is
standing
in
an
election
in
a
constituency
and
he
owns
a
radio.
Now,
if
you
own
a
radio,
you
should
stand
by
the
journalistic
requirements
of
being
fair
to
each
and
everybody.
You
can
tell
them
to
pay,
but
at
least
you
allow
them.
But
you
know
they
took
it
to
themselves
by
saying
that
my
rival
cannot
come
to
my
own
radio
and
de-campaign
me
from
my
own
radio.
So
if
it
happened,
that
could
have
been
the
reason.129
A
similar
opinion
is
held
by
Ssempala:
The
pattern
of
ownership
of
the
media
in
this
country
is
widely
held
by
confessed
NRM
supporters
and
business
people.
That
victimized
many
journalists.
A
radio
station
in
Jinja
Baba
FM
laid
off
three
of
its
journalists,
which
belongs
to
the
District
NRM
Chairperson
Moses
Balyeku,
also
a
Member
of
Parliament
in
that
area,
because
one
of
the
journalists
said
Besigye
pulled
crowds
in
Jinja.
Another
one
read
the
story
in
the
news
bulletin
and
yet
another
one
was
feared
to
be
close
to
the
Besigye
camp.
So
the
next
morning
they
were
all
laid
off.
Another
journalist
in
a
Kampala-based
radio
station,
Top
Radio,
Richard
Kamagu,
was
laid
off.
Until
after
elections
he
was
suspended
for
mentioning
that
Besigye
had
pulled
crowds
in
Mbabara,
that
history
had
been
written
in
Mbarara
for
the
opposition
to
pull
such
crowds.
So
he
was
suspended
and
when
we
followed
up
the
matter
we
were
told
that
he
was
on
leave.
To
his
utter
shock
he
learned
about
it
from
his
colleagues
who
sat
into
his
programme
when
he
was
listening
to
the
programme
only
to
hear
that
he
was
on
leave.
He
strongly
protested
the
notion
that
he
was
on
leave.
But
he
was
reinstated
on
the
22nd
of
February,
about
three
days
after
elections
and
after
announcement
of
election
results.130
Another
argument
that
was
fronted
for
the
unequal
media
coverage
was
that
coverage
is
influenced
by
public
perception
and
financial
incentive.
For
instance,
Idris
Kiggundu,
political
editor
of
the
Observer
noted:
I
know
there
was
supposed
to
be
fair
treatment
but
the
media
is
shaped
by
public
perception.
The
media
will
always
give
space
to
people
who
are
publicly
more
prominent.
I
would
not
give
the
same
coverage
that
I
give
to
Besigye
or
Museveni
128
Amama
Mbabazi
v.
Yoweri
Kaguta
Museveni,
Electoral
Commission,
and
the
Attorney
General,
Presidential
Election
Petition
No.
1
of
2016,
Supreme
Court
of
Uganda,
31st
March
2016.
interview
with
Asan
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Uganda,
on
15th
April
2016.
130
FHRI
interview
with
Robert
Ssempala,
Executive
Director,
Human
Rights
Network
for
Journalists
Uganda
(HRNJ-U),
on
22nd
April
2016.
129
FHRI
40
40
to
Biraaro,
even
though
Biraaro
might
have
better
ideas.
I
know
we
are
surpassed
to
provide
some
public
service
but
we
are
also
a
business
entity.131
John
Kakande,
New
Vision
Editor,
expressed
a
similar
view:
Elections
are
a
very
costly
exercise.
We
had
wanted
to
have
a
team
of
journalists
attached
to
all
the
8
candidates
but
we
were
able
to
manage
2,
that
is
Museveni
and
Besigye.
But
even
then,
for
Mbabazi
we
relied
a
lot
on
the
teams
in
the
region.
For
the
other
5
candidates
we
relied
mainly
on
the
upcountry
teams.132
A
newly
introduced
media
event
enhancing
access
to
information
and
equal
coverage
of
candidates
and
their
manifestos
were
the
two
live
presidential
debates.
This
indisputably
improved
access
to
information
for
the
electorate
and
their
ability
to
make
an
informed
decision,
being
able
to
directly
compare
candidates
and
their
positions
on
critical
issues:
It
was
a
very
good
initiative.
This
time
we
had
all
the
candidates
participate
at
least
on
the
second
round.
It
was
very
healthy
that
candidates
were
regulated,
given
equal
treatment
and
time.
It
only
fell
short
of
one
ingredient,
letting
the
public
ask
a
few
questions
to
the
candidates.
That
would
have
also
engaged
citizens
this
time
around.
But
it
was
a
healthy
idea.
It
brought
all
candidates
to
the
same
level,
including
the
newcomers.133
2.4.2
Access
to
information
from
the
Electoral
Commission
Access
to
information
in
possession
of
the
Electoral
Commission
and
transparency
of
the
electoral
process
is
another
area
of
concern,
in
particular
in
respect
of
transparent
reporting
on
the
election
results.
At
the
national
level
the
results
were
not
being
released
in
a
disaggregated
manner
indicating
the
votes
per
polling
stations,
but
rather
showing
overall
results
at
the
district
level.
This
denies
the
public
the
opportunity
to
verify
the
results
at
the
primary
level,
undermining
confidence
of
the
public
in
the
electoral
process.
According
to
EU
EOM
observations,
in
only
10
out
of
42
tally
centres
observed
print-outs
of
sub-county
results
broken
down
to
polling
station
level
were
distributed.
134
2.5
CONCLUSION
Space
for
the
media
to
operate
freely
seems
to
be
narrowing
with
an
increasing
number
of
attacks
on
journalists
reported
during
the
2016
election
period,
primarily
at
the
hands
of
police.
The
freedom
of
the
media
was
further
restricted
by
the
closure
of
radio
stations
and
interference
by
state
institutions
in
the
programming
of
broadcasters,
arrests
of
social
media
critics,
shutdown
of
social
media,
and
a
ban
on
all
live
media
coverage
of
FDCs
defiance
campaign
activities.
The
government
justifies
its
actions
in
limiting
freedom
of
expression
and
media
freedoms
by
stating
the
necessity
to
control
media
content
to
ensure
truthful
and
non-
abusive
information
that
does
not
incite
violence.
The
state
does
have
a
responsibility
to
ensure
national
security,
however,
freedom
of
expression
is
not
limited
to
truthful
information
but
also
extends
to
statements
thought
by
others
to
be
false,
controversial
or
unpleasant.
The
government
should,
therefore,
not
be
overzealous
in
restricting
131
FHRI
interview
with
Idris
Kiggundu,
Political
Editor,
The
Observer,
on
31st
March
2016.
132
FHRI
interview
with
John
Kakande,
New
Vision
Editor,
on
15th
April
2016.
133
FHRI
interview
with
Robert
Ssempala,
Executive
Director,
Human
Rights
Network
for
Journalists
Uganda
(HRNJ-U),
on
22nd
April
2016.
134
EU
Election
Observation
Mission,
2016,
op.
cit.,
p.
12.
CHAPTER TWO
41
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
41
media
space
under
the
guise
of
maintaining
public
order.
Instead
of
arresting
journalists,
restricting
media
houses
and
shutting
down
social
media
in
the
anticipation
of
a
possible
unlawful
action,
the
state
should
focus
on
prosecuting
those
media
actors
who
actually
break
the
law.
This
will
act
as
a
deterrence
measure
for
other
journalists
to
break
the
law
while
at
the
same
time
allowing
the
space
for
the
media
to
flourish.
Access
to
information,
despite
commendable
initiatives,
remains
wanting.
Adequate
access
to
information
on
all
candidates
and
party
manifestos
for
voters
is
difficult
to
obtain
due
to
unequal
media
coverage,
with
the
NRM
and
to
a
lesser
extent
the
FDC
and
Go
Forward
receiving
the
largest
share.
In
addition,
information
on
the
election
process
and
in
particular
the
results
should
be
made
accessible
in
a
more
transparent
manner
to
enhance
confidence
in
the
election
administration.
42
42
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
CHAPTER THREE
3.1
INTRODUCTION
The
right
to
freedom
of
assembly
is
provided
for
under
Article
29
of
the
Constitution,
which
provides
every
person
with
the
right
to
assemble
and
to
demonstrate
together
with
others
peacefully
and
unarmed
and
to
petition.
The
right
to
peaceful
assembly
is
not
an
absolute
right
and
can
be
restricted
to
ensure
the
rights
and
freedoms
of
others
or
the
public
interest,
but
not
beyond
what
is
acceptable
and
demonstrably
justifiable
in
a
free
and
democratic
society
or
what
is
provided
for
in
the
Constitution. 135
The
Constitutional
Court
argued
in
2008
that
the
power
to
prohibit
the
convening
of
an
assembly
or
forming
of
a
procession
in
a
public
place,
for
whatever
reason,
does
not
fall
within
the
limit
of
Article
43
of
the
Constitution,
but
that
it
goes
beyond
what
is
acceptable
and
demonstrably
justifiable
in
a
free
and
democratic
society
or
what
is
provided
in
the
Constitution. 136
The
Uganda
Human
Rights
Commission
(UHRC)
further
elaborated
on
the
right
to
peaceful
assembly
in
Uganda,
noting
that
restricting
the
right
requires
an
immediate
and
imminent
threat
to
peace,
and
that
public
alarm,
excitement
or
noise
do
not
constitute
a
breach
of
peace.
The
UHRC
further
stated
that
the
actions
taken
to
restrict
the
right
must
be
reasonable
and
proportionate.137
3.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
With
the
return
of
the
multi-party
political
system
and
the
enactment
of
the
Political
Parties
and
Organisations
Act,
2005
in
November
2005,
political
parties
became
legal
entities
and
are
allowed
to
conduct
political
activities
again,
including
public
rallies.
Yet,
ever
since
the
opening
of
the
political
space
and
return
to
multi-party
politics,
the
right
to
freedom
of
assembly
has
been
subject
to
abuse.
During
the
2006
election
period,
it
was
noted
that
the
right
to
freedom
of
assembly
was
largely
respected
with
presidential
candidates
able
to
organize
political
rallies,
however
intimidation,
harassment
and
interference
was
widely
reported,
especially
against
the
opposition.138
Opposition
rallies
were
often
dispersed
by
security
forces
that
overtly
displayed
partisan
tendencies. 139
In
addition,
the
requirement
by
the
Electoral
Commission
to
campaign
between
the
hours
of
7am
and
6pm
was
at
times
selectively
enforced
by
the
police,
at
the
detriment
of
the
opposition
candidates.140
During
the
years
following
the
2006
general
elections,
the
right
to
freedom
of
assembly
came
under
further
threat,
with
many
opposition
gatherings
being
prevented
or
(violently)
dispersed.141
The
ruling
by
the
Constitutional
Court,
declaring
S.
32(2)
of
the
Police
Act
giving
police
powers
to
prohibit
assemblies
unconstitutional
and
hence
null
and
void,
in
spite
of
being
highly
commendable,
did
not
register
improvements
in
the
practice
of
the
police
in
preventing
and
dispersing
public
gatherings
of
opposition
politicians.142
136
Judgement
of
G.M.
Okello,
JA
in
Muwanga
Kivumbi
v
Attorney
General,
Constitutional
Petition
No.
9
of
2005,
Constitutional
Court,
2008.
137
UHRC,
Press
Statement
on
Increasing
Violence
During
Public
Demonstrations,
2011.
138
Uganda
Presidential
and
Parliamentary
Elections:
Commonwealth
Observer
Group,
2006,
pp.
26-27.
139
FHRI,
The
Right
to
Healthcare
in
Uganda,
Report
for
the
period
January
June
2010,
Kampala,
p.
42.
140
Commonwealth
Observer
Group,
2011,
op.
cit.,
pp.
23-24.
141
FHRI,
The
Right
to
Freedom
of
Association
and
Assembly:
Inside
Multi-Party
Politics
in
Uganda,
Human
Rights
Status
Report
for
the
Period
January
May
2007,
Kampala,
pp.
27-30;
and
FHRI,
Electoral
Reforms
in
Uganda,
2008,
op.
cit.,
pp.
130-131.
142
FHRI,
Electoral
Reforms
in
Uganda,
2008,
op.
cit.,
pp.
130-131.
44
44
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
During
the
2011
election
period,
freedom
of
assembly
was
generally
respected
and
the
candidates
were
mostly
able
to
move
freely
throughout
the
country
and
campaign
intensively,
though
instances
of
intimidation
and
harassment
were
noted.143
However,
in
the
wake
of
the
2011
general
elections,
during
the
Walk
to
Work
protests
between
March
and
October
2011,
the
right
to
freedom
of
assembly
came
under
increased
attack.
Protests
were
violently
dispersed
on
several
occasions,
leading
to
loss
of
life,
injuries
and
arrests
of
numerous
opposition
members. 144
In
response
to
the
nullification
of
S.
32(2)
of
the
Police
Act,
and
in
order
to
provide
a
comprehensive
framework
for
regulating
public
gatherings,
the
Public
Order
Management
Act
was
enacted
in
2013.
The
Public
Order
Management
Act,
2013
(POMA)
does
not
provide
adequate
safeguards
for
the
right
to
freedom
of
peaceful
assembly.
Section
8
provides
the
police
with
the
power
to
stop
or
prevent
the
holding
of
a
public
meeting
where
the
public
meeting
is
held
contrary
to
this
Act.
This
law
gives
the
police
powers
to
prohibit
or
disperse
public
gatherings
on
the
mere
basis
of
administrative
faults
(e.g.
not
being
able
to
notify
the
police
at
least
three
days
in
advance).
The
POMA
therefore
does
not
comply
with
generally
accepted
practice,
which
provides
that
a
notification
system
should
not
function
as
a
de
facto
request
for
authorisation,
nor
should
the
failure
to
notify
authorities
render
an
assembly
unlawful
or
be
used
as
a
ground
to
disperse
the
assembly.145
3.3
FREEDOM
OF
ASSEMBLY
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
144
FHRI,
Uganda:
The
Right
to
a
Fair
Trial
Next
Steps,
Report
for
the
Period
30th
June
2011
June
2012,
Kampala,
pp.
79,
96-97.
145
UN
General
Assembly,
Joint
report
of
the
Special
Rapporteur
on
the
rights
to
freedom
of
peaceful
assembly
and
of
association
and
the
Special
Rapporteur
on
extrajudicial,
summary
or
arbitrary
executions
on
the
proper
management
of
assembly,
submitted
to
the
31st
Session
of
the
UN
Human
Rights
Council,
4th
February
2016
(A/HRC/31/66),
pp.
6-7.
146
Daily
Monitor,
Police
arrest
former
Prime
Minister
Amama
Mbabazi,
by
Monitor
Reporter,
9th
July
2015,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Police-arrest-former-Prime-Minister-Amama-
Mbabazi/-/688334/2780802/-/65o336z/-/index.html.
147
Section
3
of
the
Presidential
Elections
Act
provides
that
an
aspirant
may
consult
in
preparation
for
his
or
her
nomination
within
twelve
months
before
the
nomination
date,
and
that
for
this
purpose
an
aspirant
may
carry
out
nationwide
consultations,
prepare
campaign
materials,
raise
funds
and
convene
meetings
of
national
delegates.
148
Amama
Mbabazi
v.
Yoweri
Kaguta
Museveni,
Electoral
Commission,
and
the
Attorney
General,
Presidential
Election
Petition
No.
1
of
2016,
Supreme
Court
of
Uganda,
31 st
March
2016.
CHAPTER THREE
45
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY
45
The
FDC
also
faced
widespread
intimidation
and
interference
during
the
consultation
period.
For
instance,
on
10th
October
2015,
a
convoy
of
FDC
party
officials
heading
to
Rukungiri
to
open
offices
and
mobilise
party
rallies
was
stopped
along
the
Masaka-
Mbarara
road.
According
to
IGP
Gen.
Kayihura,
the
FDC
did
not
notify
the
police
on
time.
He
explained
that
the
police
did
not
have
any
problems
with
the
FDC
opening
party
offices,
however
the
exercise
also
entailed
mobilisation
of
rallies,
and
therefore
it
could
not
be
allowed.
149
During
the
arrest,
FDC
woman
activist
Fatuma
Naigaga
was
reportedly
publicly
stripped.
However,
Gen.
Kayihura
argued
that
Naigaga
stripped
naked
to
blackmail
the
Police,
and
that
the
footage
aired
on
television
was
edited
in
such
a
way
to
conceal
this.
Nonetheless,
he
also
noted
that
if
police
officers
are
found
culpable
in
relation
to
this
incident,
they
would
be
held
accountable.
As
a
result,
four
police
officers
were
put
under
investigation
over
the
arrest
of
Naigaga,
including
Felix
Kulayige,
Rwizi
Regional
Police
Commander.150
Police brutality during the arrests of FDC officials on 10th October 2015
Only
days
later,
on
October
15th,
the
police
again
arrested
key
FDC
officials
who
had
planned
a
mobilisation
tour
in
Kireka,
Mukono,
Jinja
and
Iganga.
Around
4am,
police
deployed
its
personnel
near
Dr
Besigyes
home
in
Kasangati,
effectively
putting
him
under
preventive
arrest.
Around
10.30am,
Dr
Besigye
drove
out
of
his
home
and
was
blocked
after
200
metres
by
police
officers.
Dr
Besigye
was
told
by
the
commanding
officer
to
return
to
his
house
or
face
arrest.
He,
however,
refused
to
be
imprisoned
in
his
home.
Consequently,
Dr
Besigye
was
apprehended
by
police
and
detained
at
Naggalama
Police
Station.151
Three
people
who
had
come
to
visit
him
in
the
morning
were
also
arrested
and
taken
to
an
undisclosed
location
by
police.152
149
New
Vision,
Kayihura
faults
officers
over
activists
arrest,
by
Simon
Masaba,
16th
October
2015,
p.
4.
150
ibid.
151 The Observer, Police holds Besigye, Ssemuju, scribes, op. cit., p. 3.
152 Daily Monitor, Besigye detained, FDC rally blocked, by Stephen Kafeero, 16th October 2015, p. 4.
46
46
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
FDC
Presidential
flag
bearer
Dr
Kizza
Besigye
being
dragged
by
police
officers
to
a
police
vehicle
at
his
home
in
Kasangati
o n
15th
October
2015.
On
the
same
morning,
police
surrounded
the
house
of
Kyadondo
East
MP
and
FDC
member
Hon.
Ssemujju
Nganda.
When
Ssemujju
left
the
house
to
take
his
children
to
school,
he
was
blocked
by
police
and
ordered
out
of
the
car.
After
they
failed
to
agree
on
a
way
forward,
police
officials
allegedly
beat
him
and
dragged
him
forcefully
to
the
police
truck,
drove
him
to
Naggalama,
and
later
transferred
him
to
Kira
Road
Police
Station.
Gen.
Kayihura
explained
that
Dr
Besigye
and
Hon.
Ssemujju
were
arrested
because
they
were
disobeying
the
guidelines
recently
issued
by
the
Electoral
Commission,
which
bar
campaigns
before
nominations.153
It
is,
however,
unclear
whether
these
arrests
in
October
2015
were
effected
under
electoral
laws
or
the
POMA.
Gen.
Kayihura
argued
that
communications
did
not
amount
to
notice
within
the
meaning
of
Section
5
of
the
POMA
since
it
does
not
fulfil
the
requirements
demanded
by
the
law,
but
he
added
that
the
activities
risk
violating
other
laws,
as
well
as
guidelines
of
the
Electoral
Commission. 154
The
Electoral
Commission
Spokesperson,
Jotham
Taremwa,
justified
the
arrests
noting
that
it
was
not
yet
time
for
campaigns.155
The
FDC
has
argued
that
the
activities
are
not
subject
to
the
POMA
because
meetings
convened
and
held
exclusively
for
a
lawful
purpose
of
a
public
body,
including
political
parties,
are
excluded
from
the
prohibited
public
meetings
as
per
the
POMA.
In
reaction
to
the
interference
with
the
freedom
of
assembly,
the
FDC
filed
a
suit
against
the
Inspector
General
of
Police,
Gen
Kale
Kayihura,
the
Attorney
General
and
the
National
Independent
Electoral
Commission
on
15th
October
2015,
for
allegedly
interfering
with
campaign
rallies
organized
by
the
FDC.
The
FDC
accused
the
IGP
of
being
discriminative
by
allowing
the
NRMs
flag
bearer,
President
Museveni,
to
hold
his
campaign
countrywide,
while
forcefully
stopping
campaigns
by
FDC
aspirants
on
the
153 The Observer, Police holds Besigye, Ssemuju, scribes, op. cit., p. 3.
Monitor,
Police,
Besigye
standoff:
What
does
the
law
say?,
by
Eriasa
Mukiibi
Sserunjogi,
16th
October
2015,
p.
4.
155
ibid.
154
Daily
CHAPTER THREE
47
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY
47
pretext
that
the
law
does
not
allow
campaigns
before
nominations. 156
This
case
is
still
pending
before
the
Constitutional
Court.
2016
presidential
aspirant,
Gen.
Benon
Biraaro,
also
faced
intimidation
and
interference
during
the
consultation
period
in
Rushere,
Sheema
and
Budaka.
