Friday, December 7, 2018

Inside the sale of Greenland, ICB, Crane bank

Last year, when the parliamentary committee on Commissions, Statutory Authorities and State Enterprises (Cosase) opened an investigation into the defunct banks, it needed credible information, naming names and apportioning responsibility for specific acts of a fraudulent or questionable nature. Without this insight, any parliamentary probe would find itself constrained. A year later, Bugweri county MP, Abdu Katuntu, who chairs Cosase, told The Observer that parliament is now in a firm position with the investigations and Ugandans will have value for the resources spent on the inquiry.


“It will be prejudicial to the ongoing process if I share my thoughts about the likely outcome of this process, but the information that has been discovered is so far good and worth it,” he said. Based on Cosase’s working document seen by this newspaper, the committee’s outstanding task will be to apportion blame for the commissions and omissions raised by the auditor general (AG) as well as tracing of the assets of the defunct banks.
“We have some information of who benefited from the scheme but we wait to hear from the side of those accused,” said one of the MPs who sits on Cosase, speaking off the record. This MP explained that it is against this background that parliament instructed the AG and inspector general of government (IGG) to investigate the wealth of the top leadership at BoU.

 “This can give you clues as to where we are heading,” the MP said. On November, 28, 2017, Katuntu requested the auditor general to undertake a special audit on the closure of commercial banks by Bank of Uganda (BoU). Aware that there are several investigations that have previously been carried out on closed banks like Greenland Bank Limited, Katuntu’s committee specifically asked the auditor General to shed light on “the status of the banks at closure, cost of liquidation, status of assets and liabilities of the aforementioned banks from closure to-date, non-performing assets, non-recoverable assets and liquidators.” 

Under the Financial Institutions Act (FIA) as amended, BoU can revoke the licence of a financial institution if it is satisfied that it has ceased to carry on business, become insolvent, gone into liquidation, wound up, undercapitalised or dissolved. Section 95 of the FIA provides that BoU shall, within a year after taking over a financial institution, consider and implement any of the following options: arrange a merger with another financial institution; arrange for the purchase of assets and assumption of all or some of the liabilities by other financial institutions; arrange to sell the financial institution; liquidate the assets of the financial institution. 

The parliamentary investigation seeks to establish whether the central bank exercised these powers in accordance with the law. “In specific terms, this investigation is intended to establish the status of the assets and liabilities at the time of takeover and to-date as well as find out whether they have acted in good faith and with due care as receivers and liquidators in the exercise of their general powers,” Katuntu said. Accordingly, the auditor general opened inquiries into how Teefe bank, International Credit Bank Limited, Greenland bank, Cooperative bank, National Bank of Commerce, Global Trust bank and Crane bank came to be shut down.

ATTEMPT TO BLOCK INVESTIGATIONS
Some individuals attempted to block the parliamentary investigations on ground that it was sub judice. Shareholders of Crane bank and National Bank of Commerce are battling BoU in the High court over the closure of their respective banks. Indeed, deputy speaker of parliament Jacob Oulanyah had stopped Cosase on this very ground. However, Katuntu approached Speaker Rebecca Kadaga who intervened to save the parliamentary investigations. Kadaga indicated that the inquiry did not materially touch the issues in the court.

At the same time, the Financial Intelligence Authority and the Inspectorate of Government were carrying out a parallel inquiry into suspected illicit financial transactions said to involve former BoU director for supervision, Justine Bagyenda. The FIA executive director, Sydney Asubo, told The Observer that his mandate is not to investigate, but source information.
“It is within that context that we formed ground to justify further investigations into the illicit finance flows,” Asubo said. When asked whether this is good ground to question central bank mandarins, Asubo said: “I would not advise further investigations if the information sourced is flimsy. Whereas I cannot discuss what our report says, I can confirm that we formed the ground to justify investigations.”

 We understand that the FIA report, which was shared with the speaker to parliament, IGG and minister of Finance, Planning and Economic Development, was the basis upon which Kadaga, weeks ago, called off the process of approving Bagyenda’s nomination as a new member on the FIA board. IGG INVESTIGATIONS Meanwhile, in the background, IGG’s own probe found itself almost getting muddled by a behind-the-scenes power play which threatened to further undermine the integrity of the central bank. The bank governor, Emmanuel Tumusiime Mutebile, was the subject of wide-ranging whistle-blower allegations from individual employees of BoU who claimed their rights and freedoms were being violated.

The IGG was, therefore, asked to inquire into the very competence of the bank’s top management. Matters came to a head with the appointment of one Twinemanzi Tumubweine to replace Bagyenda, as executive director supervision. This appointment was derided as having been premised on conflict of interest, nepotism and influence peddling. Tumubweine is son to Manzi Tumubweine, who has been a member of BoU’s board of directors. The petition also said Twinemanzi was unqualified for the job.

Very quickly, a war of words broke out between the Inspectorate of Government and the governor with the latter arguing that the constitutional guarantees of independence outlined in respect to BoU insulated him from investigations by the IGG. The impasse saw an exchange of several legal opinions and letters between the two constitutional bodies, ultimately prompting the intervention of President Museveni. Museveni called a meeting at State House-Entebbe attended by the governor; his deputy, Dr Louis Kasekende, the IGG, and Katuntu in his capacity as chairperson of Cosase, which exercises parliamentary oversight over both institutions.

At the conclusion of the meeting, the president set up a harmonised committee chaired by Katuntu to quietly investigate the issues and power politics at BoU. This ad hoc committee is yet to report to the president. However, along the way, the AG released a preliminary report on the defunct banks. 

AUDITOR GENERAL’S FINDINGS 
The report from his special audit of Bank of Uganda and defunct banks was released last month. Auditor General John Muwanga revealed that there were no documented guidelines/regulations or policies in place for the identification of the purchasers of Gold Trust Bank, National Bank of Commerce and Crane Bank Limited.

“There were also no guidelines to determine the procedures to be adopted by the central bank in the sale/transfer of assets and liabilities of the defunct banks to the identified purchaser. In the absence of guidelines, I could not establish the basis used to select the purchaser and determining the values of assets and liabilities transferred by BoU to the purchaser,” the AG’s report notes. The AG further noted that BoU did not carry out a requisite valuation of assets and liabilities of the three defunct banks whose fate was resolved under the ‘purchase and assumption’ arrangement. “In absence of the valuation and or documented evaluation of alternatives and assumptions used, I could not establish how the terms for the transfer of assets and liabilities in the P&A were determined.”

Whereas the AG was availed with the asset movement schedules for Greenland Bank, ICB and Cooperative bank indicating details of assets at closure, assets sold, selling price, period sale, unsold assets, performing and non-performing loans from time of closure to the year 2001, for the period starting 2002 when the liquidation role was directly performed by BoU, no asset movement schedules were availed. To that effect, the AG notes, “I could not adequately verify the movement of assets of the three banks from Shs 117.6 billion at closure to Shs 19.7bn as at 30th June 2016.” In the case of ICB, Greenland bank and Cooperative bank, the total loan portfolio sold of Shs135bn included secured loans of Shs34.5bn sold to Nile River Acquisition Company at a 93% discount.


The AG also discovered that the Crane Bank non-performing loans worth Shs 570.38bn out of the gross loans of Shs 1,159bn, were sold to dfcu Bank at what appears to be heavily discounted cost of Shs200bn. “I could not establish how the consideration of Shs 200bn was derived from the bad book of Shs 570.38bn…Further, I was not provided with the schedule of loans and the corresponding collateral transferred to dfcu.” On Friday, Cosase is expected to again meet with BoU officials to clarify on the issues raised in the AG’s report. skakaire@observer.ug

Gold Trust Bank sale agreement was signed two weeks before seizure — MPs


Members of Parliament were yesterday shocked to learn that Bank of Uganda (BOU) flouted all the procurement procedures in the sale of Gold Trust Bank to dfcu Bank. Documents presented to the parliamentary committee on commission, statutory authorities and state enterprises (Cosase) investigating the closure indicated that the bank was sold to dfcu before it was closed and that the deal was not authorised by the board.
According to the documents, BOU signed a confidential agreement with dfcu Bank on July 10, 2014 and on July 25, 2014 revoked the bank’s licence, contrary to the BOU Act.
“How can that happen? You sell before you close? The law requires you to first take over management for six months and if the institution does not comply with the prudential financial standards, then you close it. But in this case, the bank was closed and taken over on the same day,” MP Moses Kasibante said.
 The agreement was signed by the then executive director in charge of supervision, Justine Bagyenda, on behalf of BOU and dfcu managing director Juma Kisame on behalf of dfcu. Global Trust Bank was one of the commercial banks that started operations in 2008 and was closed in 2014 on account of accumulated losses to a tune of sh60b. Its closure came two years after the collapse of National Bank of Commerce in 2012.
Although BOU closed the bank in accordance with the Financial Institutions Act 2004, the Auditor General, John Muwanga, revealed that BOU sold the bank to dfcu without internal guidelines, regulations or policies in place to guide the identification of the buyer and valuation of the assets. “Therefore, I was unable to determine how the buyer was selected and also establish how the purchase and assumption agreement was arrived at. In the absence of guidelines and procurement records, I could not ascertain whether BOU selected and evaluated the bids in line with the evaluation criteria,” Muwanga stated.
During the meeting yesterday, Bagyenda and the BOU head of legal, Margaret Kasule, came under fire for exposing Global Trust Bank’s financial details to dfcu before the closure. The MPs also wanted to know how dfcu got to know about the deal. Bagyenda also came under fire for signing on behalf of BOU, yet she was reportedly not authorised.
The BOU Act stipulates that agreements are only signed by the governor, his deputy and the board secretary.
Trouble started when MP Michael Tusiime said: “Negotiationsfor takeover were done before the agreement was signed contrary to the BOU Act.For you to have signed the agreement, it means you disclosed the bank’sfinancial affairs to the buyer. Did you seek their permission as required bySection 40 (3) of BOU Act?”
 Bagyenda, however, bounced the question to Kasule, who admitted to drafting the agreement, but denied being part of it or being consulted before the signing. “So madam Bagyenda, why did you disclose the bank’s financial information to strangers, yet it had been entrusted with you as a regulator?” committee chairperson Abdu Katuntu asked.
Bagyenda said the decision was not taken by her as an individual, but the management and board of the bank. But when BOU governor Emmanuel Mutebile was asked to explain, he referred the matter to the board secretary, Hellen Susan Wasagali Kanyemibwa.
“I have the minutes of the board meeting from January2014-December 2014, this issue was never discussed,” Kanyemibwa said asBagyenda struggled to explain.
 “My view is that this confidential agreement was drafted by the legal department. I assumed that they had followed all the procedures,” Bagyenda said as MPs asked her why she signed.

Museveni briber found guilty, convicted in US

Former Hong Kong Home Affairs minister Patrick Ho Chi-ping has been found guilty by the federal court in USA of offering millions of bribes to several African leaders including Ugandan and Chadian presidents.
Ho was convicted for offering a $500,000 bribe to Uganda President Yoweri Museveni, $500,000 to Uganda Foreign Affairs minister Sam Kutesa and $2 million to Chad's President Idriss Deby. Ho was found guilty after a one-week trial before US district judge Loretta A. Preska in the Southern District of New York of one count of conspiring to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), four counts of violating the FCPA, one count of conspiring to commit international money laundering and one count of committing international money laundering.  