He
narrated
his
experience
in
Rushere:
In
Rushere
a
police
man
came
and
almost
cried.
He
said,
the
President
is
here
but
I
am
being
harassed
that
you
people
end
your
meeting.
He
said
his
life
was
on
the
line,
so
we
quickly
finished
our
meeting.157
3.3.2
Freedom
of
assembly
during
the
2016
campaign
period
During
the
campaign
period,
presidential
and
parliamentary
aspirants
were
relatively
free
to
hold
assemblies,
although
widespread
instances
of
intimidation
and
interference
during
opposition
rallies
were
noted.
Despite
EC
guidelines
stating
that
there
should
be
no
parallel
rallies,
throughout
the
campaign
period,
the
NRM
allegedly
prompted
citizens
to
take
to
the
streets
with
NRM
shirts
and
placards
and,
for
instance,
deface
Mbabazi
posters
when
Mbabazi
was
holding
rallies
(e.g.
in
Mukono,
Masaka,
Fort
Portal,
Iganga,
Arua).
In
Mukono,
it
was
alleged
that
at
the
time
State
Minister
for
water
and
environment,
Ronald
Kibuule,
organised
rival
activities
to
disrupt
Mbabazis
campaigns.158
In
Fort
Portal,
Gen.
Tumukunde
was
seen
to
fly
a
helicopter
fully
decorated
with
President
Museveni
campaign
posters
to
Mbabazis
rally
venue
shortly
before
Mbabazis
arrival.159
In
addition,
on
several
occasions
citizens
were
told
to
stay
away
from
Mbabazis
rallies.
For
instance,
ahead
of
Mbabazis
arrival
in
Hoima
district,
numerous
announcements
were
played
on
radio
urging
people
to
keep
away
from
his
rallies
and
instead
wait
for
the
visit
of
the
beloved
Museveni.160
These
incidents
resulted
in
the
build
up
to
the
violence
in
Ntungamo
district
on
13th
December
2015.
On
13th
December
2015,
Go
Forward
candidate
Amama
Mbabazi
had
a
scheduled
rally
in
Ntungamo.
When
Mbabazis
convoy
ran
into
a
group
of
Museveni
supporters,
a
stone
was
thrown
at
one
of
the
cars
in
Mbabazis
convoy
sparking
off
the
clash.161
A
fight
ensued
between
the
two
groups,
leaving
several
injured.162
It
was
further
reported
by
several
opposition
politicians
that
when
they
would
organise
a
rally
and
reserve
a
space,
NRM
members
and/or
supporters
hang
NRM
posters
at
the
rally
venue.
Hon.
Alice
Alaso,
former
Woman
Representative
for
Serere
District,
narrated
to
FHRI:
On
29th
December
2015
in
Bugondo
sub-county
NRM
people
came
and
hung
all
their
posters
everywhere,
which
was
very
provocative
to
us.
They
knew
that
the
place
was
cleared
for
our
rally
but
they
came
and
hung
NRM
posters,
even
on
the
156
Daily
Monitor,
IGP
sued
over
interference
with
FDC
rallies,
by
Anthony
Wesaka,
16th
October
2015,
p.
8.
157 FHRI interview with General Benon Biraaro, former presidential candidate for the Farmers Party, on 24th
March 2016.
158 New Vision, Electoral Commission and police to probe electoral violence, by Joyce Nakato, 12th November
48
48
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
leafs,
so
that
as
you
sit,
there
is
an
NRM
poster
either
of
Museveni
or
Odoa
or
other
NRM
candidates
hanging
right
above
your
head.163
Alaso
experienced
a
similar
ordeal
in
Olio
sub-county
on
2nd
January
2016
when
she
had
organised
a
rally
in
Okulonyo
Parish:
By
the
time
I
reached
there,
the
whole
place
was
yellow
and
the
NRM
was
playing
music,
people
were
drunk.
I
could
not
have
a
rally
where
my
people
were
angry.
I
am
a
responsible
leader
so
I
told
myself
that
it
is
not
a
matter
of
life
and
death
and
I
did
not
want
people
to
clash.
I
called
the
DPC
and
he
did
nothing.
I
called
the
registrar
and
she
did
not
even
come.
I
just
had
to
call
off
the
rally.164
Ingrid
Turinawe,
FDC
National
Party
Mobiliser,
explained
to
FHRI
that
despite
their
campaign
programme
being
discussed
and
approved
by
the
Electoral
Commission,
rallies
were
disrupted
on
several
occasions:
We
would
have
a
confirmed
programme,
confirmed
by
both
the
Electoral
Commission
and
the
candidates,
but
the
police
would
just
destruct
(sic)
the
programme.
One
major
incident
was
in
Bukwo
district.
We
were
supposed
to
visit
Tariyeti
Camp,
but
we
were
blocked
by
police
at
the
entry
of
the
camp.
It
was
on
the
schedule
of
the
day
but
we
found
police
saying
they
had
orders
from
above
and
we
would
not
access
the
camp.165
As
a
result
of
such
behaviour
by
police,
many
political
activists
continue
to
view
the
police
and
other
security
forces
as
being
partisan
in
favour
of
the
incumbent.
For
instance,
on
14th
December
2015,
FDC
presidential
flag
bearer,
Dr
Besigye,
accused
sub-
county
internal
security
officers
(GISOs)
of
being
partisan
and
disrupting
his
rallies.
He
argued
that
GISOs
were
moving
around
telling
people
not
to
attend
his
rallies,
yet
they
are
supposed
to
be
non-partisan.166
In
December
2015,
Kampala
Lord
Mayor,
Erias
Lukwago,
wrote
to
the
Electoral
Commission
protesting
the
manner
in
which
the
Police
prevented
him
from
having
his
inaugural
campaign
rally
in
Kampala
on
Monday
30th
November
2015.
Kampala
Metropolitan
Police
Spokesperson
said
the
venue
(Nakasero
Market)
was
found
not
suitable
due
to
hindrance
of
traffic
and
business.
Lukwago,
however,
argued
that
the
action
was
aimed
at
stopping
his
campaign,
as
according
to
him,
other
persons,
including
the
Katikiro
of
Buganda,
had
been
allowed
to
use
the
venue
before.
167
The
partisan
nature
of
the
police
was
also
displayed
through
the
selective
implementation
of
laws,
such
as
campaigning
beyond
6pm,
which
is
prohibited
by
Section
21
of
the
Presidential
Elections
Act.
On
23rd
December,
police
intercepted
Dr
Besigye
at
8pm
when
traveling
from
Nwoya
district
to
Adjumani
through
Amuru,
accusing
him
of
campaigning
beyond
the
official
time.
According
to
Aswa
Regional
Police
Spokesperson,
Patrick
Jimmy
Okema,
we
got
reports
that
Dr
Besigye,
as
he
passed
through
Atiak
Trading
Centre,
kept
on
campaigning.
We
saw
huge
crowds.
That
is
why
we
decided
to
fire
bullets
and
also
use
tear
gas
to
disperse
the
crowds.168
However,
163
FHRI
interview
with
Hon.
Alice
Alaso
Asianut,
former
candidate
Serere
Woman
MP,
on
4th
March
2016.
164
ibid.
165 FHRI interview with Ingrid Turinawe, FDC Party Secretary for Mobilisation, on 2nd April 2016.
166 Daily Monitor, Besigye rebukes GISOs for interrupting his rallies, by Felix Basiime & Colleb Mugume, 15th
December 2015, p. 3.
167 New Vision, Lukwago suspends rallies, by Charles Etukuri, 3rd December 2015, p. 10.
Monitor,
Teargas,
live
bullets
stop
Besigyes
rally,
by
John
Okot
and
Stephen
Okello,
27th
December
2015,
p.
5.
168 Sunday
CHAPTER THREE
49
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY
49
Museveni
addressed
rallies
beyond
6pm
while
campaigning
in
Otuke
and
Lango
sub-
region
the
week
before
and
police
did
not
intervene. 169
IGP
Gen.
Kale
Kayihura,
responded
to
these
incidences
by
stating
that
we
have
told
Dr
Besigye
to
stop,
but
he
is
not
bothered.
We
are
not
going
to
allow
him
to
paralyse
the
streets
and
highways.
He
added
that
Museveni
could
have
had
a
reason.
I
will
talk
to
the
managers
and
see
why
they
did
it.170
It
has
also
been
argued
by
many
that
the
Public
Order
Management
Act
is
applied
selectively
to
the
detriment
of
opposition
candidates.
For
instance,
on
21st
December
2015,
three
supporters
of
Amama
Mbabazi
including
George
Okello
Ekwaro
(parliamentary
aspirant)
and
Douglas
Denis
Abaca
(contestant
for
youth
male
district
councillor)
were
arrested
over
an
illegal
assembly.
They
were
attempting
to
demonstrate
over
poor
leadership
and
governance
in
Apac
district.
The
officer
in
charge
of
Apac
Police
Station,
Kalifan
Chemutai,
argued
that
the
conveners
had
not
received
permission
to
hold
the
assembly.
Ekwaro,
however,
disputed
this,
saying
that
he
had
sought
permission
from
the
Police
in
writing
and
it
had
been
granted.171
AIGP
Asan
Kasingye
denies
such
selective
application
of
the
POMA
by
the
Uganda
Police
Force
(UPF):
I
know
so
many
rallies,
requests
that
have
been
made
by
the
NRM
and
we
have
refused
them.
I
know
many.
There
is
one
time,
the
first
lady
wanted
to
use
city
square.
They
call
it
constitutional
square.
We
said
no,
you
cannot.
This
is
the
first
lady.
The
police
refused.
I
also
remember
that
after
that
election
we
wanted
to
ensure
that
there
was
peace
in
the
aftermath,
and
the
Inspector
General
of
Police
said
even
the
NRM,
if
you
are
going
to
celebrate
this
victory
you
have
to
get
consent
from
the
police,
not
consent,
but
you
have
to
notify
the
police.172
Kasingye
further
argued
that
there
is
need
for
improved
collaboration
and
discussion
between
organisers
of
rallies
and
the
police
in
order
to
protect
everyones
rights:
I
think
the
most
important
thing
was,
even
security
would
want
to
know
and
plan
for
you
to
exercise
your
right,
but
also
to
make
sure
that
the
rights
of
others
are
not
violated.
That
people
are
protected
while
they
are
exercising
their
rights,
but
even
those
who
are
not
interested
in
the
programme
you
are
pursuing
are
also
protected.
For
example,
why
would
you
not
come
and
discuss
with
me
that
you
expect
2000
people.
Out
of
2000
people
I
would
know
my
level
of
deployment
to
protect
you
to
do
what
you
want
to
do.
Why
would
I
not
know
the
time
you
are
starting
and
the
time
you
are
ending?
Why
would
I
not
know
the
time
to
divert
traffic
because
you
are
going
to
be
there
from
this
time
to
that
time,
because
the
public
would
like
to
know
there
is
a
rally
here,
there
is
a
procession
here,
it
is
starting
at
Najjanakumbi
and
maybe
ending
in
Kololo,
it
is
from
what
time
to
what
time,
so
that
motorists
are
informed
during
this
and
this
time
please
use
this.173
169
Ibid.
Monitor,
Kayihura
defends
Museveni,
warns
Besigye
on
night
rallies,
by
Andrew
Bagala,
15th
February
2016,
p.
8.
171
New
Vision,
Three
more
Mbabazi
supporters
arrested
in
Apac
district,
by
Chris
Kiwawulo,
Simon
Masaba
and
Daniel
Okwir,
23rd
December
2015,
p.
7.
172
FHRI
interview
with
Asan
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Uganda,
on
15th
April
2016.
173
Ibid.
170
Daily
50
50
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
Erias
Lukwago,
Kampala
Lord
Mayor,
however,
felt
that
police
frustrated
his
ability
to
campaign:
We
had
worked
out
the
programme,
which
I
even
shared
with
the
police,
but
it
was
interrupted
and
it
became
difficult
for
me
to
go
by
that
schedule
of
getting
clearance
of
the
police
before
the
rallies
could
commence.
Though
I
had
very
few
rallies
because
of
the
arrangement
I
had
made
but
even
getting
that
clearance
which
of
course
was
uncalled
for.
It
was
a
campaign
period
and
the
law
is
very
clear
you
should
not
seek
for
permission
from
the
police
but
they
put
in
place
that
practice
that
every
rally
had
to
be
cleared.
The
law
is
clear
all
I
need
to
do
is
to
harmonize
the
programme
with
other
candidates,
have
it
sanctioned
by
the
electoral
commission,
and
serve
it
to
the
police,
and
the
police
is
only
supposed
to
provide
security.
I
am
not
supposed
to
get
clearance
from
the
police
every
time
I
have
a
rally.174
When
dispersing
rallies,
excessive
use
of
force
by
police
was
noted
on
several
occasions,
and
alleged
to
be
a
tactic
to
scare
away
people
from
attending
opposition
rallies.
For
instance,
while
campaigning
in
Serere
in
December
2015,
Besigye
said
that
police
patrol
cars
that
trail
his
convoy
and
sometimes
surround
his
campaign
venues
with
crime
preventers
clutching
clubs
is
meant
to
scare
his
supporters
from
his
rallies. 175
Ingrid
Turinawe,
FDC
national
mobiliser,
narrated
her
experience
with
excessive
use
of
force
by
the
UPF:
We
had
a
national
programme
for
the
campaigns
covering
a
period
of
three
months
but
at
several
times
we
were
disrupted.
I
was
even
injured,
I
have
scars
for
injuries
caused
by
the
Uganda
police
and
it
is
not
only
one.
I
was
injured
by
the
Uganda
police
as
they
tried
to
stop
us
from
accessing
Tariyeti
Camp,
of
course
by
tear
gassing,
beating
us
and
they
had
some
sort
of
grenades
or
something
that
they
would
throw
down
and
they
would
cut
the
legs.
They
had
fragments.
Initially
I
thought
they
had
shot
me
but
I
realised
later
they
were
hand
grenades.
They
would
throw
them,
they
bust
and
they
would
cut.
It
has
sharp
objects,
which
would
cut
everybody.
I
realized
when
I
went
for
treatment
because
the
whole
leg
was
swollen
and
it
was
all
bleeding.
I
was
told
that
they
were
fragments
and
they
removed
the
particles
which
were
in
the
leg.
That
day
3
people
were
shot
and
admitted,
they
were
seriously
injured.176
AIGP
Asan
Kasingye
explained
that
excessive
use
of
force
is
sometimes
errant
behaviour
by
individual
police
officers
rather
than
an
intended
strategy
of
the
UPF:
Sometimes
they
[individual
officers]
would
do
certain
things
and
we
say
no,
you
did
not
need
to
have
shot
because
you
are
even
causing
more
excitement,
more
confusion.
The
law
is
on
your
side,
go
and
tell
someone
you
are
not
supposed
to
do
this
and
if
possible
that
somebody
is
campaigning
beyond
time
record
and
inform
him
that
you
did
this
at
6.30
or
at
7
and
it
is
not
allowed
by
law,
it
can
be
used
against
you.177
174 FHRI interview with Erias Lukwago, Kampala Lord Mayor, on 10th May 2016.
175 Sunday Vision, Besigye, police clash in Ibanda, by Moses Walubiri and Lawrence Mucunguzi, 31st January
2016,
p.
5.
176
FHRI
interview
with
Ingrid
Turinawe,
FDC
Party
Secretary
for
Mobilisation,
on
2nd
April
2016.
177
FHRI
interview
with
Asan
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Uganda,
on
15th
April
2016.
CHAPTER THREE
51
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY
51
On
15th
February
2016
police
violently
dispersed
Dr
Besigyes
campaign
in
Kampala
and
arrested
Dr
Besigye.
According
to
police,
they
intervened
because
he
did
not
stick
to
an
authorised
route
and
his
diversion
would
disrupt
business:
The
route
was
agreed
that
you
were
going
to
use
Yusuf
Lule
Road.
You
go
to
Wandegeya
and
you
enter
the
main
gate.
Now
you
reach
Kitgum
House
and
you
want
to
go
to
town.
There
are
pictures
where
they
had
even
gone
beyond
Kitgum
House.
They
were
on
Jinja
Road,
coming
towards
Wava
Broadcasting
Station.
That
is
where
there
were
some
skirmishes,
and
they
were
told
to
go
back.
Is
there
any
presidential
candidate
who
campaigned
in
Owino?
Is
there,
including
the
President?
No,
it
is
not
allowed,
and
we
are
consistent
with
that.
Nobody
ever
went
to
the
Central
Business
District;
even
passing
there,
no
way.178
The
grounds
provided
for
disallowing
candidates
in
the
Central
Business
District
are
to
prevent
a
disturbance
of
traffic,
public
order
and
commercial
activities.
However,
the
Constitutional
Court
in
Muwanga
Kivumbi
v
Attorney
General
ruled
that
a
society
especially
a
democratic
one
should
be
able
to
tolerate
a
good
deal
of
annoyance
or
disorder
so
as
to
encourage
the
greatest
possible
freedom
of
expression,
particularly
political
expression.179
Similarly,
the
UN
Special
Rapporteur
on
the
rights
to
freedom
of
peaceful
assembly
and
of
association,
Maina
Kiai,
notes
that
a
certain
level
of
disruption
to
ordinary
life
caused
by
assemblies,
including
disruption
of
traffic,
annoyance
and
even
harm
to
commercial
activities,
must
be
tolerated
if
the
right
is
not
to
be
deprived
of
substance.180
Furthermore,
according
to
Ingrid
Turinawe,
the
rally
followed
the
route
that
was
established
beforehand:
We
had
a
schedule
for
Kampala.
We
were
supposed
to
have
the
first
rally
in
Kamwokya
and
from
Kamwokya
we
were
supposed
to
go
to
Makerere
and
Nabagereka
primary
school.
For
every
programme
we
would
draw
a
route
to
use
from
one
venue
to
another
venue.
We
were
supposed
to
start
from
Kamwokya
drive
through
Jinja
Road,
through
Arua
Park
and
then
to
Makerere.
When
we
reached
Jinja
Road,
police
unleashed
terror.
We
do
not
know
where
they
wanted
us
to
go.
They
did
not
provide
us
an
alternative
route
before.
At
Jinja
Road
they
blocked
us
and
started
beating
everybody
and
Dr
[Besigye]
was
arrested
and
taken
back
to
his
home.181
Afterwards,
Besigye
returned
to
town
to
attend
the
rally
at
Makerere.
According
to
Ingrid
Turinawe,
as
soon
as
they
reached
Wandegeya,
the
police
started
beating
people
and
arrested
Besigye.182
Kasingye,
however,
argued:
We
all
know
the
route
to
Makerere,
when
you
reach
Wandegeya
and
you
come
from
Kasangati,
you
use
Bombo
Road.
You
come,
you
reach
Wandegeya
at
the
traffic
lights,
we
know
you
are
going
to
the
right
and
then
you
access
the
main
gate.
Why
would
you
now
say
I
am
continuing
Bombo
Road?
Where
would
that
road
take
you?
Does
that
take
you
to
Makerere?
I
takes
you
to
Bible
House,
Bat
178
FHRI
interview
with
Asan
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Uganda,
on
15th
April
2016.
179
Lead
judgement
of
C.K.
Byamugisha,
JA
in
Muwanga
Kivumbi
v
Attorney
General,
Constitutional
Petition
No.
9
of
2005,
Constitutional
Court,
2008.
180
UN
General
Assembly
(A/HRC/31/66),
op
cit.,
p.
9.
181
FHRI
interview
with
Ingrid
Turinawe,
FDC
Party
Secretary
for
Mobilisation,
on
2nd
April
2016.
182
Ibid.
52
52
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
Valley,
to
town,
but
you
are
going
to
Makerere,
people
are
waiting
for
you
at
Makerere.
So
why
would
you
say
now,
me
I
want
to
go
first
of
all
to
town.183
As
a
result
of
the
skirmishes
between
police
and
FDC
supporters,
supporters
started
hurling
rocks
and
erecting
street
barricades,
which
further
escalated
the
violence
and
the
force
used
by
the
police.
Several
people
were
wounded
and
one
person
was
killed.184
According
to
AIGP
Asan
Kasingye,
live
bullets
should
only
be
used
as
a
last
resort,
and
never
to
kill:
In
public
order
management
you
use
bullets
as
a
last
resort.
Nobody
should
tell
you
that
in
public
order
management
there
is
no
section
of
live
bullets.
It
is
always
there,
but
it
is
the
last
one.
But
even
when
you
have
to
resort
to
use
that,
there
is
a
way
you
use
it,
not
directing
fire
to
the
people.
Even
when
you
do
it,
in
our
riot
act,
you
tell
them
that
live
fire
will
be
directed
to
disable
you,
not
to
kill. 185
3.3.3
Freedom
of
assembly
during
the
2016
post-election
period
Many
candidates
contested
the
outcome
of
the
2016
Presidential
Election,
resulting
in
demonstrations
in
the
months
following
the
election.
On
22nd
February
2016,
Dr
Besigye
was
arrested
and
taken
to
Naggalama
Police
Station
after
he
attempted
to
leave
his
home
to
go
to
the
Electoral
Commission
to
collect
results
declaration
forms
to
use
in
a
possible
election
petition.
According
to
IGP
Kayihura,
Dr
Besigye
wanted
to
use
the
cover
of
picking
presidential
results
from
the
EC
headquarters
to
cause
chaos
in
the
city.
He
was
supposed
to
inform
us
three
days
before
holding
a
procession
as
the
POMA
stipulates. 186
The
POMA,
however,
excludes
spontaneous
gatherings
from
a
prior
notification
requirement,
and
according
to
international
human
right
standards,
failure
to
notify
should
not
be
used
as
a
basis
for
dispersing
an
assembly.
In
addition,
the
Constitutional
Court
ruled
that
the
freedom
of
assembly
cannot
be
restricted
on
mere
anticipatory
grounds
of
disrupting
public
order.
This
was,
therefore,
a
clear
violation
of
the
rights
to
freedom
of
peaceful
assembly
and
liberty.
FDC
continued
its
defiance
campaign
activities
and
planned
to
organise
nationwide
demonstrations
for
5th
May
2016.187
On
29th
April
2016,
however,
Deputy
Chief
Justice,
Stephen
Kavuma,
issued
an
interim
order
against
the
FDC,
Dr
Besigye
and
their
agents,
officials
and
supporters
from
engaging
in
demonstrations,
processions,
other
public
meetings,
media
campaigns
or
pronouncements
including,
but
not
limited
to,
the
respondents
planned
and
led
demonstrations
or
processions
scheduled
for
the
5 th
May
or
any
other
day
from
the
date
hereof
in
furtherance
of
the
respondents
defiance
campaign
pending
the
hearing
and
determination
of
the
main
Constitutional
Application
number
017
of
2016
now
pending
in
this
Court.188
The
application
of
this
interim
order
was
heard
ex
parte
in
the
absence
of
the
respondents
(FDC
and
Dr
Besigye),
which
is
only
allowable
where
the
delay
caused
by
183
FHRI
interview
with
Asan
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Uganda,
on
15th
April
2016.
184
For
further
information
on
this
case,
see
Chapter
5
on
the
right
to
life.
185
FHRI
interview
with
Asan
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Uganda,
on
15th
April
2016.
186
Daily
Monitor,
Besigye
is
not
special
Kayihura,
by
Joseph
Kato,
23rd
February
2016,
p.
3.
187
The
FDC
announced
the
defiance
campaign
to
protest
the
outcomes
of
the
2016
presidential
election.
The
party
instituted
weekly
prayers
and
announced
countrywide
protests
while
calling
for
an
independent
audit
of
the
presidential
election
results.
188
Attorney
General
v
FDC
and
Col.
(Rtd)
Dr
Kizza
Besigye,
Interim
Order,
Constitutional
Court,
Constitutional
Application
No.
18
of
2016,
29th
April
2016.
CHAPTER THREE
53
RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY
53
including
all
parties
would
or
may
entail
irreparable
damage
or
serious
mischief.189
It
is
difficult
to
argue
that
such
danger
was
present
in
this
case,
as
the
order
was
made
six
days
ahead
of
the
scheduled
demonstrations,
indicating
there
was
sufficient
time
for
the
respondents
to
have
been
notified
and
included
in
the
court
proceedings.
According
to
the
UN
Special
Rapporteur
on
the
rights
to
freedom
of
peaceful
assembly
and
of
association,
Maina
Kiai,
blanket
bans
on
the
right
to
freedom
of
peaceful
assembly,
or
even
bans
on
the
exercise
of
the
right
in
specific
places
or
at
specific
times
are
intrinsically
disproportionate.190
The
FDC
being
of
the
opinion
that
the
interim
order
by
the
Constitutional
Court
was
unlawful,
was
determined
to
continue
with
the
defiance
campaign
activities,
including
the
weekly
prayers
held
every
Tuesday
at
the
FDC
headquarters
in
Najjanakumbi
in
Kampala.
According
to
Besigye,
I
am
horrified
to
hear
that
a
court
can
make
an
order
with
far
reaching
restrictions
on
rights
of
citizens
ex-parte.
It
was
not
that
heaven
was
caving
in.
This
will
certainly
be
defied
because
it
is
illegal.191
On
Tuesday
3rd
May,
ahead
of
the
weekly
prayers,
police
arrested
Kampala
City
Lord
Mayor
Erias
Lukwago,
Dr
Stella
Nyanzi,
FDC
weekly
prayers
lead
pastor
Habby
Ngabo
and
his
co-pastor
Edward
Ssenyange,
among
others. 192
The
next
day,
Lukwago,
pastor
Ngabo
and
Dr
Nyanzi,
together
with
23
other
suspects
were
charged
before
Makindye
Magistrates
Court
with
several
offences
including
disobeying
lawful
orders,
and
were
released
on
bail.193
3.4
CONCLUSION
During
the
consultation
period
the
right
to
freedom
of
assembly
was
severely
restricted.
Most
notably,
the
Supreme
Court
argued
that
the
interception
of
Mbabazi
enroute
to
Mbale
and
his
consequent
detention
were
unjustified,
highhanded
and
contrary
to
the
law.
The
freedom
of
assembly
during
the
2016
campaign
period
was
respected
to
the
extent
that
presidential
and
parliamentary
candidates
were
largely
able
to
organise
rallies.
However,
widespread
intimidation
and
interference
during
opposition
rallies
was
noted
with
NRM
members
and/or
supporters
disrupting
rallies
on
several
occasions.
The
interference
in
the
campaigns
of
opposition
members
affected
their
ability
to
market
their
manifestos
and
ideas
effectively,
denying
the
electorate
the
chance
to
make
an
informed
decision.
In
the
post-election
environment
the
freedom
of
assembly
was
gravely
violated
following
an
interim
order
by
Deputy
Chief
Justice
Kavuma,
banning
all
demonstrations,
processions
or
other
public
meetings
part
of
FDCs
defiance
campaign.
Such
a
blanket
ban
on
public
gatherings
is
a
severe
violation
of
the
right
to
freedom
of
assembly,
and
the
issuing
of
such
order
ex-parte,
a
violation
of
the
right
to
a
fair
hearing.
189
Uganda
Law
Society,
Statement
of
Uganda
Law
Society
on
interim
ex
parte
orders
in
AG
v
FDC,
Besigye
(Constitutional
Petition
No.
13
of
2016),
4th
May
2016.
190
UN
General
Assembly
(A/HRC/31/66),
op.
cit.,
p.
8.
191
New
Vision,
Kavuma
interim
orders
against
FDC
illegal,
says
Besigye,
by
Moses
Walubiri,
30th
April
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.newvision.co.ug/new_vision/news/1423517/kavuma-interim-fdc-illegal-
besigye.
192
Daily
Monitor,
Lukwago,
Dr
Nyanzi
arrested
as
police
crack
on
FDC
defiance
campaign,
by
Michael
Kakumirizi
&
Job
Bwire,
3rd
May
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Lukwago-Dr-Nyanzi-arrested-police-crack-FDC/-
/688334/3187122/-/1485av4z/-/index.html.
193
Daily
Monitor,
Pr
Ngabo,
Lukwago,
Nyanzi
secure
bail,
by
Anthony
Wesaka,
4th
May
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Pr-Ngabo-Lukwago-Nyanzi-secure-bail/-
/688334/3189042/-/rkigvy/-/index.html.
54
54
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
CHAPTER FOUR
RIGHT TO LIFE
4.1
INTRODUCTION
Under
international
human
rights
law,
derogation
from
the
right
to
life
is
only
permitted
in
execution
of
a
death
sentence
carried
out
pursuant
to
a
final
judgement
rendered
by
a
competent
court
and
only
for
the
most
serious
crimes.194
The
Constitution
reinforces
this.
Article
22
of
the
Constitution
guarantees
the
right
to
life
except
where
a
death
sentence
is
passed
in
a
fair
trial
by
a
court
of
competent
jurisdiction
in
respect
of
a
criminal
offence,
and
such
conviction
and
sentence
have
been
confirmed
by
the
highest
appellate
court.
4.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
During
the
2006
and
2011
elections,
only
one
violation
of
the
right
to
life
was
documented.
On
15th
February
2006,
shortly
before
the
2006
elections,
a
Special
Police
Constable
(SPC),
Ramathan
Magara,
killed
two
and
wounded
a
third
when
firing
into
a
FDC
rally
at
Bulange
Mengo
in
Kampala.
Magara
was
prosecuted
and
sentenced
to
14
years
imprisonment
in
June
2009.195
The
Walk
to
Work
protests
following
the
2011
elections
resulted
in
further
violations
of
the
right
to
life.
During
April
2011,
at
least
nine
people
were
shot
and
killed
by
police
seeking
to
quell
demonstrations
in
Kampala,
Gulu
and
Masaka,196
including
a
two-year-
old
girl,
Juliana
Nalwanga,
who
was
hit
in
the
head
by
a
stray-bullet
when
a
police
constable
tried
to
disperse
protestors
in
Masaka
district.197
4.3
RIGHT
TO
LIFE
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
During
the
2016
election
period,
there
were
a
number
of
instances
where
police
used
lethal
force
to
disperse
rallies,
resulting
in
the
loss
of
life.
For
instance,
on
15 th
February
2016
one
person
was
killed
in
Kampala
when
police
clashed
with
FDC
supporters
after
Besigyes
rally
was
disrupted
and
Besigye
was
arrested
for
the
second
time
that
day.
Chaos
erupted
after
police
blocked
Dr
Besigye
from
addressing
his
planned
rallies
in
Kampala
as
it
would
disturb
traffic
flow.
Police
fired
teargas
to
disperse
the
crowd
and
arrested
Dr
Besigye,
and
after
a
short
detention
at
Kira
Road
Police
Station
drove
him
to
his
home.
Besigye,
however,
drove
back
to
town
to
address
a
scheduled
rally
at
Makerere
University.
At
Wandegeya
police
blocked
and
arrested
him
again.
The
violence
that
followed,
resulted
in
the
death
of
one
person,
identified
as
Emmanuel
Musisi
Nsubuga,
and
22
others
were
injured.198
The
police
accepted
that
they
killed
him.
They
are
the
ones
who
carried
him
to
his
burial
ground
and
even
paid
money
for
his
burial
to
the
family.199
On
the
evening
before
Election
Day,
one
person
was
killed
and
two
others
seriously
injured
when
an
army
officer
and
his
bodyguards
opened
fire
at
a
group
of
supporters
of
the
FDC
in
Bugweri
County
in
Iganga
district.
The
incident
occurred
after
the
FDC
supporters
clashed
with
Capt.
Moses
Kalera,
who
they
accused
of
trying
to
help
the
NRM
candidate,
Dan
Ibaale,
bribing
voters
in
the
area.200
194 Article 6(1) and (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966.
195 Daily Monitor, Anger as Magara gets 14 years in jail for killing FDC supporters, by Alfred Nyongesa and
196 Human Rights Watch, Uganda: Walk to Work Group Declared Illegal, retrieved on 22nd July 2015 from:
http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/04/04/uganda-walk-work-group-declared-illegal.
197
FHRI,
The
Right
to
a
Fair
Trial
2012,
op.
cit.,
p.
79.
198
Daily
Monitor,
US
condemns
killing
of
Besigye
supporer,
by
Frederic
Musisi,
18th
February
2016,
p.
6.
199
FHRI
interview
with
Ingrid
Turinawe,
FDC
Party
Secretary
for
Mobilisation,
on
2nd
April
2016.
200
Daily
Monitor,
Iganga
Two
killed,
by
Yazid
Yolisigira,
23rd
February
2016,
p.
13.
56
56
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
On
19th
February
2016,
the
day
after
elections,
a
13-year-old
boy,
Muzamiru
Kule,
was
shot
dead
by
a
police
officer
during
a
clash
between
FDC
supporters
and
security
personnel
both
UPF
and
UPDF
at
the
Kasese
district
tallying
centre.
Bob
Kagarura,
Rwenzori
East
Police
Commander,
confirmed
that
Kule
was
shot
as
security
officers
dispersed
rioting
FDC
supporters
along
the
Kasese
-
Fort
Portal
road
and
died
on
the
way
to
Kilembe
Hospital.201
Hon.
Winnie
Kiiza,
Kasese
Woman
MP,
narrated
this
ordeal:
On
the
election
day
of
the
President
and
Members
of
Parliament,
there
is
a
13-
year-old
boy
who
was
shot
dead
at
a
tally
centre.
He
was
called
Muzamiru.
Muzamiru
was
shot
dead
at
a
tally
centre
where
the
police
did
not
want
[people]
to
be
closer
to
the
tally
centre
to
see
how
the
declarations
were
made.
They
dispersed
people
with
tear
gas,
beat
them
up
badly,
until
they
even
commanded
for
firing
of
live
ammunition.
That
is
how
this
Muzamiru
boy
died.202
According
to
AIGP
Asan
Kasingye,
live
bullets
should
only
be
used
as
a
last
resort,
and
never
to
kill:
In
public
order
management
you
use
bullets
as
a
last
resort.
Nobody
should
tell
you
that
in
public
order
management
there
is
no
section
of
live
bullets.
It
is
always
there,
but
it
is
the
last
one.
But
even
when
you
have
to
resort
to
use
that,
there
is
a
way
you
use
it,
not
directing
fire
to
the
people.
Even
when
you
do
it,
in
our
riot
act,
you
tell
them
that
live
fire
will
be
directed
to
disable
you,
not
to
kill. 203
Non-lethal
crowd
control
methods,
however,
seem
to
be
lacking
in
the
standard
equipment
provided
to
police
officers.
According
to
accepted
policing
procedures,
the
provision
of
a
firearm
to
law
enforcement
officials
with
no
less-lethal
alternative
other
than
a
baton
is
unacceptable.204
This
calls
for
a
need
to
equip
police
officers
with
sufficient
non-lethal
alternatives.
According
to
Severino
Twinobusingye,
Go
Forward
counsel,
one
of
the
persons
who
had
sworn
an
affidavit
in
support
of
the
presidential
election
petition
was
later
killed:
There
is
a
witness
called
Moses
from
Buyende
district.
He
was
killed
around
12th
March
[2016].
He
was
murdered.
After
elections,
he
came
and
swore
an
affidavit
for
us.
After
swearing
an
affidavit,
they
broke
into
the
offices.
That
is
when
they
discovered
he
was
the
chairman
of
NRM
in
Buyende
district.
So
they
killed
him.205
In
addition
to
these
killings,
there
were
a
number
of
suspicious
deaths.
For
instance,
t he
EC
supervisor
for
Kyambogo
village,
Ntuusi
sub-county
in
Sembabule
district
was
found
killed
on
25th
February
2016.
According
to
John
Mugambe,
the
in-charge
of
security
in
Ntuusi
sub-county,
it
is
not
yet
clear
why
the
deceased
was
killed
because
all
his
belongings
including
a
mobile
phone
and
some
amount
of
money
were
not
taken. 206
201 Uganda Radio Network, One Killed in Kasese Post-election Protests, by Thembo Kahungu, 20th February
202
FHRI
interview
with
Hon.
Winifred
Kiiza,
Woman
MP
Kasese
district,
on
15th
April
2016.
203
FHRI
interview
with
Asan
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Uganda,
on
15th
April
2016.
204
UN
General
Assembly
(A/HRC/31/66),
op.
cit.,
p.
13.
205
FHRI
interview
with
Severino
Twinobusingye,
Counsel
Legal
Team
Go
Forward,
on
5th
April
2016.
206
Daily
Monitor,
Sembabule
EC
supervisor
found
dead,
by
Gertrude
Mutyaba,
29th
February
2016,
p.
8.
CHAPTER FOUR
57
RIGHT TO LIFE
57
Furthermore,
Hon.
Alice
Alaso
reported
to
FHRI
that
one
of
her
agents,
Yoru
Denis,
was
killed
on
19th
February
2016.
He
was
found
with
his
neck
twisted
and
ear
pierced,
but
they
do
not
know
who
killed
him
or
why.
The
Go
Forward
team
further
reported
the
extra-judicial
killing
of
at
least
two
of
their
supporters.
In
Bukedea
district,
a
Go
Forward
supporter,
Okwii
Isaacs
house
was
allegedly
burned
down
whilst
his
four
year
old
son
was
sleeping
and
died
in
the
fire. 207
Go
Forward
supporter,
Ms
Tumwebaze,
was
allegedly
murdered
in
Mbarara
and
her
body
dumped
in
the
river.208
Fred
Enanga,
police
spokesperson,
however,
refuted
these
claims
and
described
these
accusations
as
glaring
falsehood.209
Following
the
election,
violence
broke
out
in
Bundibugyo.
Eight
people
were
reportedly
killed
in
Busaro
sub-county
of
Bundibugyo
district
on
28th
February
2016.
This
followed
the
announcement
by
the
district
registrar,
Daniel
Nayebare,
that
Ronald
Mutegeki
had
won
the
election
for
Bundibugyo
district
LC5
seat,
and
thereby
overturned
the
provisional
results
that
had
announced
Jolly
Tibemanya
as
winner.
According
to
eyewitnesses,
a
group
of
about
30
people
armed
with
sticks,
pangas
and
spears
appeared
in
Bukundugu
village
and
started
killing
people. 210
Even
in
Bundibugyo
it
was
the
same
electoral
violence
where
the
Electoral
Commission
decides
to
announce
someone
and
then
without
even
any
petition
they
decide
to
change
who
has
won.
Then
people
become
violent.
From
there
you
can
see
how
lives
have
been
lost.211
Though
the
clashes
were
instigated
by
the
election
results
and
the
contradictory
announcements,
the
violence
had
a
deep-rooted
tribal
element:
[T]he
Bakonzo
did
not
have
a
candidate
at
LC
5.
Both
were
Bamba,
only
that
one
Bamba
was
more
favoured
by
the
Bamba
than
the
other.
Meanwhile,
the
other
who
was
not
favoured
by
the
Bamba
was
the
favourite
of
some
Bakonzo.
So
the
Bamba
felt
the
one
who
went
through
was
the
one
who
was
supported
more
by
the
Bakonzo
than
the
Bamba.
I
think
the
Bamba
feel
it
was
a
Bakonzo
supported
candidate
that
has
gone
through.
I
think
that
is
what
is
eating
them
up.
But
that
notwithstanding,
I
would
imagine
that
the
Electoral
Commission
brought
all
that
chaos.
First,
by
announcing
the
candidate
who
was
more
supported
by
the
Bamba
and
then
later
on
changing
the
results
without
anybody
saying
I
am
contesting
the
results.
You
can
see
a
small
mistake
leading
to
loss
of
so
many
lives.
If
this
election
had
been
properly
conducted,
probably
the
right
candidates
announced
at
the
right
time,
maybe
this
would
not
have
happened.212
Incidences
of
violence
and
killings
have
continued
to
take
place
in
Bundibugyo
throughout
March
and
April,
with
the
death
toll
rising
to
over
30
reported
deaths.
According
to
police
intelligence,
The
Bamba
King,
Col.
Martin
Kamya
was
behind
the
clashes.
The
King,
allegedly,
rallied
his
subjects
to
vote
Ms
Tibemanya
during
the
election,
however
the
voters
instead
decided
to
vote
for
Mutegeki,
and
consequently
the
207
Amama
Mbabazi,
Statement
to
the
press
and
public
on
brutalisation
of
Go
Forward
team,
Press
Statement
on
7th
January
2016.
208
Ibid.
209
Saturday
Monitor,
Police
warn
Mbabazi
on
claims
of
State
murder,
by
Joseph
Kato,
9th
January
2016,
p.
4.
210
New
Vision,
Whos
to
blame
for
Bundibugyo
clashes?,
by
Geoffrey
Mutegeki,
29th
February
2016,
p.
12.
211
FHRI
interview
with
Hon.
Winifred
Kiiza,
Woman
MP
Kasese
district,
on
15th
April
2016.
212
Ibid.
58
58
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
King
ordered
an
attack
on
those
who
did
not
support
the
kingdom.213
The
Obudhingiya
Bwa
Bwamba
cultural
institution
has,
however,
denied
the
involvement
of
King
Kamya
in
the
post-election
clashes.214
4.4
CONCLUSION
Excessive
use
of
force
by
security
officers
continues
to
result
in
incidental
loss
of
life.
The
violence
and
loss
of
life
in
the
days
before
Election
Day,
undoubtedly
contributed
to
an
environment
of
fear.
Despite
statements
made
by
police
that
lethal
crowd
control
methods
are
only
used
as
a
last
resort,
too
often
does
the
police
resort
to
live
bullets
to
disperse
demonstrations.
There
is
need
to
effectively
investigate
these
and
other
killings
to
ensure
perpetrators
are
held
accountable.
Furthermore,
investigations
in
the
violence
and
killings
in
the
Rwenzori
region
are
urgent
to
address
the
root
causes
behind
the
recurrent
killings
in
this
region
and
hold
perpetrators
accountable.
Adequate
and
timely
investigations
of
suspected
unlawful
or
arbitrary
killings
are
an
important
part
of
the
states
obligation
to
protect,
as
a
failure
to
do
so
amounts
to
a
violation
of
the
right
to
life
itself.