The total $1m bribe to Museveni and Kutesa was in a bid to secure business dealings in railway services, infrastructure construction, fishing, hydro-energy, banking and finance as well as tourism for the Chinese conglomerate CEFC China Energy Co. Other potential deals for CEFC included; construction of a Chinatown to boost tourism on land near L.Victoria and possibly an island.
CEFC also offered profit-sharing through a partnership with the Museveni and Kutesa family businesses. Museveni's $500,000 bribe termed as "campaign donation" was delivered in May 2016 ahead of Museveni's swearing in at Kololo ceremonial grounds, never mind that the controversial elections had already been held in February.
Before leaving for Uganda and delivering Museveni's bribe, Ho asked Kutesa for help with the customs officials in regards to Museveni's bribe that was delivered in gift boxes, court heard.
Ho stated in an email also copied Kutesa's wife Edith, "As we are about to board the plan[e] to Uganda, we are preparing to bring with us some very 'nice' gifts to your President and to [the Ugandan Foreign minister] to celebrate the occasion. We shall require special assistance with your customs procedure. Please assist in whatever way you can otherwise we will have to make other plans." 
Kutesa’s $500,000 bribe was paid via a wire transfer from HSBC bank in Hong Kong (China) through an intermediary HSBC bank (USA) to Stannic bank in Uganda on May 6, 2016.
Ho’s Uganda-bribery scheme was hatched in 2014 from the time when Kutesa was president of the UN General Assembly. 
Court heard that so successful was Ho’s meeting with President Museveni, that he wrote to CEFC chairman Ye (who also worked as a special advisor to Kutesa during his time at UN) that Museveni was willing to undo already completed bids in oil blocks in order to award the concessions to CEFC.
As for the Chad bribery scheme in which $2m was paid to President Deby, it was aimed at securing oil deals in the poor West African nation. 69-year-old Ho will be sentenced on March 14 and faces up to 65 years in prison. He was found guilty on seven of eight counts of bribery and money laundering by 12 jurors (nine women and 3 men).
“Patrick Ho now stands convicted of scheming to pay millions in bribes to foreign leaders in Chad and Uganda, all as part of his efforts to corruptly secure unfair business advantages for a multibillion-dollar Chinese energy company,” said US attorney Geoffrey Berman. 
“As the jury’s verdict makes clear, Ho’s repeated attempts to corrupt foreign leaders were not business as usual, but criminal efforts to undermine the fairness of international markets and erode the public’s faith in its leaders.”
The conviction of Ho comes just days after Museveni was given a corruption fight award at the 25th anniversary celebrations of Transparency International, Uganda Chapter in recognition of his efforts to fight against corruption.
At the ceremony Museveni told the gathering that his own father was corrupt Mzee Amos Kaguta was corrupt because he had in possession at his home government branded veterinary medicines. Museveni said his fight against corruption had been frustrated by the people in civil service and politicians, who despite their good pay still steal public resources. He said on December 10, he "will announce new measures in our renewed fight against corruption. That said, there is corruption in Uganda. It stems from the colonial times."
"We also made the mistake of assuming that elected leaders would diligently serve in their people's interests. We gave people power to elect leaders, who instead of offering oversight have joined the corrupt class," Museveni said.
Adding; "However, corruption will now be defeated. The corrupt civil servants have exposed themselves. The population is angry with them. Also, we now have more educated young people. The pool from which to pick the replacements for the corrupt civil servants has grown."

Chi Ping Patrick Ho convicted of International Bribery, Money Laundering Offenses: Schemed to Bribe the President of Chad, President and Foreign Minister of Uganda

Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, December 5, 2018

Former Head of Organization Backed by Chinese Energy Conglomerate Convicted of International Bribery, Money Laundering Offenses

Schemed to Bribe the President of Chad, President and Foreign Minister of Uganda

A federal jury in New York City today convicted the head of a nongovernmental organization (NGO) based in Hong Kong and Virginia on seven counts for his participation in a multi-year, multimillion-dollar scheme to bribe top officials of Chad and Uganda in exchange for business advantages for a Chinese oil and gas company, announced Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman of the Southern District of New York.
Chi Ping Patrick Ho, aka “Patrick C.P. Ho,” aka “He Zhiping,” 69, of Hong Kong, China, was found guilty today after a one-week jury trial before U.S. District Judge Loretta A. Preska in the Southern District of New York of one count of conspiring to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), four counts of violating the FCPA, one count of conspiring to commit international money laundering and one count of committing international money laundering.  Ho is scheduled to be sentenced before Judge Preska on March 14, 2019, at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
“Patrick Ho paid millions of dollars in bribes to the leaders of two African countries to secure contracts for a Chinese conglomerate,” said Assistant Attorney General Benczkowski.  “Today’s trial conviction demonstrates the Criminal Division’s commitment to prosecuting those who seek to utilize our financial system to secure unfair competition advantages through corruption and bribery.”
“Patrick Ho now stands convicted of scheming to pay millions in bribes to foreign leaders in Chad and Uganda, all as part of his efforts to corruptly secure unfair business advantages for a multibillion-dollar Chinese energy company,” said U.S. Attorney Berman.  “As the jury’s verdict makes clear, Ho’s repeated attempts to corrupt foreign leaders were not business as usual, but criminal efforts to undermine the fairness of international markets and erode the public’s faith in its leaders.”
According to evidence presented at trial, Ho was involved in two bribery schemes to pay top officials of Chad and Uganda in exchange for business advantages for CEFC China, a Shanghai-based multibillion-dollar conglomerate that operates internationally in multiple sectors, including oil, gas, and banking.  At the center of both schemes was Ho, the head of a nongovernmental organization based in Hong Kong and Arlington, Virginia, the China Energy Fund Committee (the “CEFC NGO”), which held “Special Consultative Status” with the United Nations (UN) Economic and Social Council.  CEFC NGO was funded by CEFC China.
According to the evidence presented at trial, in the first scheme (the “Chad Scheme”), Ho, on behalf of CEFC China, offered a $2 million cash bribe, hidden within gift boxes, to Idriss Déby, the President of Chad, in an effort to obtain valuable oil rights from the Chadian government.  In the second scheme (the “Uganda Scheme”), Ho caused a $500,000 bribe to be paid, via wires transmitted through New York, New York, to an account designated by Sam Kutesa, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Uganda, who had recently completed his term as the President of the UN General Assembly.  Ho also schemed to pay a $500,000 cash bribe to Yoweri Museveni, the President of Uganda, and offered to provide both Kutesa and Museveni with additional corrupt benefits by “partnering” with them in future joint ventures in Uganda.
The Chad Scheme
According to the evidence presented at trial, the Chad Scheme began in or about September 2014 when Ho flew into New York, New York to attend the annual UN General Assembly.  At that time, CEFC China was working to expand its operations to Chad and wanted to meet with President Déby as quickly as possible.  Through a connection, Ho was introduced to Cheikh Gadio, the former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Senegal, who had a personal relationship with President Déby.  Ho and Gadio met in midtown Manhattan, New York where Ho enlisted Gadio to assist CEFC China in obtaining access to President Déby.
Gadio connected Ho and CEFC China to President Déby.  In an initial meeting in Chad in November 2014, President Déby described to Ho and CEFC China executives certain lucrative oil rights that were available for CEFC China to acquire.  Following that meeting, Gadio advised Ho and CEFC China to send a technical team to Chad to investigate the oil rights and make an offer to President Déby.  Instead, Ho insisted on a prompt second meeting with the President.  The second meeting took place a few weeks later, in December 2014.  Ho led a CEFC China delegation, which flew into Chad on a corporate jet with $2 million cash concealed within several gift boxes.  At the conclusion of a business meeting with President Déby, Ho and the CEFC China executives presented President Déby with the gift boxes.
To the surprise of Ho and the CEFC China executives, President Déby rejected the $2 million bribe offer.  Ho subsequently drafted a letter to President Déby claiming that the cash had been intended as a donation to Chad.  Ultimately, Ho and CEFC China did not obtain the unfair advantage that they had sought through the bribe offer, and by mid-2015, Ho had turned his attention to a different “gateway to Africa”: Uganda.
The Uganda Scheme
According to the evidence presented at trial, the Uganda Scheme began around the same time as the Chad Scheme, when Ho was in New York, New York for the annual UN General Assembly.  Ho met with Sam Kutesa, who had recently begun his term as the 69th President of the UN General Assembly (“PGA”).  Ho, purporting to act on behalf of CEFC NGO, met with Kutesa and began to cultivate a relationship with him.  During the year that Kutesa served as PGA, Ho and Kutesa discussed a “strategic partnership” between Uganda and CEFC China for various business ventures, to be formed once Kutesa completed his term as PGA and returned to Uganda.
In or about February 2016 – after Kutesa had returned to Uganda and resumed his role as Foreign Minister, and Yoweri Museveni (Kutesa’s relative) had been reelected as the President of Uganda – Kutesa solicited a payment from Ho, purportedly for a charitable foundation that Kutesa wished to launch.  Ho agreed to provide the requested payment, but simultaneously requested, on behalf of CEFC China, an invitation to Museveni’s inauguration, business meetings with President Museveni and other high-level Ugandan officials, and a list of specific business projects in Uganda that CEFC China could participate in.
In May 2016, Ho and CEFC China executives traveled to Uganda.  Prior to departing, Ho caused the CEFC NGO to wire $500,000 to the account provided by Kutesa in the name of the so-called “foundation,” which wire was transmitted through banks in New York, New York.  Ho also advised his boss, the Chairman of CEFC China, to provide $500,000 in cash to President Museveni, ostensibly as a campaign donation, even though Museveni had already been reelected.  Ho intended these payments as bribes to influence Kutesa and Museveni to use their official power to steer business advantages to CEFC China.
Ho and CEFC China executives attended President Museveni’s inauguration and obtained business meetings in Uganda with President Museveni and top Ugandan officials, including at the Department of Energy and Mineral Resources.  After the trip, Ho requested that Kutesa and Museveni assist CEFC China in acquiring a Ugandan bank, as an initial step before pursuing additional ventures in Uganda.  Ho also explicitly offered to “partner” with Kutesa and Museveni and/or their “family businesses,” making clear that both officials would share in CEFC China’s future profits.  In exchange for the bribes offered and paid by Ho, Kutesa thereafter steered a bank acquisition opportunity to CEFC China.
This case was investigated by the FBI and IRS-CI.  U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations and the Department of Justice, Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs provided assistance.
Trial Attorney Paul A. Hayden of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section, FCPA Unit and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Douglas S. Zolkind, Daniel C. Richenthal and Catherine E. Ghosh of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for Southern District of New York’s Public Corruption Unit and the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section are prosecuting the case.
The Fraud Section is responsible for investigating and prosecuting all FCPA matters.  Additional information about the Justice Department’s FCPA enforcement efforts can be found at www.justice.gov/criminal/fraud/fcpa.

Adapted from: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-head-organization-backed-chinese-energy-conglomerate-convicted-international-bribery

Kuteesa and Museveni implicated in a U.S. Bribing Case!