213
Daily
Monitor,
Police
arrest
80
as
death
toll
rises
in
Bundibugyo
election
clashes,
by
Joseph
Kato
and
Moris
Mumbere,
1st
March
2016,
p.
7.
214
Daily
Monitor,
Bwamba
reacts,
by
Scovia
Atuhaire,
7th
March
2016,
p.
11.
CHAPTER FOUR
59
RIGHT TO LIFE
59
CHAPTER FIVE:
5.1
INTRODUCTION
The
right
to
liberty
and
security
of
the
person
is
an
internationally
recognised
human
right
that
protects
people
from
arbitrary
arrests,
detention
or
enforced
disappearance.
The
Constitution
provides
that
a
person
arrested,
restricted
or
detained
shall
be
informed
immediately,
in
a
language
that
the
person
understands,
of
the
reasons
for
the
arrest,
restriction
or
detention
and
of
his
or
her
right
to
a
lawyer
of
his
or
her
choice. 215
5.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
During
the
2006
election
period,
the
arrest
and
prosecution
of
FDC
leader,
Dr
Kizza
Besigye,
was
the
most
prominent
violation
of
the
right
to
liberty
impacting
on
the
election
process.
Dr
Besigye
was
arrested
on
14th
November
2005
on
charges
of
treason,
rape,
terrorism
and
illegal
possession
of
weapons.
He
was
only
released
on
2nd
January
2006,
52
days
before
the
elections
on
23rd
February
2006.
In
addition,
he
had
to
appear
27
times
in
court,
liming
his
ability
to
campaign
tremendously.216
His
prosecution
was
widely
regarded
as
designed
to
frustrate
his
presidential
campaign.
Similarly,
two
FDC
MPs
were
prosecuted
for
murder,
limiting
their
ability
to
campaign
and
undermining
their
legitimacy
as
political
leaders.217
Furthermore,
there
were
instances
of
candidates
being
arrested
for
using
malicious,
false,
abusive,
insulting
or
derogatory
statements
during
campaigns.218
In
the
2011
election
period,
the
Uganda
Human
Rights
Commission
received
several
complaints
regarding
unlawful
arrests
during
campaigns
and
on
polling
day. 219
The
EU
Election
Observation
Mission
noted
that
police
was
seemingly
biased
as
arrests
of
opposition
agents,
politicians
and
supporters
were
widespread,
yet
the
EU
observers
did
not
record
any
arrests
of
NRM
agents,
politicians
and
supporters. 220
Furthermore,
Ms
Annet
Namwanga,
responsible
for
arranging
DP
financial
resources
from
abroad,
was
arrested
on
charges
of
terrorism
and
detained
incommunicado
for
16
days.221
After
DP
secured
her
release
she
was
re-arrested.
In
addition,
several
civil
society
activists
were
arrested
when
carrying
out
voter
sensitisation.222
Both
in
2006
and
2011,
cases
of
arbitrary
arrests
and
detention
of
stakeholders
in
ungazetted
safe
houses
were
reported.223
5.3
RIGHT
TO
LIBERTY
AND
SECURITY
OF
THE
PERSON
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
Throughout
the
election
period,
there
were
widespread
reports
of
arbitrary
arrests,
despite
cautionary
statements
by
the
UHRC
against
arresting
citizens
before
thorough
investigations,
and
that
preventive
arrest
infringes
on
the
presumption
of
innocence.224
217 The two FDC MPs were acquitted by High Court. See: Commonwealth Observer Group, 2006, op. cit., p.
27.
219
Electoral
institute
for
Sustainable
Democracy
in
Africa,
2011,
op.
cit.,
p.
19.
220
EU
Election
Observation
Mission,
2011,
op.
cit.,
pp.
15,
25.
221
Ibid.,
p.
23.
222
For
instance,
several
activists
of
the
Citizens
Coalition
for
Electoral
Democracy
in
Uganda
(CCEDU)
were
arrested
by
police
while
distributing
a
leaflet
asking
voters
not
to
vote
for
any
MP
or
leader
involved
in
corruption
and
demanding
that
all
MPs
return
UGX
20
million
deposited
into
their
bank
accounts.
223
EU
Election
Observation
Mission,
2011,
op.
cit.,
p.
7.
224
On
14th
December
2015,
Juliet
Logose,
UHRC
officer
in
charge
of
West
Nile,
cautioned
the
police
against
arresting
citizens
before
thorough
investigations.
On
15th
December
2015,
Kamadi
Byonabye,
UHRC
director
CHAPTER FIVE
61
RIGHT TO LIBERTY AND SECURITY OF THE PERSON
61
For
instance,
Kampala
Lord
Mayor,
Erias
Lukwago,
noted:
16th
November
2015
we
were
supposed
to
be
nominated.
We
had
organised
to
go
for
nomination
and
the
Minister
came
up
with
this
obnoxious
bill
to
scrap
adult
suffrage
in
Kampala.
They
wanted
to
nominate
the
councilors
and
leave
out
the
Lord
Mayor.
I
refused
that
and
told
them
I
had
to
first
get
official
communication
from
the
Electoral
Commission.
So
there
was
a
battle
here
because
I
could
not
allow
the
police
to
block
me
from
my
home.
There
was
a
stiff
battle
and
even
one
of
the
journalists
called
Isaac
of
Delta
TV
was
almost
killed.
Eventually
they
put
me
in
the
black
van
and
drove
me
up
to
Naggalama
[Police
Station]
where
I
stayed
up
to
11pm.
I
was
not
charged
with
any
offence.225
In
January
2016,
former
intelligence
operative
and
political
activist,
Charles
Rwomushana,
was
detained
for
four
days
at
the
Special
Investigations
Division
at
Kireka
as
he
was
being
investigated
by
police
for
publishing
hate-speeches
on
his
social
media
platforms.
According
to
Rwomushana
he
was
denied
access
to
his
relatives
and
lawyers
until
his
release.226
On
5th
March
2016,
the
police
arrested
the
head
of
FDC
task
force
in
Rukungiri,
Darius
Tweyambe,
for
unknown
reasons.
According
to
sources
from
Rukungiri
Police
Station,
Tweyambe
was
taken
to
Ntungamo
Police
Station
and
later
taken
to
Kampala.227
On
6th
March,
Ntungamo
Officer
in
Charge
of
criminal
investigations,
Bosco
Gume
Salongo,
said
they
were
requested
to
put
him
in
custody
and
that
they
are
waiting
for
him
to
be
picked
up
and
transported
to
Kampala.228
On
7th
March,
Police
Spokesperson,
Fred
Enanga,
explained
that
they
arrested
Tweyambe
and
Henry
Mutyaba
for
allegedly
circulating
a
picture
depicting
a
dead
President
Museveni
on
social
media,
and
that
the
suspects
were
being
detained
and
interrogated
at
the
Special
Investigations
Unit
in
Kireka.229
Similar
to
the
2006
and
2011
elections,
the
police
was
accused
of
being
partisan
during
the
election
process
to
the
detriment
of
the
opposition
politicians.
For
instance,
following
the
violence
in
Ntungamo
on
13th
December
2015,
at
least
23
Go
Forward
members
were
arrested.230
According
to
Amama
Mbabazi,
none
of
the
NRM
supporters
who
threatened
to
burn
his
car
or
threw
stones
at
his
car
were
arrested.231
According
to
Mbabazi,
the
supporters
and
team
members
of
Go
Forward
were
acting
in
self-defence
and
now
face
trumped
up
charges
in
court.232
Based
on
this
incident,
former
IGP
Julius
Peter
Odwee
also
argued
that
the
Uganda
Police
Force
has
become
partisan.
He
stated
for
regional
services,
said
that
the
commission
does
not
agree
with
preventive
arrests
as
it
infringes
on
the
presumption
of
innocence.
225
FHRI
interview
with
Erias
Lukwago,
Kampala
Lord
Mayor,
on
10th
May
2016.
226
Observer,
Rwomushana
released,
put
under
police
guard,
by
Siraje
Lubwawma
and
Zurah
Nakabugo,
13 th
14th
January
2016,
p.
2.
227
New
Vision,
Tweyambe
arrested
again,
by
Caleb
Behikaho,
7th
March
2016,
p.
13.
228
Daily
Monitor,
Besigye
chief
campaigner
detained,
by
Perez
Rumanzi,
7th
March
2016,
p.
11.
229
Daily
Monitor,
Two
arrested
over
dead
Museveni
picture,
by
Joseph
Kato,
7th
March
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Two-arrested-over--dead--Museveni-picture/-
/688334/3106714/-/hfjb9lz/-/index.html.
230
New
Vision,
Guards
arrested,
Mbabazi
protests,
by
Chris
Kiwanuka,
Simon
Masaba,
and
Jeff
Lule,
22nd
December
2015,
p.
9.
231
Daily
Monitor,
Museveni
ordered
raid
on
my
office,
by
Isaac
Imaka
and
Frederic
Musisi,
22nd
December
2015,
p.
5.
232
On
12th
January
2016,
11
suspects
of
the
violence
in
Ntungamo
were
granted
bail
by
the
Ntungamo
Magistrates
Court.
At
the
time
of
writing,
the
case
was
still
on-going.
62
62
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
that
the
police
are
supposed
to
treat
everyone
equal,
and
when
two
sides
are
fighting,
they
should
both
be
taken
to
court.233
Western
Youth
MP
Gerald
Karuhanga
noted
similar
behaviour
by
security
forces
in
Ntungamo
on
Election
Day.
According
to
him,
his
home
was
under
military
siege
and
many
of
his
supporters
and
agents
were
arrested
and
taken
to
police
or
safe
houses.
In
response
to
this
allegation,
DPC
Baker
Kawonawo,
stated
that
20
suspects
had
been
arrested
over
allegations
of
bribing
voters.234
On
23rd
February,
police
raided
the
Mbarara
FDC
party
offices
and
arrested
15
people.
According
to
Mbarara
District
FDC
chairperson,
Stanley
Katembeya,
the
police
failed
to
explain
the
arrests,
and
were
only
told
that
one
of
them
is
a
dangerous
person
by
the
District
Police
Commander,
Japhar
Magyezi.
Magyezi
confirmed
the
arrests
but
said
they
were
arrested
from
a
lodge
next
to
the
FDC
offices.235
On
29th
February
2016,
FDC
said
that
more
than
300
of
its
supporters,
including
polling
agents
were
being
held
in
unknown
facilities
across
the
country.
According
to
FDC
Spokesperson,
Semujju
Nganda,
over
200
supporters
were
arrested
two
days
before
Election
Day
when
Dr
Besigyes
attempt
to
hold
rallies
in
Kampalas
city
centre
turned
violent.
Many
more
FDC
supporters
were
arrested
in
the
week
following
the
elections
after
Dr
Besigye
rejected
results
of
the
presidential
election.
Police
spokesperson
Fred
Enanga,
however,
refuted
these
numbers,
stating
that
only
132
cases
had
been
documented
by
the
police
countrywide
which
was
not
limited
to
the
FDC
but
included
all
political
players.236
5.3.1
Arrests
of
presidential
candidate
Dr
Kizza
Besigye
One
of
the
most
prominent
violations
of
the
right
to
liberty
during
the
2016
election
period
was
the
repeated
arrest
of
FDC
presidential
candidate
Dr
Kizza
Besigye.
Only
in
February
2016,
Dr
Besigye
was
arrested
9
times,
denied
entry
to
and
exit
from
his
own
residence,
denied
free
access
to
his
lawyers
and
persistently
blocked
from
visiting
the
party
headquarters.237
On
15th
February
2016,
Besigye
was
arrested
twice
when
he
was
attempting
to
address
rallies
in
Kampalas
city
centre
to
close
his
election
campaign.
Police
arrested
him
when
Besigye
refused
to
change
the
route
for
his
rallies,
and
was
briefly
taken
to
Kira
Road
Police
Station
before
being
driven
home.
Afterwards,
Dr
Besigye
drove
back
to
the
city
to
address
a
rally
at
Makerere
University,
but
was
arrested
again
from
Wandegeya.
Police
Spokesperson,
Fred
Enanga,
said
that
Dr
Besigye
was
only
restrained
from
disrupting
business
in
the
Central
Business
District.238
On
Election
Day,
Dr
Besigye
was
arrested
when
he
demanded
access
to
a
house
in
Naguru,
a
suburb
of
Kampala,
suspected
to
be
used
by
security
operatives
to
rig
the
elections.
According
to
Patrick
Onyango,
Spokesperson
for
Kampala
Metropolitan
Police,
233
Daily
Monitor,
Police
is
acting
partisan
-
former
IGP
Odwee,
by
Bill
Oketch,
3rd
January
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/Magazines/PeoplePower/Police-is-acting-partisan-former-IGP-Odwee/-
/689844/3018994/-/item/0/-/qk68kz/-/index.html.
234
Daily
Monitor,
Police
arrest
20
in
Ntungamo
violence,
by
Alfred
Tumushabe
and
Perez
Rumanzi,
19th
February
2016,
p.
12.
235
Daily
Monitor,
Police
raid
Mbarara
FDC
party
offices,
arrest
15,
by
Rajab
Mukombozi
and
Sylvia
Katushabe,
25th
February
2016,
p.
13.
236
Daily
Monitor,
Police
holding
300
FDC
supporters,
polling
agents,
by
Solomon
Arinaitwe,
1st
March
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Police-holding-300-FDC-supporters-polling-
agents/-/688334/3097494/-/11jxmx5/-/index.html.
237
Forum
for
Democratic
Change,
FDC-NEC
Statement
on
2016
elections,
2nd
March
2016.
238
Daily
Monitor,
US
condemns
killing
of
Besigye
supporter,
by
Frederic
Musisi,
18th
February
2016,
p.
6.
CHAPTER FIVE
63
RIGHT TO LIBERTY AND SECURITY OF THE PERSON
63
Dr
Besigye
was
apprehended
for
criminal
trespass
and
assault
and
later
released
on
police
bond.239
A
day
later,
on
19th
February
2016,
after
the
FDC
called
a
press
conference
to
show
the
results
that
were
announced
at
polling
stations
in
the
presence
of
citizens
and
FDC
polling
agents,
police
raided
the
FDC
headquarters.
Police
fired
tear
gas
and
bullets
to
disperse
the
crowd
that
had
gathered
at
the
FDC
officers,
and
arrested
Dr
Kizza
Besigye,
Gen.
Mugisha
Muntu
and
Ingrid
Turinawe.
According
to
Kampala
Metropolitan
Police
Commander,
Andrew
Felix
Kaweesi,
they
arrested
Besigye
under
preventive
arrest
reference,
and
that
they
would
keep
him
detained
until
the
results
would
be
announced
on
20th
February
2016
to
prevent
him
from
causing
civil
disobedience. 240
Ingrid
Turinawe,
shared
her
experience
of
this
incidence
with
FHRI:
Our
headquarters
were
broken
into.
We
were
found
in
a
meeting
at
the
headquarters.
They
were
claiming
that
we
were
going
to
announce
the
results
because
we
had
a
tally
centre
and
we
would
clearly
see
where
Kiggundu
was
changing
the
results
and
was
announcing
wrong
results.
So
they
claimed
that
we
were
going
to
announce
results,
and
they
came
and
arrested
three
of
us:
me,
the
party
president
and
Dr
Besigye.
We
were
detained
at
Naggalama
Police
Station
and
during
the
night
they
released
Dr
Besigye
and
Gen.
Muntu,
but
they
told
me
that
I
had
other
cases.
I
slept
in
the
cells
but
the
next
day
they
released
me
without
any
charges.241
According
to
Dr
Kizza
Besigye,
they
were
detained
without
charge
at
Naggalama
police
station.
He
further
noted
that
he
had
been
put
under
house
arrest,
that
his
home
was
sealed
off,
nobody
was
allowed
to
access
his
home
and
he
suspected
to
have
been
put
under
an
electronic
blockade
as
he
was
unable
to
access
any
internet
services
from
his
home.242
On
20th
February
2016,
FDC
party
officials
were
blocked
from
entering
the
home
of
Dr
Besigye,
who
was
still
being
kept
under
house
arrest.
Kampala
Lord
Mayor,
Erias
Lukwago,
who
had
also
come
for
the
meeting
at
Besigyes
home,
was
arrested
and
driven
away
in
a
police
vehicle
as
he
attempted
to
talk
to
journalists.243
On
22nd
February
2016,
the
police
raided
the
FDC
headquarters
again,
this
time
reportedly
arresting
one
party
official
and
at
least
five
data
clerks
the
party
had
contracted
to
work
on
tallying
presidential
election
results.
According
to
Patrick
Onyango,
Kampala
Metropolitan
Police
Spokesperson,
they
did
not
arrest
data
clerks
at
the
FDC
headquarters,
but
they
arrested
five
people
who
failed
to
identify
themselves
and
that
some
of
those
arrested
were
coordinators
of
Dr
Besigyes
Power
10
network,
who
he
said
were
calling
up
people
from
different
parts
of
the
country
to
come
to
Kampala
and
demonstrate
against
the
Electoral
Commissions
declaration
on
Saturday
that
President
Museveni
won
the
election.244
They
were
taken
to
Katwe
Police
Station,
charged
with
inciting
violence,
and
released
on
police
bond
on
the
same
day
after
239 Daily Monitor, Besigye held after storming suspected rigging centre, by Erias Mukiibi Sserunjogi, 19th
February
2016,
p.
2.
Vision,
Besigye,
Muntu,
100
others
arrested,
by
Simon
Masaba
and
Eddie
Ssejjoba,
20th
February
2016,
p.
2.
241
FHRI
interview
with
Ingrid
Turinawe,
FDC
Party
Secretary
for
Mobilisation,
on
2nd
April
2016.
242
Dr
Kizza
Besigye,
Election
Results
Must
be
Rejected,
press
statement,
Kampala,
20th
February
2016.
243
Saturday
Monitor,
Police
besiege
Besigye
home,
by
Eriasa
Mukiibi
Sserunjogi
and
Leilah
Nalubega,
21st
February
2016,
p.
3.
244
Daily
Monitor,
Police
storm
FDC
headquarters
again,
make
more
arrests,
by
Eriasa
Mukiibi
Sserunjogi,
23rd
February
2016,
p.
3.
240
Saturday
64
64
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
recording
their
statements.
FDC
National
Chairman,
Wasswa
Birigwa,
however
refuted
allegations
that
the
arrested
staff
were
trying
to
coordinate
members
to
incite
violence.
According
to
him,
police
came
and
entered
our
offices.
They
ordered
all
members
there
to
identify
themselves
and
those
without
IDs
were
arrested.
Some
of
those
arrested
had
just
arrived
from
different
areas
to
submit
their
declaration
forms.245
On
the
same
day,
Dr
Besigye
was
arrested
and
taken
to
Naggalama
Police
Station
after
he
attempted
to
leave
his
home
to
go
to
the
Electoral
Commission
to
collect
results
declaration
forms
to
use
in
a
possible
election
petition.
According
to
IGP
Kayihura,
Dr
Besigye
wanted
to
use
the
cover
of
picking
presidential
results
from
the
EC
headquarters
to
cause
chaos
in
the
city.
He
was
supposed
to
inform
us
three
days
before
holding
a
procession
as
the
POMA
stipulates.246
Dr
Besigye
was
arrested
just
outside
his
gate.
When
the
police
barricaded
the
road,
he
intended
to
walk
to
the
EC
offices.
The
police
then
forced
Besigye
into
a
waiting
police
van
to
drive
him
to
Naggalama
Police
Station.247
On
the
same
day,
Ms
Turinawe
was
also
arrested
as
she
was
driving
from
the
FDC
party
headquarters
to
Naggalama
where
Dr
Besigye
was
detained:
I
was
driving
out
to
go
and
check
on
him
[Besigye]
at
Naggalama.
It
was
about
3pm.
When
I
reached
the
clock
tower
I
saw
the
police
van
entering
the
lane
in
which
I
was
driving.
I
became
suspicious.
I
continued
past
Nsambya
traffic
lights
and
around
Mukwano
the
van
drove
past
me
and
blocked
me
and
I
was
arrested.
It
was
a
terrible
evening
because
I
was
detained
from
the
car.
They
did
not
take
me
to
any
police
station
or
park
me
anywhere.
They
drove
the
van
from
3.30pm
the
time
I
was
arrested
up
to
1am.
They
were
driving
me
around
the
city,
took
me
to
Muyenga,
Ntinda,
Kiwatule,
Kabalagala,
industrial
area,
Wandegeya.
They
drove
me
until
it
got
dark.
They
drove
me
everywhere
until
1am
when
they
parked
at
Kira
Road
Police
Station.
They
gave
me
police
bond
and
drove
me
back
home
at
2am.
The
bond
they
gave
me
was
for
an
offence
of
attempting
to
commit
a
felony.
I
do
not
know
which
felony
they
were
talking
about.248
She
further
explained
that
she
was
not
able
to
contact
anyone
from
the
time
of
arrest
until
she
was
released
at
night,
as
her
telephones
were
taken
away. 249
On
24th
February
2016,
Dr
Besigye
was
unable
to
enjoy
his
right
to
vote
in
the
local
government
elections
as
he
was
still
being
held
under
house
arrest
at
his
home
in
Kasangati.
According
to
Gen.
Kale
Kayihura,
however,
Dr
Besigye
was
not
under
house
arrest,
but
his
movements
were
being
closely
monitored.
According
to
Kayihura,
the
police
action
was
a
consequence
of
his
utterances
and
activities
that
amount
to
incitement
to
violence
and
defiance
of
the
law
and
justified
under
article
43
of
the
Constitution
which
provides
that
no
one
should
prejudice
the
rights
and
freedoms
of
others
or
the
public
interest.
He
added
that
Besigye
is
allowed
unlimited
access
to
his
lawyers,
family
and
party
officials,
among
others. 250
Besigye,
however,
refuted,
this
and
stated
that
people
who
come
to
see
him
were
not
allowed
in,
and
police
decides
who
is
245
New
Vision,
Police
explains
FDC
data
entrants
arrest,
by
Jeff
Andrew
Lule,
24th
February
2016,
p.
8.
246
Daily
Monitor,
Besigye
is
not
special
Kayihura,
by
Joseph
Kato,
23rd
February
2016,
p.
3.
247
Daily
Monitor,
Police
arrest
Besigye
again,
by
Eriasa
Mukiibi
Sserunjogi,
23rd
February
2016,
p.
2.
248
FHRI
interview
with
Ingrid
Turinawe,
FDC
Party
Secretary
for
Mobilisation,
on
2nd
April
2016.
249
Ibid.
250
Daily
Monitor,
Besigye
not
under
arrest
IGP,
press
statement
by
General
Kale
Kayihura,
Inspector
General
of
Police,
24th
February
2016,
published
on
26th
February
2016,
pp.
6-7.
CHAPTER FIVE
65
RIGHT TO LIBERTY AND SECURITY OF THE PERSON
65
allowed
to
see
him.251
This
was
also
the
experience
of
Charles
Mwanguhya,
NTVs
Fourth
Estate
talk
show
host:
We
tried
with
the
authorities
to
give
us
clearance,
like
three
weeks
before,
because
technically
or
officially
Besigye
was
not
under
arrest,
it
is
only
his
movements
that
have
been
restricted.
I
called
the
person
in
charge,
that
is
the
head
of
Human
Resource
in
the
police,
Afande
Andrew
Felix
Kaweesi.
I
also
spoke
to
the
other
senior
who
has
been
speaking
about
this,
that
is
AIGP
Asan
Kasingye
and
I
also
booked
Kizza
Besigye
for
an
interview.
I
told
them
that
I
had
booked
Besigye
and
he
had
agreed
to
be
interviewed
from
his
house.
The
police
did
not
indicate
there
was
any
problem
or
any
protocols
that
we
were
supposed
to
follow.
When
the
crew
arrived
on
Sunday
evening,
they
found
the
DPC
of
Kasangati
Police
Station
and
they
were
told
that
they
[police]
were
not
aware
of
the
interview
and
even
if
they
were,
they
would
need
clearance
from
their
superiors.
I
kept
trying
to
call
him
[Kaweesi]
but
his
phone
was
off.
I
tried
to
call
Kasingye
but
his
phone
was
also
not
going
through.
At
about
8
oclock
Kaweesi
picked
up
and
I
told
him
I
was
at
Besigyes
home
with
my
crew
and
we
wanted
to
do
the
interview
I
had
told
him
about.
He
said
he
thought
we
were
going
to
record
and
for
a
live
show
he
needed
to
consult
his
superiors.
Kaweesi
kept
on
consulting
but
time
was
running
out
as
the
show
runs
at
a
particular
time.
The
consultations
were
never
concluded.252
On
25th
February,
a
group
of
Besigyes
supporters
from
Kakiri
in
Wakiso
District
came
to
his
home
in
Kasangati,
but
Kasangati
DPC,
James
Kawalya,
ordered
them
to
leave
immediately.
Two
men
in
the
group
were
arrested
and
pushed
into
the
police
van
on
orders
of
Kawalya.
Shortly
after,
journalists
reported
hearing
the
men
screaming
loudly
inside
the
van
and
seeing
the
driver
of
the
van
holding
what
looked
like
a
pepper
spray
canister
and
applying
it
on
the
two
gentlemen.
When
police
arrested
Dr
Besigye
later,
the
two
men
were
removed
from
the
van
with
the
older
man
left
lying
helplessly
on
the
ground
within
the
police
cordon.
Pleas
from
journalists
to
have
him
taken
to
the
hospital
fell
on
deaf
ears.
DPC
Kawalya,
when
asked
about
the
incident,
declined
to
comment. 253
AIGP
Asan
Kasingye
explained
to
FHRI
that
the
UPF
does
not
condone
torture
in
any
way:
I
do
not
condone
anybody
being
tortured
because
he
is
going
to
Besigye.
No
way.
I
would
want
to
see
any
police
officer
standing
and
say
it
was
right
for
us
to
torture
somebody.
You
do
not
torture
somebody.
We
have
the
means
of
stopping
you
from
doing
whatever
you
do,
going
wherever
you
want
to
go,
so
torturing,
if
anybody
was
tortured
it
is
not
right.254
On
26th
February
2016,
a
delegation
of
ambassadors
from
the
European
Union
were
allowed
to
meet
Dr
Besigye
at
his
home.
O thers
who
attempted
to
access
the
home
were,
however,
promptly
arrested.
Those
arrested
included
a
pastor
identified
as
Wilson
Talemwa,
from
Ntungamo
district.
He
was
put
into
a
police
van
and
taken
to
Kasangati
Police
Station,
where
he
and
others
were
detained.
Police
commanded
by
DPC
Kawalaya,
maintained
a
heavy
presence
around
Besigyes
home,
vetting
every
visitor
and
arresting
Monitor,
Police
siege
on
Besigyes
home
enters
seventh
day,
by
Stephen
Kafeero,
26th
February
2016,
p.
2.
252
FHRI
interview
with
Charles
Mwanguhya,
Host
Forth
Estate
Talk
Show,
NTV,
on
30th
March
2016.
253
Daily
Monitor,
Police
siege
on
Besigyes
home
enters
seventh
day,
op.
cit.
254
FHRI
interview
with
Asan
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Uganda,
on
15th
April
2016.
251
Daily
66
66
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
more
than
40
people
that
day.
When
asked
why
the
police
were
arresting
Dr
Besigyes
visitors,
DPC
Kawalya
simply
stated
you
will
know.255
Besigyes
lawers
petitioned
Kasangati
Magistrates
Court
on
26th
February
2016,
to
challenge
the
continued
house
arrest.
The
application
sought
similar
orders
as
the
ones
filed
before
the
same
court
during
the
Walk-to-Work
protests
in
2011.
In
2011,
court
held
that
it
was
unlawful
for
the
police
to
confine
Besigye
at
his
residence
on
grounds
that
his
home
is
not
a
gazetted
detention
centre
in
the
law.
His
detention
was
unlawful
as
he
was
not
kept
in
a
lawful
detention
centre
and
this
was
beyond
the
constitutional
48hour
period,
ruled
Magistrate
Jessica
Chemeri
in
2011.256
At
the
time
of
writing
of
this
report,
the
case
was
still
pending
before
Kasangati
Magistrates
Court.
On
28th
February
2016,
Dr
Besigye
was
allowed
to
attend
a
church
service
at
All
Saints
Church
Nakasero,
trailed
by
security
personnel
under
the
command
of
Stephen
Tanui,
deputy
commander
of
Kampala
Metropolitan
Police.
On
his
way
back
to
Kasangati,
Dr
Besigye
disagreed
with
the
police
on
the
route.
At
the
junction
between
Kyaggwe
and
Nakasero
road,
he
was
diverted
from
driving
through
the
Central
Business
District
and
forced
to
drive
in
the
direction
of
Kamwokya
through
Nakasero
Road.
He
was
briefly
held
at
Kira
Road
Police
Station
before
being
driven
back
to
his
home.257
On
1st
April
2016,
after
43
days
of
house
arrest,
IGP
Kayihura
finally
ordered
the
withdrawal
of
police
deployment
from
Besigyes
home.
According
to
Kayihura,
the
withdrawal
of
police
from
Besigyes
home
was
an
extension
of
a
token
of
good
will.
Kayihura,
however,
added
that
he
had
Kasangati
DPC
keeping
a
keen
eye
on
Besigyes
movements.258
Besigye
attributed
the
withdrawal
of
police
from
his
home
to
pressure
from
the
High
Court,
the
international
community
and
Ugandans.
Only
days
after
his
house
arrest
was
lifted,
Dr
Kizza
Besigye
was
again
arrested
on
5th
April
2016
on
his
way
to
the
FDCs
weekly
prayers
at
the
partys
headquarters
in
Najjanakumbi.
His
drive
attracted
large
crowds
on
the
road,
and
at
Mulago
he
was
blocked
from
proceeding.
Kampala
Central
Police
Station
DPC,
Aaron
Baguma,
ordered
the
towing
of
Besigyes
car
and
drove
him
to
Kololo
Independence
Grounds
which
were
being
used
as
mini-barracks
for
security
forces,
and
later
took
Besigye
to
Kira
Road
Police
Station.
There,
Besigye
was
transferred
to
the
black
police
van
which
brought
him
to
Naggalama
Police
Station.259
He
was
released
later
in
the
day
and
on
13th
April
2016
charged
with
disobeying
lawful
orders.260
255 Saturday Monitor, EU ambassadors meet Besigye, by Stephen Kafeero, 27th February 2016, p. 3.
256
Daily
Monitor,
Besigye
turns
to
court
to
seek
his
freedom,
by
Anthony
Wesaka,
29th
February
2016,
p.
3.
257
Daily
Monitor,
Besigye
goes
to
pray,
towed
back
by
police,
by
Ephraim
Kasozi,
29th
February
2016,
p.
3.
258
Daily
Monitor,
IGP
Kayihura
orders
withdrawal
of
police
from
Besigyes
home,
by
Job
Bwire,
1st
April
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/IGP-Kayihura-orders-withdrawal-police-
from-Besigye-home/-/688334/3142270/-/nqgeklz/-/index.html.
259
Daily
Monitor,
Besigye
arrested
on
first
day
of
freedom,
by
Frederic
Musis
and
Ebber
Aturinde,
6th
April
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/Elections/Besigye-arrested-on-first-day-of--freedom-/-
/2787154/3147784/-/5725r7z/-/index.html.
260
Daily
Monitor,
Besigye
charged
with
disobeying
lawful
orders,
by
Monitor
Reporter,
13th
April
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Besigye-charged-disobeying-lawful-orders/-
/688334/3157194/-/jcfv83/-/index.html.
CHAPTER FIVE
67
RIGHT TO LIBERTY AND SECURITY OF THE PERSON
67
On
29th
April
2016,
Deputy
Chief
Justice,
Stephen
Kavuma,
issued
an
interim
order
banning
all
defiance
campaign
activities.261
The
FDC,
of
the
opinion
that
the
interim
order
by
the
Constitutional
Court
was
unlawful,
was
determined
to
continue
with
the
defiance
campaign
activities,
including
the
weekly
prayers
held
every
Tuesday
at
the
FDC
headquarters
in
Najjanakumbi
in
Kampala.
On
Tuesday
3rd
May,
ahead
of
the
weekly
prayers,
police
arrested
Kampala
city
Lord
Mayor
Erias
Lukwago,
Dr
Stella
Nyanzi,
FDC
weekly
prayers
lead
pastor
Habby
Ngabo
and
his
co-pastor
Edward
Ssenyange,
among
others.262
The
next
day,
Lukwago,
pastor
Ngabo
and
Dr
Nyanzi,
together
with
23
other
suspects
were
charged
before
Makindye
Magistrates
Court
with
several
offences
including
disobeying
lawful
orders,
and
were
released
on
bail.263
According
to
FDC
officials,
more
than
150
opposition
supporters
and
officials
are
either
in
detention
or
missing
since
the
FDC
called
for
nationwide
demonstrations
ahead
of
the
12th
May
presidential
inauguration.264
In
addition,
on
5th
May,
the
day
of
the
planned
nationwide
FDC
demonstrations,
Dr
Besigye
and
Lukwago
were
put
under
house
arrest,
which
continued
until
the
swearing
in
of
President
Museveni.265
261 See Chapter 4 of this report for further details on this court order.
262 Daily Monitor, Pr Ngabo, Lukwago, Nyanzi secure bail, by Anthony Wesaka, 4th May 2016, retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Pr-Ngabo-Lukwago-Nyanzi-secure-bail/-
/688334/3189042/-/rkigvy/-/index.html.
263
Daily
Monitor,
Lukwago,
Dr
Nyanzi
arrested
as
police
crack
on
FDC
defiance
campaign,
by
Michael
Kakumirizi
&
Job
Bwire,
3rd
May
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Lukwago-Dr-Nyanzi-arrested-police-crack-FDC/-
/688334/3187122/-/1485av4z/-/index.html.
264
Daily
Monitor,
Opposition
leaders
held
at
home
ahead
of
swearing-in,
by
Stephen
Kafeero,
10th
May
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Opposition-leaders-held-at---home-ahead-of-
swearing-in/-/688334/3197042/-/nc6eocz/-/index.html.
265
Ibid.
68
68
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
266 FHRI interview with Erias Lukwago, Kampala Lord Mayor, on 10th May 2016.
267 Daily Monitor, Besigye arrested in Kampala, taken to Nalufenya, by Job Bwire and Rachel Mabala, 11th
CHAPTER FIVE
69
RIGHT TO LIBERTY AND SECURITY OF THE PERSON
69
On
1st
February
2016,
FDC
candidate
for
Ibanda
South,
Alex
Byaruhanga,
went
missing
three
days
after
Dr
Besigye
campaigned
in
the
town.
District
Police
Commander,
Denis
Ocaya,
confirmed
on
3rd
February
2016
that
his
office
had
received
information
about
Byaruhangas
disappearance
and
was
investigating
the
matter. 272
Byaruhanga
resurfaced
on
4th
February
2016
in
Kampala.
He
said
he
was
kidnapped
and
kept
in
a
secret
location
in
Kampala
and
later
dumped
near
Nsambya
police
barracks.
He
explained
that
he
was
abducted
by
three
men
and
driven
to
Mbarara
town
where
he
was
handed
over
to
another
group
who
drove
him
to
Kampala
and
kept
him
in
a
dark
store.
Ocaya
confirmed
that
Byaruhanga
had
returned
and
that
his
office
was
investigating
the
matter.273
According
to
Isaac
Apenyo,
parliamentary
candidate
for
Ajuri
County,
three
of
his
campaign
task
force
members
disappeared
on
17th
February
2016.
He
said
that
soldiers
led
by
Patrick
Okullo
Okeng
(Amugu
GISO)
arrested
his
people
who
were
distributing
appointment
letters
to
his
agents,
and
up
to
now
all
their
phones
are
switched
off.274
Okeng
said
he
was
not
mandated
to
comment
on
security
issues.275
According
to
Mbabazi,
in
late
November
2015,
a
Go
Forward
supporter,
Daniel
Ayugi
of
Abim,
was
picked
up
by
security
forces
at
Uganda
House,
blindfolded,
driven
to
an
unknown
location
and
tortured
for
a
number
of
days.
He
was
later
dumped
back
at
Uganda
House.
He
required
surgery
to
recover
from
his
injuries.276
One
disappearance
received
particularly
widespread
media
attention,
the
case
of
Christopher
Aine,
Amama
Mbabazis
former
head
of
security.
Aine
was
reported
missing
on
17th
December
2015.
There
were
allegations
that
he
was
arrested
by
police,
and
suspicions
that
he
was
killed
when
a
photo
of
a
dead
body
depicted
as
Aine
surfaced
in
the
media.
Police,
however,
denied
having
Christopher
Aine
in
custody.
The
case
remained
unresolved
until
Aine
resurfaced
on
7th
April
2016,
stating
he
fled
to
Tanzania
to
stay
out
of
danger
after
his
involvement
in
the
Ntungamo
clashes.277
5.4
CONCLUSION
The
right
to
liberty
and
security
of
the
person
seems
to
be
increasingly
curtailed
with
police
overzealously
arresting
persons
under
the
guise
of
public
order
management,
and
later
releasing
them,
often
without
charges.
That
this
often
happens
to
opposition
members
and/or
supporters
or
journalists
covering
opposition
activities
casts
further
doubt
on
the
appropriateness
and
lawfulness
of
these
arrests.
The
most
blatant
violation
of
the
right
to
liberty
during
the
2016
election
period
was
the
preventive
detention
of
presidential
candidate
Dr
Besigye
at
his
home
for
43
days
between
19th
February
and
1st
April
2016,
and
again
in
the
days
prior
to
the
swearing
in
of
President
Museveni.
Despite
police
arguing
that
they
were
only
monitoring
his
movements,
Dr
Besigye
argued
differently,
not
being
allowed
to
leave
his
home
and
only
being
able
to
receive
visitors
after
approval
from
police.
272 Saturday Monitor, Ibanda FDC candidate goes missing after Besigye visit, by Elly Karenzi, 6th February
2016, p. 7.
273 Daily Monitor, Missing FDC candidate found, by Elly Karenzi, 9th February 2016, p. 13.
274
Daily
Monitor,
Army
on
the
spot
over
missing
agents,
by
Bill
Oketch,
19th
February
2016,
p.
17.
275
Ibid.
276 Amama
Mbabazi,
Statement
to
the
press
and
public
on
brutalisation
of
Go
Forward
team,
Press
Statement
on
7th
January
2016.
277
See
more
on
the
Ntungamo
clashes
in
chapter
six.
70
70
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
CHAPTER SIX
ELECTORAL VIOLENCE
6.1
INTRODUCTION
Human
rights
seek
to
create
an
environment
conducive
to
individuals
right
to
life,
health,
freedom
from
torture,
cruel,
inhuman
or
degrading
treatment
or
punishment,
and
protection
from
deprivation
of
property,
among
others.
Violence,
especially
with
involvement
of
state
officials
negates
this
and
often
leads
to
various
human
rights
violations.
Not
in
the
least,
because
security
organisations
have
a
constitutional
duty
to
observe
human
rights.
Article
221
of
the
Constitution
states
that
it
shall
be
the
duty
of
the
Uganda
Peoples
Defence
Forces
and
any
other
armed
force
established
in
Uganda,
the
Uganda
Police
Force
and
any
other
police
force,
the
Uganda
Prions
Service,
all
intelligence
services
and
the
National
Security
Council
to
observe
and
respect
human
rights
and
freedoms
in
the
performance
of
their
functions.
6.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
Following
the
2001
elections,
a
Select
Committee
on
Election
Violence
was
established
to
inquire
into
the
causes
of
election
violence
in
Uganda,
among
others.
The
committee
found
that
election
violence
in
Uganda
has
been
steadily
increasing
since
1996. 278
It
also
found
that
the
form
of
violence
has
shifted
from
spontaneous
eruptions
of
fighting
resulting
in
injuries
and
destruction
of
property
to
highly
organised
violence
resulting
in
loss
of
life,
serious
and
fatal
injuries
and
massive
loss
of
property. 279
Evidence
adduced
by
the
committee
shows
that
whereas
many
agents
and
candidates
were
found
to
have
participated
in
election
violence,
much
of
the
election
violence
is
escalated
by
illegal
involvement
of
some
agents
of
the
state.
It
was
found
that
whereas
some
of
the
state
agents
initiated
and
executed
election
violence
themselves,
many
candidates
and
agents
who
opted
for
violence
employed
state
agents,
especially
the
UPDF,
LDUs,
ISOs,
DISOs,
GISOs,
RDCs
and
cadres
in
the
Offices
of
RDCs
to
execute
violence
against
their
opponents.280
The
committee
recommended
addressing
the
weak
election
laws
and
regulations;
institutional
weaknesses;
poverty
and
the
commercialisation
of
politics
and
the
electoral
process;
ignorance
and
lack
of
a
democratic
culture;
abuse
of
office
and
of
the
armed
forces;
individual
merit
election
system;
and
sectarianism
in
order
to
address
the
root
causes
of
election
violence
in
Uganda.281
The
2006
and
2011
elections
were
generally
more
peaceful
than
the
2001
elections
that
experienced
widespread
acts
of
violence,
however
election
violence
continues
to
occur.
In
the
2006
elections,
though
the
environment
was
relatively
peaceful,
a
number
of
violent
incidents
occurred,
especially
in
the
weeks
leading
up
to
Election
Day.
The
EU
Election
Observation
Mission
reported
a
number
of
incidents
in
which
security
forces
were
involved
in
partisan
politics,
most
notably
on
15th
February
in
Kampala,
three
supporters
were
shot
and
killed
when
a
soldier
opened
fire
at
a
crowd
waiting
for
Dr
Besigye. 282
The
EU
EOM
further
reported
clashes
between
rival
political
groups
in
several
areas
of
the
country
and
disturbance
of
public
order,
where
police
had
to
intervene
and
at
times
forced
to
use
tear
gas
and
warning
shots.