Our people must be taught to desist from accepting bribes. The ability to say NO, must become a core value of our nation” – Sunday Adelaja
It is such a convenience that President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni are planning an Anti-Corruption Drive and new measures on the 10th December 2018. As he was pledging that on the 4th December 2018. This case has been in the works, as it was revealed last year, that Foreign Minister Sam Kuteesa and Museveni was bribed for $1m by a Chinese Associate Patrick C.P. Ho. This news is vital, as it proves how untouchable both of these leaders are. As the Foreign Minister and President can do whatever and get whatever deals behind closed doors.
That Museveni and Kuteesa are doing this is not surprising, but the value and what was at stake. Shows how illicit and unknown the deals with the petroleum industry are in the Republic. They are clearly signing off deals and paying off the State House in Entebbe. As this deal shows how Kuteesa and Museveni operates. This is one of plenty, but one that is uncovered by the U.S. Department of Justice.
Look!
In or about February 2016 – after Kutesa had returned to Uganda and resumed his role as Foreign Minister, and Yoweri Museveni (Kutesa’s relative) had been reelected as the President of Uganda – Kutesa solicited a payment from Ho, purportedly for a charitable foundation that Kutesa wished to launch. Ho agreed to provide the requested payment, but simultaneously requested, on behalf of CEFC China, an invitation to Museveni’s inauguration, business meetings with President Museveni and other high-level Ugandan officials, and a list of specific business projects in Uganda that CEFC China could participate in. In May 2016, Ho and CEFC China executives traveled to Uganda. Prior to departing, Ho caused the CEFC NGO to wire $500,000 to the account provided by Kutesa in the name of the so-called “foundation,” which wire was transmitted through banks in New York, New York. Ho also advised his boss, the Chairman of CEFC China, to provide $500,000 in cash to President Museveni, ostensibly as a campaign donation, even though Museveni had already been reelected. Ho intended these payments as bribes to influence Kutesa and Museveni to use their official power to steer business advantages to CEFC China” (Department of Justice – ‘Former Head of Organization Backed by Chinese Energy Conglomerate Convicted of International Bribery, Money Laundering Offenses’ 05.12.2018, link: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-head-organization-backed-chinese-energy-conglomerate-convicted-international-bribery).
The Ugandans should be horrified how little the President and Foreign Minister cost, as they were selling off the petroleum licenses for the Lake Albertine Graben and Region. Where there are already dozens of Companies in. Even CNOOC! That is why this would be the second company who got a Petroleum Licenses in the Republic.
The Ugandans should also be terrified that the President only cost $500k and $500k for the Foreign Minister. They only cost A Milli, which is close to nothing. Especially considering what was at stake. These gentlemen are supposed to be there for the public and serve them. But showing only self-interest.
Now, the Chinese National Ho is found guilty in New York yesterday. Therefore, the evidence and the case was solid enough. That proves the reality of how he solicited bribes with the Foreign Minister and President. Clearly succeeded until the US Authorities caught a wind of it. Also, shows how the State House and the President is corrupted. Peace.

Thursday, December 6, 2018

PATRICK HO, HONG KONG BUSINESSMAN, CONVICTED FOR BRIBES TO CHAD'S PRESIDENT DEBY AND UGANDA'S GEN. MUSEVENI

Gen. Museveni and Janet Museveni, his wife and Education Minister, greet members of Ho's delegation who traveled to the May 12, 2016 swear-in. This was one of dozens of photographs the U.S. entered into evidence in the federal court trial.

Hong Kong businessman Chi Ping Patrick Ho was convicted for bribing three African leaders on behalf of a powerful Chinese business conglomerate, CEFC China Energy Ltd., in U.S. federal court in Manhattan today.
 
The jury deliberated for just over four hours beginning at 10 A.M. Ho was convicted on seven of eight counts connected to bribery, money-laundering, and related conspiracy for the crimes. The maximum penalty on all seven counts is 65 years in prison; Ho is 69 years old. 
 
Ho was convicted of conspiring to bribe and then offering $2 million in cash to Chad's President Idriss Deby in December, 2014, in a bid to secure for CEFC China oil concessions whose value was estimated at $3 billion. 
 
Ho was convicted for conspiring to bribe and then delivering $500,000 in cash to Uganda's dictator Yoweri Museveni when he attended his swearing-in in May 2016. He was also convicted of paying Sam Kutesa a bribe of $500,000 via wire transfer from New York to an account provided by Kutesa's wife. In Uganda Ho wanted to secure for CEFC interests in: rail, infrastructure construction, fishing from Lake Victoria, hydro-energy, banking and finance, and tourism. 
 
Other potential deals included the construction of a Chinatown to boost tourism on land near Lake Victoria and on an island. CEFC also offered profit-sharing through a partnership with the Museveni and Kutesa family businesses. The meeting with Museveni was so successful that Ho wrote a report to CEFC's chairman Ye that the Ugandan dictator was willing to undo already-completed bids in oil blocks to award concessions to CEFC. 
 
“Patrick Ho now stands convicted of scheming to pay millions in bribes to foreign leaders in Chad and Uganda, all as part of his efforts to corruptly secure unfair business advantages for a multibillion-dollar Chinese energy company," U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman, said this afternoon. "As the jury’s verdict makes clear, Ho’s repeated attempts to corrupt foreign leaders were not business as usual, but criminal efforts to undermine the fairness of international markets and erode the public’s faith in its leaders.”
 
Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski added, “Patrick Ho paid millions of dollars in bribes to the leaders of two African countries to secure contracts for a Chinese conglomerate. Today’s trial conviction demonstrates the criminal division’s commitment to prosecuting those who seek to utilize our financial system to secure unfair competition advantages through corruption and bribery.”
 
The "Uganda Scheme," as the U.S. called it, was hatched in Kutesa's office at the United Nations beginning in October 2014, when he was President of the General Assembly (PGA). Some meetings occurred in Kutesa's New York City residence. The first meeting was arranged after Ho contacted Kutesa's chief of staff Arthur Kafeero.
 
Kutesa boasted to Ho in their early meetings about his family ties to Museveni; his daughter is married to Museveni's son Gen. Muhoozi Kaenerugaba. The country's powerful Special Forces Command reports to Kaenerugaba, once considered a potential successor to his father. 
 
Eventually, Ho persuaded Kutesa invite him to speak at an event at the United Nations and to appoint Ye Jianming, the CEFC China chairman, as a Special Advisor to Kutesa. Ho then invited Kutesa and his wife to Hong Kong and China where they met with Ye. 
 