According
to
the
EU
EOM,
unlike
the
elections
in
2001,
the
incidents
of
violence
in
the
2006
election
period
278
Republic
of
Uganda,
Report
of
the
Select
Committee
on
Election
Violence,
September
2002,
p.
137.
279
Ibid.,
pp.
140-141.
280
Ibid.,
pp.
141-142.
281
Ibid.,
pp.
175-176.
72
72
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
did
not
appear
to
be
the
result
of
deliberate
and
planned
attempts
to
harass
and
intimidate
the
opposition.283
Similar
to
the
2006
elections,
the
2011
elections
were
characterised
as
being
relatively
peaceful,
notwithstanding
a
number
of
incidents
of
violence
and
intimidation,
especially
on
Election
Day.284
The
post-election
environment
was,
however,
marred
with
violence
resulting
from
the
Walk
to
Work
demonstrations
organised
countrywide.
There
were
reports
of
people
throwing
stones
at
security
agents
and
setting
fire
to
debris.285
The
UPF
and
UPDF
used
teargas,
rubber
bullets
and
live
ammunition
to
disperse
crowds,
including
innocent
bystanders
and
pedestrians
who
were
not
involved
in
the
protests.286
According
to
a
report
from
the
UN
Office
of
the
High
Commissioner
for
Human
Rights
(OHCHR),
teargas
was
fired
into
schools,
health
centers
and
homes,
which
contributed
to
the
admission
of
15
children
and
three
expectant
mothers
to
Mulago
Hospital.287
Over
the
course
of
the
month
of
April,
nine
people
were
reported
to
have
been
shot
and
killed
by
police
seeking
to
quell
demonstrations
and
many
more
civilians
were
injured.288
At
least
five
policemen
and
one
soldier
were
also
injured.289
6.3
ELECTION
VIOLENCE
DURING
THE
2016
ELECTION
PERIOD
In
the
lead
up
to
the
2016
elections,
tensions
rose
as
stakes
were
particularly
high
with
high
level
splits
in
the
NRM,
failure
to
effect
electoral
reforms
and
intimidation
tactics
between
political
camps:
I
think
every
election
in
Uganda,
the
stakes
increase.
The
stakes
now
were
higher
than
in
2011.
People
looked
like
they
were
more
determined
to
fight
than
in
2011.290
In
the
lead
up
to
the
2016
elections
there
were
indications
of
possible
widespread
election
violence,
i.e.
the
mass
recruitment
of
crime
preventers
followed
by
the
creation
of
militia
groups
in
response.
As
a
result,
a
multi-media
campaign
was
launched
by
civil
society
to
pledge
peace
during
the
2016
elections.
Though,
more
incidences
of
violence
were
noted
during
the
2016
election
period
compared
to
2006
and
2011,
the
anticipated
large-scale
violence
fortunately
did
not
materialise.
Both
Odoi
and
Kulayigye
argued
that
one
of
the
main
causes
of
violence
is
the
perception
of
politics
as
livelihood,
as
a
career,
instead
of
a
service
to
the
community
and
the
country,
and
as
a
result
politicians
are
seen
fighting
opponents
at
any
cost:
People
have
not
seen
politics
as
service
that
when
you
are
a
political
leader,
you
are
a
servant
of
the
people.
People
actually
enter
politics
as
a
career
from
where
they
should
lead
and
be
big
people
in
society.
So
the
stakes
were
too
high
in
285
Human
Rights
Watch.
Uganda:
Walk
to
Work
Group
Declared
Illegal.
Retrieved
on
22
July
2015
from
http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/04/04/uganda-walk-work-group-declared-illegal
286
United
Nations
Office
of
the
High
Commissioner.
Office
of
the
High
Commissioner
for
Human
Rights
calls
for
constructive
dialogue.
Retrieved
on
22
July
2015
from
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=10947&LangID=E.
287
Ibid.
288
Human
Rights
Watch.
Uganda:
Walk
to
Work
Group
Declared
Illegal,
op.
cit.
289
United
Nations
Office
of
the
High
Commissioner.
Office
of
the
High
Commissioner
for
Human
Rights
calls
for
constructive
dialogue,
op.
cit.
290
FHRI
interview
with
Dr
Tanga
Odoi,
Chairman
NRM
Electoral
Commission,
on
29th
April
2016.
CHAPTER SIX
73
ELECTORAL VIOLENCE
73
primaries.
We
had
over
100,200
people
competing
for
just
296
positions
as
members
of
parliament.
So
the
primaries
were
bound
to
be
chaotic.291
Another
cause
of
election
violence
noted
was
the
militarization
of
politics.
For
instance,
History
Lecturer
Mwambutsya
Ndebesa
noted:
The
main
cause
of
violence
in
Uganda
is
militarisation
of
political
competition.
The
whole
notion
of
militarising
or
securitising
elections
will
one
day
lead
this
country
to
break
into
pieces
where
you
have
crime
preventers
now
taking
over,
you
have
the
DISOs,
GISOs,
military
and
the
police
out
there
to
militarise
the
whole
election
exercise,
definitely
that
was
very
dangerous. 292
Mistrust
between
the
security
forces
and
the
public
has
also
been
cited
as
a
cause
of
violence:
There
is
a
crisis
of
mistrust.
The
civilians
do
not
trust
the
police.
The
police
do
not
trust
the
civilians.
Each
one
of
them
thinks
that
the
other
is
up
to
no
good,
up
to
some
mischief.
So
there
is
a
crisis
of
mistrust
of
government
institutions
and
government
institutions
mistrusting
the
people.
That
for
me
is
the
basis.
This
is
simply
because
there
have
increasingly
been
signs
of
government
institutions
being
partisan,
unfair,
repressive
to
the
people,
and
the
people
are
getting
agitated
and
resorting
to
other
means
to
claim
their
rights.
So
the
bottom
line
is
weak
institutions
that
are
seen
as
biased,
partisan,
incompetent,
violent
and
that
do
not
work
for
the
people
but
for
those
in
power.293
Lt
Col.
Felix
Kulayigye,
UPDF
spokesperson,
also
noted
that
threats
to
violence
have
increased
since
the
2011
elections,
mainly
blaming
this
on
opposition
members:
Threats
to
violence
have
increased
compared
to
the
past
elections.
The
opposition
tried
to
threaten
people
and
they
actually
believed
that
there
will
be
chaos.
A
good
number
of
NRM
supporters
rushed
to
villages
fearing
for
their
lives.294
Threats
to
violence
were,
however,
seen
stemming
from
both
opposition
and
ruling
party
camps.
Opposition
members
were
repeatedly
arrested
for
statements
that
were
deemed
to
incite
violence,
while
at
the
same
time
high-ranking
NRM
and
police
officials
made
public
statements
on
using
force
against
anybody
opposing
state
power,
fuelling
the
atmosphere
of
violence.
For
instance,
during
the
launch
of
the
NRM
campaigns
in
January
2016,
the
NRM
Secretary
General,
Justine
Lumumba,
warned
that
the
NRM
government
is
not
going
anywhere,
and
if
anyone
would
disrupt
the
peace
they
would
be
shot.295
President
Museveni
vowed
following
the
clashes
in
Ntungamo
district
that
whoever
participated
in
the
attacks
on
NRM
supporters
would
pay
dearly.
Museveni
said
that
if
you
go
and
put
your
finger
in
the
behind
of
a
leopard,
then
you
are
in
trouble.
You
attack
NRM
people
in
Uganda,
where
do
you
go?
Those
people
made
a
big
mistake,
and
whoever
sent
them
will
also
regret.
We
shall
go
against
him
or
her.296
291 Ibid.
292 FHRI interview with Mwambutsya Ndebesa, Lecturer of History at Makerere University, on 19th April
2016..
293
FHRI
interview
with
Nicholas
Opiyo,
Executive
Director,
Chapter
Four,
on
11th
April
2016.
294
FHRI
interview
with
Col.
Felix
Kulayigye,
Chief
Political
Commissar,
Uganda
Peoples
Defence
Force
(UPDF),
on
29th
April
2016
295
Daily
Monitor,
Lumumba
shoot-to-kill
threat
sparks
outrage,
by
Nelson
Wesonga,
1st
February
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/SpecialReports/Elections/Lumumba-shoot-to-kill-threat-
sparks-outrage/-/859108/3056812/-/uuv6twz/-/index.html.
296
New
Vision,
Mbabazi
guards
will
pay
dearly,
says
Museveni,
by
Vision
Reporter,
21st
December
2015,
p.
4.
74
74
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
The
2016
elections
experienced
both
strategic
and
incidental
violence.
Strategic
violence
mostly
took
the
shape
of
deliberate
intimidation
and
harassment
of
opposition
politicians
and
their
agents
and
supporters.
For
instance,
according
to
Alice
Alaso:
My
agent
Enyagu
Emma
was
beaten
the
following
morning
after
election.
He
was
rounded
up
after
following
him
and
he
was
beaten
properly.
They
tried
to
stab
him
but
he
kept
defending
himself.
His
problem
was
just
that
he
was
my
agent
during
elections.297
Such
strategic
intimidation
and
harassment
also
resulted
into
incidental
eruptions
of
violence,
such
as
the
clashes
in
Ntungamo.
Despite
EC
guidelines
stating
that
there
should
be
no
parallel
rallies,
throughout
the
campaign
period,
NRM
prompted
citizens
to
take
to
the
streets
with
NRM
shirts
and
placards
and
deface
Mbabazi
posters,
when
Mbabazi
was
holding
a
rally
(e.g.
Mukono,
Masaka,
Fort
Portal,
Iganga,
Arua).298
According
to
Mbabazis
petition
challenging
the
outcome
of
the
presidential
elections:
When
your
petitioner
was
subsequently
allowed
to
go,
he
was
hounded
and
trailed
by
some
members
of
the
Uganda
Peoples
Defence
Forces,
the
Uganda
Police,
a
motley
crew
of
all
the
state
security
agencies
and
the
so-called
Crime
Preventers
(sic)
who
would
go
as
advance
teams
or
would
go
at
the
time
of
the
consultations
to
dissuade
voters
and
member
of
the
public
from
attending
the
Petitioners
meeting
and
actually
dispersed
the
petitioners
meetings
in
diverse
places
in
eastern
Uganda,
instilled
fear
and
harassed
all
who
attended
the
said
meetings,
and
arrested
all
those
who
carried
your
petitioners
manifestos,
posters
and
other
campaign
materials
thereby
frustrating
his
efforts
and
giving
unfair
advantage
to
candidate
Yoweri
Kaguta
Museveni.299
On
several
occasions
citizens
were
told
to
stay
away
from
Mbabazis
rallies.
For
instance,
ahead
of
Mbabazis
arrival
in
Hoima
district,
numerous
announcements
were
played
on
radio
urging
people
to
keep
away
from
his
rallies
and
instead
wait
for
the
visit
of
the
beloved
Museveni. 300
These
incidents
resulted
in
the
build
up
to
the
violence
in
Ntungamo
district
on
13th
December
2015.
On
13th
December
2015,
Go
Forward
candidate
Amama
Mbabazi
had
a
scheduled
rally
in
Ntungamo.
When
Mbabazis
convoy
ran
into
a
group
of
Museveni
supporters,
a
stone
was
thrown
at
one
of
the
cars
in
Mbabazis
convoy
sparking
off
the
clash.301
A
fight
ensued
between
the
two
groups,
leaving
several
injured.
A
boda
boda
cyclist
in
Ntungamo
narrated:
I
got
a
T-shirt
from
a
friend.
He
told
me
the
President
was
coming
and
we
have
been
asked
to
put
them
on,
that
whoever
was
putting
it
on
would
be
given
four
litres
of
fuel.
I
was
parked
near
my
stage
and
people
came
and
beat
me. 302
297
FHRI
interview
with
Hon.
Alice
Alaso
Asianut,
former
candidate
Serere
Woman
MP,
on
4th
March
2016.
298
See
Chapter
3
of
this
report
for
further
discussion
on
disruption
of
rallies
and
other
public
gatherings.
299
Amama
Mbabazi
v.
Yoweri
Kaguta
Museveni,
Electoral
Commission,
and
the
Attorney
General,
Presidential
Election
Petition
No.
1
of
2016,
Supreme
Court
of
Uganda,
31 st
March
2016.
300
Daily
Monitor,
The
build
up
to
Ntungamo
clahses,
by
Isaac
Imaka,
15th
December
2015,
p.
5.
301
New
Vision,
Leaders
condemn
Ntungamo
violence,
by
Eddie
Ssejjoba
and
Jeff
Lule,
15th
December
2015,
p.
5.
302
Daily
Monitor,
Kayihura
vows
to
arrest
Mbabazi
security
team,
by
Perez
Rumanzi
and
Isaac
Imaka,
15th
December
2015,
p.
4.
CHAPTER SIX
75
ELECTORAL VIOLENCE
75
Violence
in
Ntungamo
N tungamo
13th
December
2015
Even
the
actions
of
police
following
the
violence
in
Ntungamo
can
be
classified
as
strategic
violence
by
rounding
up
only
Go
Forward
members,
and
letting
NRM
members
who
promoted
the
provocation
walk
scot-free.
Based
on
this
incident,
former
IGP
Julius
Peter
Odwee
is
of
the
opinion
that
the
Uganda
Police
Force
has
become
partisan.
He
stated
that
the
police
are
supposed
to
treat
everyone
equally,
and
when
two
sides
are
fighting,
they
should
both
be
taken
to
court. 303
According
to
Go
Forward
counsel,
Severino
Twinobusingye,
the
arrested
Go
Forward
supporters
were
not
even
involved
in
the
Ntungamo
incident:
The
fight
started
in
Ntungamo,
people
who
were
arrested
from
Kampala
were
arrested
from
Rt
Hon
Mbabazis
home
and
at
the
Go
Forward
offices
in
Nakasero.
They
were
about
31
but
when
they
were
screening,
they
kept
only
12.
The
case
is
still
on-going.
They
are
not
from
Ntungamo.
They
were
visitors
who
had
come
to
visit
Hon
Mbabazi.
They
had
nothing
to
do
with
what
was
going
on
in
Ntungamo.
They
were
just
rounded
up,
some
of
them
were
cleaners,
tea
boys
while
others
were
Mbabazis
visitors.
They
had
nothing
to
do
with
what
was
going
on
in
Ntungamo.
And
they
were
arrested.
Up
to
now
they
are
facing
trial.
They
are
now
out
on
bail,
and
the
case
is
in
court.304
He
further
argued
that
crime
preventers
were
involved
in
the
Ntungamo
violence:
Like
in
Ntungamo,
they
[crime
preventers]
had
petrol
and
they
wanted
to
burn
Hon
Amama
Mbabazi
[his
car].
That
is
why
they
fought.
They
fought
because
it
is
the
crime
preventers
who
came
with
sticks
to
beat
people.
People
defended
themselves
by
disarming
the
crime
preventers
and
beating
them.
Their
job
303
Daily
Monitor,
Police
is
acting
partisan
-
former
IGP
Odwee,
by
Bill
Oketch,
3rd
January
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/Magazines/PeoplePower/Police-is-acting-partisan-former-IGP-Odwee/-
/689844/3018994/-/item/0/-/qk68kz/-/index.html.
304
FHRI
interview
with
Severino
Twinobusingye,
Counsel
Legal
Team
Go
Forward,
on
5th
April
2016.
76
76
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
basically
was
to
disrupt
other
peoples
rallies,
to
deface
posters,
and
Mbabazi
was
the
chief
target
of
that
militia
group.305
It
has
been
argued
by
many
that
crime
preventers
fuelled
the
atmosphere
of
violence
during
the
2016
election
period
(see
case
study).
Case
study:
Crime
preventers
According
to
statements
by
IGP
Gen.
Kale
Kayihura,
the
police
have
passed
out
an
estimated
11
million
crime
preventers.306
This
equals
approximately
256
times
the
size
of
the
police
force,
which
stands
at
43,000.
Crime
preventers
are
supposed
to
supplement
the
work
of
police
in
keeping
law
and
order
through
close
monitoring
of
their
societies
and
informing
the
police
about
crime
and
suspected
criminals
in
their
communities.307
AIGP
Asan
Kasingye,
elaborated
on
the
role
of
crime
preventers
during
elections:
The
role
of
crime
preventers
in
elections
is
the
same
role
of
crime
preventers
in
their
communities
when
there
is
no
election:
to
make
sure
they
work
hand
in
hand
with
police
to
ensure
that
we
prevent
crime.
Where
crime
can
be
committed,
they
can
help
in
apprehending
suspects
and
handing
them
over
to
police,
that
is
all.308
In
the
lead
up
to
the
2016
elections,
the
crime
preventers
increasingly
attracted
negative
attention
with
several
reports
of
crime
preventers
being
involved
in
crimes
and
partisan
behaviour.
In
several
districts
throughout
the
country,
residents
and
local
government
leaders
accused
crime
preventers
of
abetting
crime
and
mistreating
suspects.
For
instance,
according
to
Robert
Acaye,
district
councillor
for
Kabedo-Opong
parish
in
Gulu
district,
crime
preventers
have
been
directly
involved
in
committing
crimes.309
The
Lira
district
Chief
Administrative
Officer,
Elias
Byamungu,
even
accused
crime
preventers
in
the
district
of
allegedly
raping
women
and
terrorising
innocent
citizens.310
Residents
of
Bukhabusi
sub-county
in
Manafwa
District
accused
crime
preventers
of
torturing
suspects
when
executing
arrests.
One
resident
claimed
his
son
was
tortured
to
near
death
by
crime
preventers
in
the
presence
of
a
police
officer,
for
trying
to
resist
arrest.311
In
addition,
crime
preventers
were
accused
of
altering
voters
registers.
According
to
FDC
Secretary
General,
Nandala
Mafabi,
crime
preventers
in
Arua
indicated
on
the
voters
register
if
you
are
opposition,
and
that
crime
preventers
said
they
were
going
to
delete
the
known
opposition
voters.312
On
21st
December
2015,
a
crime
preventer
in
Buwama
town,
Mpigi
district,
nearly
lost
her
life
after
she
was
found
replacing
names
of
the
dead
in
the
register
with
those
of
people
the
residents
of
the
area
did
not
recognise.313
FHRI
also
received
reports
of
crime
preventers
being
involved
in
electoral
malpractices
on
Election
Day,
including
ticking
ballot
papers
on
behalf
of
voters
and
ballot
stuffing.
For
instance,
305
Ibid.
Vision,
Kayihura
clarifies
on
crime
preventers
reports,
by
Vision
Reporter,
28th
January
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.newvision.co.ug/new_vision/news/1415755/kayihura-clarifies-crime-
preventers-reports.
307
Uganda
Police
Force,
Over
a
Million
Crime
Preventers
Passed
Out,
10th
November
2015,
retrieved
from:
http://www.upf.go.ug/over-a-million-crime-preventers-passed-out/.
308
FHRI
interview
with
Asan
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Uganda,
on
15th
April
2016.
309
Daily
Monitor,
Crime
preventers
accused
of
abetting
crime
in
Gulu,
by
James
Owich,
1st
January
2016,
p.
7.
310
Daily
Monitor,
District
boss
accuses
crime
preventers
of
rape,
by
Bill
Oketch,
19th
April
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/District-boss-accuses-crime-preventers-raping-women-/-
/688334/3165792/-/j2q405/-/index.html.
311
Daily
Monitor,
Residents
accuse
crime
preventers
of
torture,
by
Fred
Wambede,
5th
November
2015,
p.
15.
312
Daily
Monitor,
Ministry
probes
crime
preventers
over
altering
voters
register,
by
Nelson
Wesonga,
28th
December
2015,
p.
4.
313
Daily
Monitor,
Crime
preventer
escapes
death
over
voter
roll,
by
Saddat
Mbogo,
24th
December
2015,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Crime-preventer-escapes-death-over-voter-
roll/-/688334/3007936/-/bb9pm1z/-/index.html.
306
New
CHAPTER SIX
77
ELECTORAL VIOLENCE
77
according
to
Severino
Twinobusingye,
counsel
for
Go
Forward:
Rt
Hon
Mbabazis
agents
were
chased
from
all
polling
stations
by
crime
preventers.
Their
work
was
to
do
ballot
stuffing,
pre-ticking
and
post-ticking.
Those
were
some
of
the
key
pieces
of
evidence
that
we
had
that
were
stolen.
It
even
had
a
video
of
how
they
were
being
instructed
and
by
who,
and
where
they
were
pre-ticking.
You
could
see
in
the
video,
the
man
is
pre-ticking
and
went
to
stuff
the
ballots.
After
voting,
the
ballot
papers
which
remained,
which
were
not
used,
they
would
go
and
post-tick.
They
would
tick
everything
and
put
it
in
the
ballot
box.314
Nicholas
Opiyo
noted:
Crime
preventers
were
vigilantes
for
the
ruling
party.
They
acted
as
spies
for
the
government
in
villages
where
they
were
deployed.
They
would
report
on
you,
what
you
were
doing,
who
you
were
meeting.
Secondly,
several
of
them
were
seen
working
alongside
the
police
force
beating
people
who
were
peacefully
demonstrating.