It was after Kutesa's term as PGA expired that the bribe-for-businesses-scheme swung into full operation. Kutesa has been embroiled in corruption allegations dating over a period of decades. In 2014 he survived a petition seeking to block his elevation to the post of PGA that gained over 15,000 signatures
 
Kutesa, through his wife Edith, solicited through e-mail messages in April 2016 payment from Ho for a fake charitable foundation which the couple created as a ruse to accept the bribe payment, the jury was told. Ho agreed to send the $500,000 and asked that: chairman Ye of CEFC China be invited to Museveni's 2016 inauguration; that business meetings be arranged with the dictator and other senior government officials; and, that a list of specific Uganda business projects be compiled that CEFC could invest in. 
 
The $500,000 to Kutesa was then wired on May, 6, 2016 to Stanbic Bank Uganda Ltd., to an account that includes the Numbers 6581, according to a map presented by the U.S. as evidence that traced the route the funds traveled. Before being rerouted to the account provided by Edith Kutesa, the money was first sent by an HSBC account in Hong Kong that includes the Numbers 2838 to an HSBC U.S.A branch, also on May 6. The HSBC account holder was CEFC China Energy. The beneficiary at Stanbic was Food Security and Sustainable Energy Foundation, the alleged foundation created by the Kutesas. "Ho intended these payments as bribes to influence Kutesa and Museveni to use their official power to steer business advantages to CEFC China," the U.S. maintained. 
 
CEFC chairman Ye ended up not traveling to Museveni's swearing-in. Ho was accompanied by other CEFC executives. Ho asked Ye to provide $500,000 in cash as a "campaign donation" to Museveni that would be delivered when the delegation traveled to Museveni's May 12, 2016 inauguration. The election itself --widely reported as rigged-- had been held months earlier, on Feb. 18, 2016. 
 
On May 10, 2016, the day before departing to Uganda, Ho sent a note to the Kutesas saying, "We shall require some special assistance with your customs officials," in reference to the $500,000 in cash for Museveni, the jury heard.
 
While in Uganda Ho and the delegation in addition to meeting Gen. Museveni met with senior government officials including from the ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources. 
 
With respect to the "Chad Scheme," Ho was introduced to Senegal's former foreign minister Cheikh Tidiane Gadio, a friend of President Deby. Ho and Gadio held their first meeting in September 2014, in Trump World Towers near the U.N., where CEFC Energy owned a suite. Gadio then arranged the meeting in Chad. During the first meeting with Deby in November 2014, the Chadian president described some oil blocs available for CEFC to acquire. 
 
Instead of following up with a technical team to evaluate the potential concessions as Gadio recommended, Ho insisted that the former Senegalese minister arrange a second meeting with Deby. It was during this second visit to Chad in December, 2014, that Ho and colleagues from CEFC, presented the $2 million in cash wrapped in gift boxes. 
 
Gadio initially himself was charged with accepting a bribe of $400,000 to arrange the meeting with Deby. The U.S. dropped charges against Gadio and during trial, which started last week Monday, he testified that he wasn't aware that Ho and his CEFC colleagues intended to offer Deby a bribe. He testified that Deby rejected the bribe offer. 
 
Ho's operations in the U.S. were enabled through his U.N.-affiliated NGO, China Energy Fund Committee (CEFC NGO), which was funded by CEFC China Energy, a company that reported revenue of $40 billion in 2014. Ye, the chairman, has not been seen in public since March, 2018, and it's believed he may have been arrested by the authorities. Ho's NGO was based in Hong Kong and Arlington, Virginia, in the U.S.  The government maintained that Ho used his NGO to conduct his corrupt activities, giving him access to walk the corridors of the U.N. 
 
Ho's sentencing is March 14, 2019. He was once a home affairs minister in Hong Kong. 

KCCA, Central Bank, URA well-paid but very corrupt-Museveni




Museveni was the chief guest at the 25th anniversary celebrations of Transparency International, Uganda Chapter, in Kampala.
President Museveni has said while Ugandans were complaining of officials suspected of corruption not being put in jail, it is within the law that they have to be prosecuted first.
He however noted that while the government had put in place laws to protect public servants, there was now need for quicker methods of demanding accountability.
The President was  speaking during the celebrations to mark the 25th anniversary of Transparency International Uganda (TIU) at Imperial Royale Hotel where a national anti- corruption dialogue was held under the theme ‘Citizen’s participation in the fight against corruption: A Sustainable Path to Uganda’s Transformation.’
“The laws are there, the institutions are there but the personnel handling them are the problem. I don’t need a frightened civil service. The country needs confident and able leaders who know what is right and do what is right,” he said.
He re-echoed the people’s views that increment in the remuneration of salaries of public servants was not the cure to corruption because public servants in government institutions like KCCA, Bank of Uganda, URA were still corrupt despite the high pay.
The Bank of Uganda is under investigation by the Parliament Committee on Commissions, Statutory authorities and State Enterprises (COSASE) over fraudulent dealings.
Previously the President has accused officials in the Ministry of Finance and the Uganda Revenue Authority of corruption.
The President said that patriotism was the cure to corruption and that he would talk more on the government’s new efforts to curb corruption on 10th December 2018.
The Minister of Ethics and Integrity, Fr. Simon Lokodo thanked His Excellency for putting in place legal frame works to fight corruption.
He noted that government had gone into partnerships with international agencies whose main goal and focus was to fight corruption and demand for accountability, which government could not do alone.

76% of hospitals fail to account for medicines – AG report

76 per cent of districts and municipal councils failed to account for over Shs 4.5 billion dispensed for health supplies and medicines in 2016/17, the auditor general’s report reveals.