There
were
crime
preventers
who
were
seen
emerging
from
police
cars
to
beat
up
people
who
were
peacefully
demonstrating.315
A
crime
preventer
in
Fort
Portal
told
Human
Rights
Watch,
the
commander
told
me
that
I
should
fight
hard
and
fight
the
other
parties.
He
said
that
we
are
living
in
the
ruling
NRM
area
so
other
parties
do
not
need
to
surface.316
On
the
allegations
that
crime
preventers
were
partisan
and
were
seen
wearing
yellow
NRM
T-
shirts,
AIGP
Kasingye
noted
that
crime
preventers
were
only
given
white
t-shirts
identifying
them
as
crime
preventers,
but
never
yellow
t-shirts.
He
added
that
the
confusion
was
created
as
the
NRM
was
simultaneously
training
NRM
cadres.317
He
further
denied
any
partisan
nature
to
the
recruitment
of
crime
preventers:
We
never
asked
anybody
what
is
your
party.
Nobody
showed
his
party
card
to
be
involved
in
crime
prevention.
These
people
were
mainly
mobilised
by
the
local
leadership.
The
local
leadership
would
go
to
a
village
and
then
identify
people
in
that
area,
good
people
with
good
standing
who
can
work
hand
in
hand
with
the
police.318
Another
aspect
of
ambiguity
surrounding
crime
preventers
was
their
recruitment
and
training
process.
Many
critics
of
the
crime
preventers
programme
have
argued
that
they
were
hastily
recruited
and
inadequately
trained,
many
even
questioning
their
legality
altogether:
There
is
no
law
that
creates
them.
They
do
not
have
a
legal
framework
within
which
to
operate.
So
they
are
criminals,
and
their
actions
are
equally
criminal.
I
can
say
this
today
and
tomorrow
and
I
have
said
it
before.
I
am
saying
this
as
a
lawyer.
There
is
none.
I
have
heard
the
Uganda
Police
trying
to
say
that
this
is
a
reserve.
It
is
not
a
reserve.319
Former
Principal
Judge,
Justice
James
Ogoola
also
expressed
his
concerns
regarding
the
legality
of
crime
preventers.
He
stated
that
there
is
no
known
law
and
legal
framework
under
which
crime
preventers
operate,
and
questioned
why
the
crime
preventers
initiative
was
not
debated
and
legislated
by
Parliament.320
314
FHRI
interview
with
Severino
Twinobusingye,
Counsel
Legal
Team
Go
Forward,
on
5th
April
2016.
315
FHRI
interview
with
Nicholas
Opiyo,
Executive
Director,
Chapter
Four,
on
11th
April
2016.
316 Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, HURINET-U, Chapter Four and FHRI, Uganda: Suspend
Crime
Preventers
Massive
unregulated
force
threatens
election
security,
press
statement,
23 rd
January
2016,
Kampala.
317
FHRI
interview
with
Asan
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Uganda,
on
15th
April
2016.
318
Ibid.
319
FHRI
interview
with
Severino
Twinobusingye,
Counsel
Legal
Team
Go
Forward,
on
5th
April
2016.
320
The
Observer,
Justice
Ogoola:
crime
preventers
illegal,
24th
December
2015,
retrieved
from:
http://observer.ug/news-headlines/41821-justice-ogoola-crime-preventers-illegal.
78
78
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
The
police,
however,
have
come
out
strongly
to
state
that
they
have
a
legal
mandate
to
recruit
crime
preventers.
AIGP
Kasingye
clarified
the
issue
of
training
by
stating
that
because
crime
preventers
are
civilians
and
their
role
is
to
provide
information
on
crimes
and
suspected
criminal
to
police,
it
is
not
necessary
to
train
crime
preventers
as
extensively
as
police
officers
or
soldiers.321On
the
other
hand,
Gen.
Kayihura
stated
during
the
passing
out
of
crime
preventers
in
Sebei
on
22nd
January
2016
that
all
we
need
to
do
is
to
change
the
sticks
and
give
them
rifles.322
He
further
added:
[Y]ou
are
a
reserve
of
the
army.
In
case
of
war,
you
will
be
called
upon
because
the
police
are
the
reserve
of
the
army,
according
to
the
law.
According
to
the
Police
Act,
the
Minister
of
Internal
Affairs,
at
any
time,
can
call
the
police
to
serve
as
a
military
force,
so
by
extension,
the
crime
preventers
in
case
of
any
a
war,
can
be
called
upon
as
part
of
national
mobilisation
and
that
is
why
they
should
be
trained
in
skills
at
arms
and
self-defence.
So
you
have
a
force
here.323
This
indicates
an
intention
to
arm
crime
preventers,
which
would
no
longer
make
them
civilians
and
would
require
them
to
be
adequately
trained
as
a
security
force.
According
to
Hon.
Alice
Alaso,
crime
preventers
in
Serere
District
were
even
dressed
in
army
uniforms. 324
UPDF
spokesperson,
Lt
Col
Felix
Kulayigye,
however,
denied
that
any
crime
preventers
were
wearing
military
uniforms
on
Election
Day.325
321
FHRI
interview
with
Asan
Kasingye,
Assistant
Inspector
General
of
Police
and
Director
of
Interpol
Uganda,
on
15th
April
2016.
322
New
Vision,
Crime
preventers
are
legal
Gen.
Kayihura,
29th
January
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.elections.co.ug/new-vision/election/1415857/crime-preventers-legal-gen-kayihura.
323
Ibid.
324
FHRI
interview
with
Hon.
Alice
Alaso
Asianut,
former
candidate
Serere
Woman
MP,
on
4th
March
2016.
325
FHRI
interview
with
Col.
Felix
Kulayigye,
Chief
Political
Commissar,
Uganda
Peoples
Defence
Force
(UPDF),
on
29th
April
2016
326
FHRI
interview
with
Nicholas
Opiyo,
Executive
Director,
Chapter
Four,
on
11th
April
2016.
CHAPTER SIX
79
ELECTORAL VIOLENCE
79
programme.
In
addition,
it
is
key
that
crime
preventers
are
adequately
regulated
through
transparent
guidelines
that
ensure
their
impartiality,
effectively
trained
and
held
accountable
for
any
misconduct.
During
Election
Day
and
declaration
of
results
in
the
days
following
Election
Day,
various
cases
of
incidental
violence
were
reported.
For
instance,
near
Molly
and
Paul
polling
station
in
Makindye,
Kampala,
angry
voters
tried
to
lynch
an
unidentified
man
who
was
found
with
pre-ticked
ballot
papers
in
favour
of
the
NRM
candidate.327
On
19th
February
2016,
in
Bulambuli
District,
a
fight
ensued
between
supporters
of
two
candidates
for
the
Woman
MP
seat,
Sarah
Wekomba
and
Irene
Muloni,
Minister
of
Energy
and
Mineral
Development
at
the
district
tally
centre.
Police
said
Wekombas
supporters
armed
with
crude
tools
such
as
stones
and
clubs,
beat
anyone
they
suspected
to
be
supporting
Muloni.
Wekomba
claimed
they
had
detected
a
ploy
for
the
vote
to
be
rigged
in
favour
of
her
opponent.
The
police,
overwhelmed
by
the
situation,
called
upon
the
UPDF
to
assist
in
overpowering
the
rioters.328
On
the
same
day,
Steven
Sekayu,
a
17-year-old
boy,
was
shot
and
injured
as
police
battled
supporters
of
the
FDC.
Steven
Sekayu
sustained
injuries
on
the
legs
and
buttocks
where
he
was
hit
by
four
bullets
as
police
fired
live
ammunition
to
quell
a
demonstration
by
FDC
supporters
in
Bugiri
to
protest
the
declaration
of
Agnes
Taaka
Wejuli,
as
winner
of
the
race
for
the
District
Woman
MP
seat.329
Such
indiscriminate
firing
into
a
crowd
is
always
unlawful.330
On
4th
March,
during
the
district
youth
elections
in
Mukono
a
group
of
youth
attempted
to
lynch
the
returning
officer,
Sarah
Kalyowa,
accusing
her
of
using
a
fake
register
that
had
only
400
voters
instead
of
the
expected
720
voters,
and
later
bringing
another
register
with
720
voters
but
with
photos
of
voters
missing.
The
youth
became
more
unruly
and
started
kicking
ballot
boxes
and
attempted
to
burn
them.
This
prompted
police
and
military
personnel
to
intervene
by
firing
bullets
in
the
air
to
disperse
the
enraged
youth
who
had
started
pulling
Kalyowas
dress
and
pushing
her.
Kalyowa
and
some
youth
were
arrested
taken
to
Mukono
Police
Station
for
investigations.331
Supporters
of
incumbent
MP
and
DP
parliamentary
candidate
for
Mukono
Municipality,
Betty
Nambooze,
were
reported
to
have
been
attacked
by
people
with
machetes
and
sticks
in
Goma
sub-county
on
the
eve
of
voting
day
at
about
9.30pm.
According
to
Nambooze,
her
car
windows
were
smashed
and
her
son
called
Geoffrey
Kisawuzi
had
gone
missing.
More
than
70
people
are
said
to
have
been
injured
in
the
fighting
which
ensued.332
FHRI
further
recorded
several
incidents
of
violence
in
Lugazi,
Buikwe
district,
in
particular
relating
to
the
mayoral
elections.
For
instance,
Irene
(alias)
narrated
how
she
was
attacked
and
unable
to
get
adequate
treatment:
327
Saturday
Monitor,
Gunfire
rocks
Makindye
over
pre-ticked
ballots,
by
Anthony
Wesaka
and
Lilian
Namagembe,
20th
February
2016,
p.
31.
328
Saturday
Monitor,
40
held
in
Bulambuli
over
poll
violence,
by
David
Mafabi
and
Rebecca
Kabuya,
20th
February
2016,
p.
35.
329
Daily
Monitor,
Family
demands
police
pays
bills
of
shot
student,
by
Asuman
Musobya,
25th
February
2016,
p.
14.
330
UN
General
Assembly
(A/HRC/31/66),
op.
cit.,
p.
14.
331
Sunday
Monitor,
Police
rescue
EC
officer
from
mob,
by
Jessica
Sabano,
6th
March
2016,
p.
6.
332
Daily
Monitor,
Shock.
Nambooze
Agents
Hacked,
19th
February
2016,
p.
10.
80
80
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
On
Friday
4th
March
2016,
two
days
after
the
Mayoral
elections,
my
landlord
and
the
neighbours
[supporters
of
Tumwebaze
Deo
former
mayoral
candidate
for
Lugazi]
knocked
at
my
door
while
they
were
jubilating
and
calling
me
Hon
A seyas
wife,
yet
I
am
just
a
supporter
[of
Hon
Aseya
Onzuma,
Lugazi
mayor].
Thinking
it
was
normal
politics,
I
opened
the
door
and
upon
opening,
they
pulled
me
out
of
the
house
and
started
beating
me.
During
the
beating,
one
of
the
tenants
picked
a
big
stone
and
stoned
my
head
and
I
got
a
big
cut.
They
told
me
that
I
should
go
join
my
mayor
in
the
hospital
and
we
both
get
treatment
since
he
was
also
nursing
wounds.
After
realizing
that
I
had
got
a
big
cut
I
decided
to
go
and
report
the
matter
to
police.
At
police
I
found
my
attacker
(Nakimuli
Jamira)
had
already
reported
herself
that
she
had
beaten
a
drunkard
from
her
house.
When
the
police
saw
the
wound
they
decided
to
detain
her.
The
next
day
she
was
released
on
orders
of
a
man
who
claimed
to
be
working
for
the
state
house.
I
was
unable
to
get
the
name
of
the
man
but
he
told
me
he
was
going
make
sure
I
get
treatment.
He
gave
me
50,000
[UGX]333
and
he
said
that
was
enough
for
the
treatment.
After
some
days
when
I
went
back
to
follow
up
the
matter,
I
went
with
a
receipt
from
the
clinic
showing
how
much
they
were
demanding
me
(sic);
he
went
to
the
clinic
and
threatened
them,
so
they
have
refused
to
treat
me
again.334
FHRI
Irenes
(alias)
head
injuries
following
an
attack
by
supporters
in
the
opposing
camp,
Lugazi
district.
Joseph
(alias)
had
a
similar
experience:
On
2nd
March
2016
the
day
we
voted
for
the
Mayor,
I
was
Aseyas
agent
at
the
district
polling
station.
After
election,
but
before
counting
the
votes,
the
MP
elect
Mulindwa
Sozzi
Isaac
[came]
to
the
polling
station
holding
an
AK47
machine
gun
and
a
pistol.
He
was
wearing
the
army
uniform,
yet
he
is
a
civilian.
He
came
with
soldiers
and
they
had
two
ballot
boxes
with
pre-ticked
ballot
papers
in
favour
of
Tumwesigye
Deo,
Mayor
elect.
The
people
refused
to
allow
them
to
interrupt
the
CHAPTER SIX
81
ELECTORAL VIOLENCE
81
counting
of
the
votes
but
they
instead
started
shooting
and
beating
people.
I
was
beaten
using
a
gun
butt
on
the
knee
and
I
could
not
run.
I
was
arrested
by
the
army
officers
and
taken
to
police
for
a
night.
The
next
day,
the
police
released
me
without
treatment
and
I
was
told
to
go
and
treat
myself.
I
fear
perusing
the
matter
because
I
was
beaten
and
arrested
by
the
police
and
the
Army
so
I
fear
that
they
might
attack
me.335
FHRI
Josephs (alias) swollen knee that was hit using a gun butt, Lugazi district.
6.4 CONCLUSION
Mistrust
of
the
citizens
in
the
election
process
and
between
citizens
and
security
forces,
has
led
to
increased
tensions
and
incidences
of
violence
in
the
2016
election
period.
The
passing
out
of
large
numbers
of
crime
preventers
shortly
before
the
elections
fuelled
this
environment
of
violence.
This
calls
for
enhanced
dialogue
between
citizens
and
police,
as
well
as
accountability
of
security
officers
who
perpetuate
violence
and/or
behave
in
a
partisan
manner
contrary
to
their
mandate.
It
further
calls
for
reforms
in
the
electoral
framework
to
enhance
trust
of
the
electorate
in
the
administration
of
elections.
82
82
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
CHAPTER SEVEN
ACCESS TO JUSTICE
7.1
INTRODUCTION
The
ICCPR
provides
that
states
must
ensure
that
any
person
whose
rights
or
freedoms
are
violated
shall
have
an
effective
remedy.336
Article
28
of
the
Constitution
provides
every
Ugandan
with
the
right
to
a
fair,
speedy
and
public
hearing
before
an
independent
and
impartial
court
or
tribunal
established
by
law.
In
respect
of
elections,
the
Constitution
further
provides
that
any
aggrieved
presidential
candidate
may
petition
the
Supreme
Court
for
an
order
that
a
candidate
declared
by
the
Electoral
Commission
elected
as
President
was
not
validly
elected.337
In
addition
to
the
court
system,
the
Electoral
Commission
also
has
jurisdiction
to
hear
and
determine
election
complaints
arising
before
and
during
polling.338
7.2
TREND
SINCE
2006
In
2006,
the
Electoral
Commission
received
a
total
of
856
complaints
or
petitions
before
and
during
the
general
elections.
The
most
common
complaints
were
in
relation
to
requests
to
nullify
declared
results
(31.5%),
academic
papers
of
candidates
(31.3%),
resignations
(14.0%),
intimidation
during
campaigns
and
on
polling
day
(7.0%),
and
inaccurate
ballot
papers
(6.2%).339
Of
the
856
complaints,
528
complaints
were
handled,
180
were
abandoned
by
the
complainant
and
148
were
found
to
have
insufficient
evidence.340
In
2011,
the
Electoral
Commission
only
reported
on
pre-election
complaints,
which
fell
in
two
categories:
nominated
candidates
who
did
not
comply
with
electoral
laws
and
candidates
who
were
not
nominated
on
alleged
failure
to
satisfy
the
nomination
requirements.341
The
Commission
received
a
total
of
358
nomination
related
complaints,
following
from
which
99
nominations
were
upheld
and
21
disqualified.342
7.2.1
Presidential
election
petition
As
in
2001,
FDC
presidential
candidate,
Dr
Kizza
Besigye,
challenged
the
2006
election
outcome
citing
sizeable
differences
between
results
from
poling
stations
and
voting
districts,
voter
disenfranchisement,
and
tampering
with
the
voters
register,
among
others.
The
Supreme
Court
ruled
that
the
principle
of
free
and
fair
elections
was
compromised
by
bribery
and
intimidation
or
violence
in
some
areas
of
the
country
and
that
the
principles
of
equal
suffrage,
transparency
of
the
vote,
and
secrecy
of
the
ballot
were
undermined
by
multiple
voting
and
vote
stuffing
in
some
areas. 343
Despite
declaring
that
the
elections
were
not
free
and
fair
and
malpractices
affected
the
results,
the
Supreme
Court
Justices
voted
4
against
3
to
uphold
the
results
of
the
election
outcome
on
the
basis
that
the
irregularities
did
not
substantially
alter
the
outcome
of
the
election.
After
unsuccessfully
petitioning
court
in
2001
and
2006,
Besigye
vowed
never
to
return
to
the
courts
of
law
over
election
irregularities.
In
2011,
instead
of
challenging
the
results
in
court,
Besigye
launched
nationwide
protests
under
the
banner
of
the
Walk-to-
Work
demonstrations.
336
Article
2(3)(a)
of
the
International
Covenant
on
Civil
and
Political
Rights,
1966.
337
Article
104
of
the
Constitution
of
the
Republic
of
Uganda,
1995.
338
Ibid.,
Article
61(1)(f).
339
Electoral
Commission,
Report
on
the
2005/2006
General
Elections,
August
2006,
par.
5.9.
340
Ibid.,
par.
5.9.
341
Electoral
Commission,
Report
on
the
2010/2011
General
Elections,
July
2011,
p.
54.
342
Ibid.,
p.
55.
343
Rtd.
Col.
Dr.
Kizza
Besigye
v
Electoral
Commission,
Yoweri
Kaguta
Museveni
(Election
Petition
No.1
Of
2006),
Supreme
Court
of
Uganda,
30th
January
2007.
84
84
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
344
Communication
with
Jennifer
Angeyo,
Head
Legal
Department
Electoral
Commission
on
20th
May
2016.
345
FHRI
interview
with
Dr
Badru
Kiggundu,
Chairperson
Electoral
Commission,
on
13th
May
2016.
346 FHRI interview with Severino Twinobusingye, Counsel, Legal Team Go Forward, on 5th April 2016.
347
FHRI
interview
with
Basalirwa
Asuman,
Party
President
of
JEEMA
(Justice
Forum)
and
Counsel
for
Go
Forward,
on
5th
April
2016.
348
Information
received
from
Citizens
Elections
Observers
Network
Uganda
on
24th
May
2016.
CHAPTER SEVEN
85
ACCESS TO JUSTICE
85
to
produce
a
manual
register
to
prove
whether
he
was
on
the
register.
He
found
his
name
in
the
manual
register
under
number
44.
Serukenya
also
had
evidence
that
he
registered
for
the
National
Identification
Register
on
22nd
April
2015.
He
petitioned
the
EC
and
even
wrote
a
letter
to
the
legal
division
which
assured
him
that
they
will
handle
the
matter.
The
EC,
however,
failed
to
handle
his
case,
and
he
decided
to
file
a
case
at
the
High
Court.
The
Chairman
of
the
Electoral
Commission
sent
a
lawyer
who
requested
to
settle
the
matter
out
of
court
at
the
EC.349
According
to
EC
Chairperson
Dr
Kiggundu:
I
told
him
while
I
was
seated
in
my
chair
as
the
supreme
court
judge
of
the
Electoral
Commission
that
his
case
would
not
sail.
For
us
as
the
Electoral
Commission,
if
we
could
not
find
him
while
we
were
downloading
information
from
the
national
register,
we
could
not
claim
that
you
are
actually
a
voter.
You
might
claim
that
you
are
a
voter
but
there
are
some
people
who
went
and
registered
partially
and
stopped
somewhere
because
they
had
forgotten
some
information.
So
that
data
cannot
be
included
in
the
system.
The
process
had
to
be
concluded.
He
happens
to
be
one
of
them
who
as
far
as
I
am
concerned,
his
particulars
were
not
complete.350
The
Electoral
Commission
Act
does
not
specify
a
timeline
within
which
complaints
must
be
handled,
hampering
the
enforcement
of
timely
remedies.
7.3.2
Presidential
election
petition
On
1st
March
2016,
Amama
Mbabazi
filed
a
petition
in
the
Supreme
Court
challenging
the
election
of
Yoweri
Kaguta
Museveni
as
President.
Mbabazi
gave
28
grounds
in
his
petition
to
seek
annulment
of
the
election
outcome,
including
voter
bribery,
intimidation
and
threats,
misuse
of
crime
preventers
as
a
state
militia,
interference
in
consultations
and
campaign
activities,
unequal
media
coverage,
misuse
of
government
resources,
late
opening
of
polling
stations,
ballot
stuffing,
multiple
voting,
use
of
a
disputed
voters
register,
and
interference
in
the
operation
of
Go
Forward
agents.351
According
to
the
Go
Forward
legal
team
they
had
collected
evidence
from
over
300
witnesses
across
the
country
to
support
the
petition:
For
every
allegation
there
must
be
a
witness,
who
saw
or
who
was
a
victim.
So
we
had
witnesses
who
saw
for
example
bribery.
We
had
witnesses
who
received
bribes.
We
had
witnesses
who
were
victims
of
torture.
We
had
witnesses
who
themselves
were
crime
preventers
and
who
had
instructions
on
what
crimes
to
commit
for
purposes
of
preventing
peaceful
elections
to
take
place.
We
had
all
those.
On
every
case
we
had
evidence,
not
one
not
two
but
as
many
as
we
could.
This
case
was
much
stronger
than
all
the
presidential
election
cases
that
we
have
had
before,
in
2001
and
2006.
In
2001
I
think
Besigye
had
less
than
200
affidavits.
In
2006
they
had
200
affidavits.
We
had
410
affidavits.352
The
evidence
collected
by
the
Go
Forward
legal
team
was,
however,
stolen
when
lead
lawyer
Muhammad
Mbabazis
offices
were
broken
into
on
8 th
March
2016.
Severino
Twinobusingye,
one
of
Mbabazis
lawyers
explained
how
this
affected
their
case:
The
evidence
was
stolen
on
the
last
day
the
court
had
given
us.
So
you
cannot
run
across
the
whole
country
when
you
have
barely
5
hours
to
the
close
of
business
of
the
day
the
court
has
given
you.
If
we
had
more
time
that
would
be
349
Information
received
from
Citizens
Elections
Observers
Network
Uganda
on
24th
May
2016.
350 FHRI interview with Dr Badru Kiggundu, Chairperson Electoral Commission, on 13th May 2016.
351
Amama
Mbabazi
v.
Yoweri
Kaguta
Museveni,
Electoral
Commission,
and
the
Attorney
General,
Presidential
Election
Petition
No.
1
of
2016,
Supreme
Court
of
Uganda,
31 st
March
2016.
352
FHRI
interview
with
Severino
Twinobusingye,
Counsel
Legal
Team
Go
Forward,
on
5th
April
2016.
86
86
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
understandable.
But
even
when
that
was
the
case,
after
we
had
asked
court
to
allow
us
to
put
in
rejoinders
to
some
of
the
evidence
that
was
given,
court
allowed
us
to
put
in
rejoinders,
we
put
it
in
and
afterwards
court
changed
its
mind
and
it
expelled
the
evidence
that
was
already
before
it.
So
we
were
a
little
bit
disturbed
when
they
kept
saying
there
was
no
evidence.
But
they
had
the
evidence
and
you
expunged
it
from
the
record.353
Twinobusingye
accused
the
State
of
being
behind
the
break-in:
The
people
who
came
to
take
documents
and
computers
from
the
office
of
Mbabazi
Mohammed,
were
dressed
in
police
uniform.
They
were
seen
dressed
in
police
uniform
and
in
military
uniform.
These
are
state
agents.
There
is
nobody
who
has
possession
of
police
uniform
and
military
uniform
other
than
the
state.
So
you
can
conclusively
say
that
it
was
the
state
at
work. 354
He
further
argued
that
the
police
subsequently
used
the
stolen
evidence
to
track
down
and
arrest
witnesses:
After
breaking
into
our
offices,
they
stole
all
the
evidence
and
that
is
what
was
used
to
track
down
our
witnesses
and
they
were
arrested
like
grasshoppers.
You
see,
when
a
witness
comes
to
me
and
I
am
supposed
to
take
an
affidavit
from
you,
I
first
record
particulars,
like
biometrics
and
so
on,
including
where
you
stay.
That
information
was
taken.
This
is
what
they
used
to
trace
these
particular
individuals
from
wherever
they
were
across
the
country
and
they
were
arrested
and
there
is
no
protection
that
we
have
that
you
can
accord
them,
because
it
is
the
state
which
is
supposed
to
protect
but
here
it
is
a
situation
where
you
have
the
state
going
around
the
villages
and
arresting
the
citizens.
So
even
if
you
were
to
protect,
against
who?
Because
the
state
is
supposed
to
protect,
but
it
is
the
state
arresting
the
people.355
Despite
these
challenges
and
irregularities,
the
hearing
continued,
and
on
31st
March
2016,
the
Supreme
Court
unanimously
dismissed
the
petition
upholding
the
outcome
of
the
2016
elections,
primarily
for
want
of
evidence
by
the
petitioner.
Many
have
criticised
the
court
proceedings.
Basalirwa
Asuman,
JEEMA
party
president
and
Go
Forward
lawyer,
for
instance,
argued:
I
think
the
court
should
have
moved
on
its
own,
in
its
role
as
carrying
out
an
inquiry,
to
appreciate
the
fact
that
this
evidence
is
not
there.
It
should
have,
for
instance,
called
observers
on
its
own,
because
the
law
allows
them.
Now
that
the
petition
of
the
observers
to
be
amicus
curiae
had
been
thrown
out,
they
should
have
called
them
and
others.356
Twinobusingye
holds
a
similar
opinion:
I
also
think
their
lordships
need
to
broaden
up,
because
the
Constitution
is
very
clear
that
the
presidential
election
petition
is
not
a
trial.
It
is
not
a
civil
trial.
It
is
an
inquiry.
So
the
court
should
be
able
to
open
up
and
go
beyond
and
really
inquire
into
the
matter.
Inquiry
means
looking
into
what
has
been
presented
by
the
353
FHRI
interview
with
Severino
Twinobusingye,
Counsel
Legal
Team
Go
Forward,
on
5th
April
2016.
354
Ibid.
355
Ibid.
356
FHRI
interview
with
Basalirwa
Asuman,
Party
President
of
JEEMA
(Justice
Forum)
and
Counsel
for
Go
Forward,
on
5th
April
2016.
CHAPTER SEVEN
87
ACCESS TO JUSTICE
87
petitioner,
but
also
you
must
go
outside
and
call
in
experts,
calling
people
that
you
really
think
should
be
able
to
come
in
and
look
at
all
observers,
like
international
observers
who
have
come
to
observe,
and
anything,
to
be
able
to
come
to
a
just
conclusion.357
357 FHRI interview with Severino Twinobusingye, Counsel Legal Team Go Forward, on 5 th April 2016.
358
FHRI
interview
with
Basalirwa
Asuman,
Party
President
of
JEEMA
(Justice
Forum)
and
Counsel
for
Go
Forward,
on
5th
April
2016.
88
88
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
be
sufficient,
for
the
petitioner
to
file
and
also
handle
the
other
pre-trial
procedures,
and
then
court
should
have
30
days
within
which
to
hear
this
case.359
This
same
challenge
was
noted
by
the
Supreme
Court
in
the
2006
presidential
election
petition.
Then
Chief
Justice,
Benjamin
Odoki,
argued:
In
my
view,
there
is
also
a
need
to
review
and
increase
the
period
of
ten
days
within
which
to
file
the
petition
and
the
period
of
thirty
days
within
which
the
Court
is
to
declare
its
findings,
as
provided
for
in
Article
104
of
the
Constitution
and
Sections
59
of
the
Presidential
Elections
Act.
The
period
within
which
the
petition
should
be
determined
should
be
increased
to
at
least
sixty
days
to
give
the
parties
and
the
Court
sufficient
time
to
prepare,
present,
hear
and
determine
the
petition.360
On
a
positive
note,
the
Supreme
Court
in
its
ruling
on
31st
March
did
take
note
of
a
number
of
concerns,
including
the
incumbents
use
of
his
position
to
the
disadvantage
of
other
candidates,
the
use
of
state
resources,
unequal
use
of
state
owned
media
and
late
enactment
of
relevant
legislation.
In
addition,
the
Supreme
Court
referred
to
the
recommendations
made
in
the
previous
two
presidential
election
petitions
in
2001
and
2006
with
regard
to
the
need
for
legal
reform,
and
that
many
of
these
calls
by
the
Supreme
Court
have
remained
unanswered.
It
urged
the
executive
and
legislature
again
to
address
legal
reforms
in
the
electoral
laws.
7.3.3
Request
for
independent
election
audit
by
FDC
The
FDC
also
contested
the
outcome
of
the
2016
presidential
elections.
Due
to
the
restrictions
of
Dr
Besigye,
and
the
inability
to
mobilise
sufficient
resources
and
evidence,
the
FDC
was
unable
to
petition
court
over
the
elections:
We
kept
thinking
our
candidate
was
going
to
get
out
of
house
arrest
so
that
we
go
ahead
with
our
case.
That
never
happened.
And
there
were
some
affidavits
that
Besigye
needed
to
swear
as
a
candidate.
He
couldnt
swear
them
from
his
home.
If
there
is
an
affidavit
you
must
prove
that
you
swore
the
affidavit
before
a
commission
of
oath.
Besigyes
home
is
not
a
chamber.
So
there
is
no
way
he
could
have
sworn
the
affidavits
from
his
home.361
According
to
Yusuf
Nsibambi,
one
of
Besigyes
lawyers,
said
the
legal
team
had
overwhelming
evidence
which
could
have
caused
the
Supreme
Court
to
nullify
the
election
results,
however
to
facilitate
the
petition
process
would
require
more
than
100
million
UGX,362
which
he
said
could
not
be
raised
with
Besigye
being
prevented
from
leaving
his
home.363
Instead
of
petitioning
court,
the
FDC
called
for
an
independent
audit
of
the
2016
presidential
elections.
According
to
Gen.
Mugisha
Muntu,
FDC
party
president:
There
are
50
polling
stations
that
all
registered
100
per
cent
turn-up.
All
of
them
voted
for
one
candidate.
An
independent
audit
will
go
down
there
and
prove
those
things.
There
are
some
stations
where
the
voters
are
more
than
those
359 FHRI interview with Severino Twinobusingye, Counsel Legal Team Go Forward, on 5th April 2016.
360 Rtd. Col. Dr. Kizza Besigye v Electoral Commission,Yoweri Kaguta Museveni (Election Petition No.1 Of
CHAPTER SEVEN
89
ACCESS TO JUSTICE
89
registered.
There
are
so
many
stations
where
only
one
declaration
of
results
(DF)
form
was
issued."364
7.3.4
Parliamentary
election
petitions
In
addition,
to
the
presidential
election
petition,
at
least
118
parliamentary
candidates
petitioned
the
High
Court
over
the
results
of
the
2016
parliamentary
elections.
The
High
Court
has
given
priority
to
hear
election
cases,
and
appointed
26
judges
to
dispose
of
the
118
petitions
before
the
end
of
June
2016.365
7.4
CONCLUSION
A
lack
of
confidence
in
the
complaints
desk
of
the
Electoral
Commission
and
the
absence
of
a
timeframe
within
which
the
EC
must
handle
complaints,
hamper
timely
and
adequate
access
to
justice
for
electoral
related
disputes.
Access
to
justice
through
a
presidential
election
petition
at
the
Supreme
Court
was
also
hampered
by
several
factors,
most
notably
insufficient
time
for
the
petitioners
to
compile
a
strong
case
and
the
court
to
adequately
inquire
into
the
alleged
violations.
The
theft
of
evidence
and
alleged
arrests
and
intimidation
of
witnesses
is
likely
to
lead
to
increased
fear
of
persons
to
swear
affidavits
in
support
of
future
election
petitions,
thereby
further
hampering
possibilities
of
access
to
justice.
Monitor,
We
want
independent
audit
of
poll
results
Mugisha
Muntu,
by
Eriasa
Mukkibi
Sserunjjogi,
3rd
March
2016,
p.
5.
365
Daily
Monitor,
26
judges
to
dispose
of
118
MP
poll
petitions,
by
Anthony
Wesaka,
3rd
May
2016,
retrieved
from:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/26-judges-to-dispose-of-118-MP-poll-petitions/-
/688334/3186346/-/2wog6cz/-/index.html.
364
Daily
90
90
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
CHAPTER EIGHT
CONCLUSION
AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1
CONCLUSION
The
2016
elections
were
marred
with
irregularities
and
human
rights
violations.
The
right
to
vote
was
violated
due
to
the
widespread
occurrence
of
electoral
offences
including
voter
bribery,
multiple
voting,
pre-ticked
ballot
papers
and
altering
of
results;
as
well
as
late
delivery
of
materials,
described
by
the
Supreme
Court
as
evidence
of
incompetence
and
gross
inefficiency
by
the
electoral
body.
A
narrowing
of
the
civic
space
in
Uganda
has
resulted
in
an
increase
in
violations
of
the
freedom
of
expression
and
assembly.
Widespread
intimidation
and
arbitrary
arrests
of
opposition
politicians
and
journalists,
as
well
as
interference
in
political
rallies
and
media
operations
stifled
free
expression
of
political
opinion
and
access
to
information
for
the
electorate
to
make
an
informed
decision.
Confining
the
movements
of
a
presidential
candidate
to
his
home
for
43
days,
thereby
interfering
with
this
right
to
vote
in
local
council
elections,
and
the
opportunity
to
petition
the
results
of
the
presidential
elections,
among
others,
without
imminent
threat
to
national
security
is
a
sign
of
severe
disregard
for
human
rights
and
the
rule
of
law.
The
Supreme
Court
is
the
highest
authority
in
the
country
on
accessing
justice,
yet
did
not
always
uphold
human
rights
standards
in
its
rulings
during
the
2016
elections.
The
interim
order
banning
all
public
meetings
and
pronouncements
on
the
defiance
campaign
was
a
blatant
violation
of
the
freedoms
of
expression
and
assembly.
The
Supreme
Court
could
also
have
done
more
to
inquire
into
the
freeness
and
fairness
of
an
election
that
was
so
widely
disputed
by
the
public.
These
and
other
shortcomings
and
violations
have
resulted
in
further
mistrust
of
the
election
administration
by
the
public.
There
is,
therefore,
a
need
to
overhaul
the
current
electoral
framework,
and
in
particular
ensure
independence
of
all
relevant
institutions,
most
notably
the
Electoral
Commission,
judiciary,
Uganda
Police
Force,
Uganda
Peoples
Defence
Forces,
and
Uganda
Communications
Commission.
This
can
be
achieved
through
a
combination
of
legislative
reform
and
national
dialogue.
By
solely
reforming
the
laws,
the
practice
may
not
change,
as
even
the
existing
legal
framework
is
often
not
respected.
There
is
thus
a
need
for
dialogue
to
reach
national
consensus.
8.2
RECOMMENDATIONS
To
the
government:
1. Introduce
comprehensive
electoral
and
political
reforms
to
strengthen
the
electoral
laws
in
Uganda
necessary
for
the
holding
of
free
and
fair
elections
that
would
garner
the
trust
of
the
ordinary
citizen.
2. Investigate
the
root
causes
of
the
recurrent
violence
and
killings
in
the
Rwenzori
region
with
a
view
to
devising
a
lasting
solution.
3. Respect
and
uphold
the
independence
and
impartiality
of
the
other
arms
of
government
and
constitutional
institutions
such
as
the
Electoral
Commission
and
Uganda
Communications
Commission.
To
Parliament:
1. Amend
S.
15
of
the
Electoral
Commission
Act,
Cap.
140
to
introduce
a
time
limit
within
which
the
Electoral
Commission
must
resolve
complaints.
2. Amend
Article
104(2)
and
(3)
of
the
Constitution
of
the
Republic
of
Uganda,
1995
(as
amended
in
2005)
and
S.
59
(2)
and
(3)
of
the
Electoral
Commission
92
92
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
Act,
Cap.
140
to
extend
the
time
for
lodging
an
election
petition
from
10
to
30
days
and
for
the
Supreme
Court
to
determine
the
petition
at
least
60
days
after
the
declaration
of
results.
3. Amend
S.
19(1)(b)
of
the
Electoral
Commission
Act,
Cap.
140
to
allow
persons
below
18
years
to
register
for
the
National
Voters
Register,
provided
the
person
turns
18
before
Election
Day.
4. Amend
the
electoral
laws
to
make
provisions
for
persons
in
detention,
particularly
those
in
pre-trial
detention,
and
Ugandans
in
the
diaspora
to
exercise
their
right
to
vote.
To
the
Electoral
Commission:
1. Ensure
timely
delivery
of
voting
materials
to
all
polling
stations
nationwide.
2. Ensure
transparency
at
every
stage
of
the
electoral
process,
including
recruitment
and
training
of
election
officials,
resolution
of
disputes,
distribution
of
materials,
counting
and
tallying
of
ballots
and
declaration
of
results.
3. Ensure
adequate
and
timely
disposal
of
electoral
complaints
in
a
transparent
manner.
To
the
Uganda
Police
Force:
1. Refrain
from
selective
implementation
of
the
Public
Order
Management
Act,
2013
and
instead
regulate
and
facilitate
the
enjoyment
of
the
right
to
freedom
of
peaceful
assembly
in
accordance
with
Article
29(1)(d)
of
the
Constitution
of
the
Republic
of
Uganda,
1995.
2. Refrain
from
using
excessive
force
in
regulating
public
gatherings
and
effecting
arrests,
and
ensure
that
police
officers
are
equipped
with
sufficient
non-lethal
crowd
control
equipment
such
as
rubber
bullets
and
tear
gas,
but
even
these
should
only
be
applied
proportionately
and
only
when
absolutely
necessary.
3. Ensure
accountability
for
all
police
officers
involved
in
human
rights
violations
and
partisan
behaviour
recorded
during
the
election
period.
4. Provide
for
the
regulatory
framework
for
crime
preventers,
in
particular
relating
to
their
recruitment,
training,
mandate
and
accountability.
To
the
Directorate
of
Public
Prosecutions:
1. Prosecute
all
persons
suspected
to
have
committed
electoral
offences
to
curb
impunity
of
perpetrators
and
electoral
malpractices.
2. Prosecute
all
security
officers
involved
in
human
rights
violations
including
but
not
limited
to
excessive
use
of
force,
extrajudicial
killings,
and
arbitrary
arrests.
To
the
Uganda
Communications
Commission:
1. Respect
and
promote
the
freedom
of
expression
in
Uganda,
avoiding
arbitrary
closure
of
social
media.
2. Enable
a
conducive
environment
for
the
media
to
operate
free
from
intimidation
and
harassment,
refraining
from
arbitrary
closure
of
media
houses
or
threats
to
withdraw
licences.
To
the
judiciary:
1. Uphold
the
independence
of
the
judiciary,
avoiding
issuing
arbitrary
orders
that
undermine
the
rule
of
law.
To
all
political
players:
1. Desist
from
engaging
in
the
commercialisation
of
politics
characterised
by
malpractices
such
as
voter
bribery,
stuffing
ballot
boxes
with
pre-ticked
ballots
and
altering
of
results,
among
others.
CHAPTER EIGHT
93
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
93
To
the
media:
1. Ensure
equal
media
coverage
of
all
candidates,
ruling
party
and
opposition
alike.
To
the
general
public:
1. Refrain
from
engaging
in
unlawful
behaviour,
including
inciting
or
participating
in
violence.
94
94
RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS IN UGANDA (2016)
HUMAN
A CALL FOR ACTION
PROGRAMMES:
PROGRAMMES:
1.
2.
LEGAL SERVICES
2.
LEGAL SERVICES
Overall Objective:
Overall
To promote
access Objective:
to justice for poor and vulnerable persons in Uganda.
To promote access to justice for poor and vulnerable persons in Uganda.
3.
CIVIC EDUCATION
3.
CIVIC EDUCATION
Overall Objective:
Overall
To enhance
humanObjective:
rights and civic awareness in order to increase demand for
To social
enhance
human rights and civic awareness in order to increase demand for
political and
accountability.
political and social accountability.
4.
EXTERNAL SERVICES
4.
EXTERNAL SERVICES
Overall objective:
objective:
To improveOverall
information
sharing and management, promote collective
To improveparticipation
informationand
sharing
management,
promoteand
collective
advocacy, maximize
buildand
consensus
on democracy
advocacy,
maximize
participation
and
build
consensus
on
democracy
and
human rights issues in Uganda.
human rights issues in Uganda.
5.
SPECIAL PROJECTS
5.
RIGHTS AND RULE OF LAW PROGRAM
1: Paralegal
Advisory
Services (PAS)
Overall
objective:
To promote judicial independence through building the human rights
Objective:knowledge of judicial officers, strengthening judicial officers associations,
To promote
access
to justice
for poor
marginalized
persons within the
public
interest
litigation
andand
public
outreach campaigns.
criminal justice system.
6.
SPECIAL PROJECTS
2: Citizens Coalition On Electoral Democracy In Uganda (CCEDU)
1: Paralegal Advisory Services (PAS)
Objective:Objective:
EnhancingTo
citizens
participation
and leadership
accountability
inpersons
Ugandas
promote
access to justice
for poor and
marginalized
within the
political processes.
criminal justice system.
2: Citizens Coalition On Electoral Democracy In Uganda (CCEDU)
Objective:
Enhancing citizens participation and leadership accountability in Ugandas
political processes.
3: Citizens Election Observers Network Uganda (CEON-U)
Objective:
To promote transparency and integrity, accountability as well as increase
citizen participation in Uganda's electoral process.