An audit exercise into management of medicines and health supplies at the districts also exposed malpractices including drug stock outs, explaining the current poor health services in the country.
Auditor general John Muwanga and his team, audited districts and municipal councils’ financial statements for district hospitals and health centre IVs. The audit focused on the procedures, processes, tools and documentation used to manage medicines and health supplies.
The report observed that unaccounted for medicines and health supplies may lead to rampant medicine stock-outs which hamper service delivery.
The auditor general advised accounting officers to ensure that all the necessary records for the items are properly maintained, monitored and any variances investigated and that optimum amount of medicines and health supplies are available at health facilities at all times.
Some of the district hospitals that failed to account for the funds include Mpigi health centre IV in Mpigi district, Kyazanga health centre IV in Masaka district, Mityana hospital, Kabuyanda hospital in Isingiro district, Buzibwera and Buyamba health centres in Mbarara district and others.
The others are Ovujo health centre III on Maracha district, Anaka hospital in Nwoya district, Pajule health centre IV in Pader district, Aduku health centre IV in Apac district, Bukwo hospital in Bukwo district, Nsinze health centre IV in Namutumba district and others.
Persistent stock-outs
The audit report also highlights persistent stock-outs of the 11 essential medicines that are supposed to be at hospitals and health centers at all times as per the ministry of Health and World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines.
The essential or tracer drugs and supplies include Artemether, Lumefantrine, HIV determine test strips, malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTS), oxygen, blood, surgical gloves, Oxytocin, safe delivery kits/mamakits and others.
The report found that mama kits were out of stock for 320 days at most hospitals and Coartem drugs used for treatment of malaria was out of stock for 285 days.
The report noted that the e stock-outs may be a result of failure by National Medical Stores (NMS) to supply drugs in the quantities ordered by health centres and lack of reliable information on drugs usage and stocking positions.
Muwanga warns that the stock-outs erode patient confidence in the health sector which leads patients to explore inappropriate and expensive alternatives of health care. He advised accounting officers to liaise with NMS to ensure continuous optimum stock of medicines and health supplies.
Expired medicines
The audit revealed that expired medicines and health supplies were found in 40 health facilities across the country. The report attributes the expiry of the drugs to a possibility of excess stocking of slow moving drugs.
“The cost of destruction of expired drugs is high and there is a risk of them getting redistributed back to the market. The entity should liaise with NMS to ensure that expired or damaged stock is destroyed in accordance with the regulations.” said Muwanga.
Under staffing
The auditor general also notes that out of 118 health facilities, 98 (83%) were experiencing high rate of under staffing ranging from 80% in Kalisizo hospital in Rakai district to 9% at Iganga Hospital.
The audit report says that in 38 districts and municipal councils, the under staffing included critical positions in medicine management. It attributed the under staffing to limited wage bill and ban on recruitment. Some of the key positions without staff include pharmacist, stores assistant, dispenser and others.
That, according to auditor general under staffing overstretched the available staff beyond their capacity, creates job-related stress to the fewer staff and negatively affects the level of public service delivery to the community.
Source http://observer.ug/news/headlines/56559-76-of-hospitals-fail-to-account-for-medicines-ag-report.html

Corruption mars Uganda privatisation


According to the state-owned New Vision newspaper, the MPs accuse State Minister for Finance, Sam Kutesa, of five counts of abuse of office and influence.
The allegations relate to the divestiture of the lucrative Entebbe Air Handling Services from the main bulk of the state-owned Uganda Airline Corporation.

The grounds for the accusations were contained in a controversial 60-page report on the privatisation process tabled in parliament earlier this month, which claimed that four ministers and one senior official had "derailed" the exercise.
The Parliamentary Speaker, Francis Ayume, is now waiting to cross-check the signatures on the petition, following confusion over a censure motion against another minister earlier this year, when some MPs claimed afterwards that they had withdrawn their names.
Mr Ayume says he will hand over the petition to President Museveni next week.
The MPs have called on Mr Kutesa to resign, otherwise they will use article 118 of the constitution against him to censure him in a parliamentary vote.
Other corruption charges
There have been several other allegations of corruption and mismanagement in the Ugandan privatisation process.


On Thursday, President Museveni confirmed that he had accepted the resignation of the Minister of State for Privatisation, Matthew Rukikaire, because of his handling of the government's divestiture of its interest in the Sheraton Hotel and the Uganda Commercial Bank (UCB).
According to local papers Mr Museveni will also probe other ministers implicated in corruption.
Vice-President Specioza Wandira Kazibwe was quoted as saying: "The president will investigate, without prejudice, malice or witchhunting all the ministers featuring in the select committees' reports and in the media in order to pin responsiblity for failure of supervision in the departments under their control."

Two weeks ago, President Museveni's brother, Major-General Salim Saleh, also resigned after the report alleged that he had engineered the improper takeover of 49% of shares in UCB.

Uganda’s ‘Generous’ Refugee Policy: Museveni’s other Con Job on The West

By Bernard Sabiti
Mr. Museveni is a cunning politician. In a ridiculously effective way. He has little legitimacy at home as he has done little for his impoverished people. So where does he look to improve it? To the West and its global elite, because unlike his helpless, impoverished people, if the West soured on him, that can potentially be dangerous for his 32 year old regime. That’s because the west still pays for a bulk of his national budget (forget the useless figures his Ministry of finance parlays to ignorant public that only 19% of its budget is donor funded. The 19% is due to insane corruption which forced most donors to stop providing most of their money through ‘Budget Support”, an international development parlance that simply means donors mixing their money with the government’s into its own ‘basket’ to run the country. Instead, especially after the unprecedented theft of donors’ money in the Office of the Prime Minister in 2012, almost all of them turned to what is called ‘Project Support’, i.e, running their own projects or channeling their money through local and international NGOs. USAID for example almost singlehandedly runs the healthcare system in rural Uganda in certain respects, complete in some cases with their own appointed  doctors and auditors. Uganda can collapse without Western Aid. Museveni knows this and the donors of course know this as well.
So how does Museveni keep donors happy/on his side? Unleashing masterstroke after masterstroke from his very deep art-of-deception pot of tricks. Becoming an internationalist, benevolent statesman; at the expense of his own people unfortunately. Let’s look at a few examples of this.
South Sudan refugees fleeing to Uganda (AP photo)

The ‘remarkably’ ‘Humane’ refugee policy
This is one of the best orchestrated frauds Museveni has perpetrated on the Western donors, humanitarians, and other ‘save the world’ elites.
The Global media;The BBCTelegraphVoice of America, the Guardian, all the globalist media elite, have named Uganda ‘One of the best places to be a refugee,’  The World Bank has christened the Ugandan refugee policy the world’s ‘most Progressive Approach to Refugee Management’
This PR was in part led by global humanitarians to get back at America and European countries whose refugee policies were getting harsher in the wake of the Syria imbroglio and the trans Mediterranean crossings of economic migrants from Africa. If a poor county like Uganda can do this much, surely EU nations can and must do better.  Except that other than providing land (which was previously largely dormant anyway), Uganda doesn’t and CAN’T ‘do’ anything for these people. It’s own people are starving. The whole operation is bankrolled by the UN and Western money and district officials in ‘host communities’ are remarkably ignorant of anything about these refugees, even the numbers, unless the UNHCR tells them as they are the ones that run the show. It’s highly probable that perhaps even UNHCR doesnt really know the actual numbers. Government officials most likely have fudged them to get money to pocket while bragging that their tiny country is managing ‘millions’ of refugees. Anyhow, the sales pitch by the West didn’t move a muscle in Europe. Hungary didn’t take the bait. Greece didn’t. Angela Merkel simply wailed, ‘If only time could be rolled back’ when even her ardent supporters began questioning the wisdom of her open door policy to middle eastern, Muslim refugees. And rightly so because mass influx of refugees without proper planning, foresight, imaginative thinking can only be a recipe for disaster.
Very little on the Ugandan glossy refugee story is actually true.
First, let’s look at that much lauded ‘Policy’. Is it really ‘progressive? Is it unique in any way? As a researcher, I have read it in its entirety, many times. The Ugandan Refugee Act of 2006 is pretty much a standard law, one that could easily become Kenya’s or Nigeria’s if you substituted the name Uganda with those countries’. It’s an internationalist document that preambles international statutes on  treatment of displaced persons, then provides for establishment of offices, committees, and staff, plus a little local context. That’s it.
But the regime saw a good opportunity with the refugees situation. Even when no one really knew what the scale of the problem would be (like how many refugees would come over – No one really has the right figures even now. Like I said, the ‘over 1million’ figure is probably ballooned by a few hundred thousands, for the benefit of corrupt officials), we opened the doors. Like we offered to host Israel’s deported asylum seekers, there is nothing ‘humane’ about Uganda’s hosting of refugees. It’s part of an important local, regional and international political calculus by Mr. Museveni to remain in power.
For the uninitiated, Uganda, it must be stated, like other hybrid regimes whose political order is sustained by patronage, political clientelism and fiefdoms; does not operate on ‘policies’.
The president’s word at a campaign rally can become law overnight which can be enforced with frightening swiftness than a  law that has been on the books for 70 years. He may informally chide his ministers for not working on certain elements of his statecraft and officials the next morning will roll over each other ‘implementing’ what the president asked to be done. It’s a one man dictatorship. Like in most kleptocracies, there is very little organisation of the State, and most bureaucrats and civil servants, besides stealing, don’t really do any worthwhile work, which is why most public goods are in shambles.  Things are run very informally especially in State House, the president’s residence where he distributes patronage from. The government is most efficient at suppressing threats against its own survival. Hence the Army, The Police and a myriad of other security agencies are a little more efficient, though that is also coming into question in light of recent high profile murders   . (Security is the only public good that, until recently was working, if you forget for a while the 20-year LRA and ADF’s rampages in Northern western Uganda respectively. The country otherwise has been peaceful over the last 15 years).
Our approach to refugees is not based on ‘policy’ at all. It is not ‘humane’ or ‘Progressive’. It is stupid in a way that benefits the president. The president realised that having an open door policy for these refugees boosts Uganda’s image abroad as a humane country, and ensures that that same world forgets his political ruthlessness: Jailing of opponents, suppression of political dissent, and disappearances of regime critics.
Uganda being ‘one of the countries hosting the highest number of refugees in the whole world today’ therefore is an alluring headline.
Uganda has pretty much an open door policy when it comes to its immigration enforcement in general, and this is not by design but rather by incompetence. Our borders are remarkably porous. Almost anyone can come in and get out. It’s like a toilet (even toilets have rules actually – ). I move across most borders in the region in the course of my work. I am ashamed by our lack of guard. When even DRC, a vast country where the authorities in Kinshasa have little control over the rest of the country does a better job than you, you know you are really bad. The country subjects you to rigorous checks and due diligence before letting you in. I can’t even begin to talk about Rwanda’s efficiency at screening visitors into their territory. It’s unrivaled. Uganda does very little of that. That’s why cross border criminality is very common. Criminals can becaught on CCTV cameras and are never caught because they simple vanish back to wherever they came from, lie low for a while and return to commit more crimes. Surely that can’t be progressive. It is incompetence at its worst, in running a state.
I was recently part of an assignment to conduct an assessment of the Humanitarian situation in the country. Since independence in 1962, Uganda has had a tumultuous sociopolitical history that, to give credit where it is due, abated with the coming into power of Museveni’s National Resistance Movement in 1986. Shortly thereafter however, a civil war in which the Lord’s Resistance Army and the government fought in Northern Uganda caused mayhem until hostilities ceased in 2005. In addition, the country has faced, and in many ways continues to face natural and man-made disasters such as floods, landslides, tribal conflict, cross-border skirmishes in the North East, and an edgy political environment.
The volatile great lakes region Uganda is in the middle of has also meant that for many years the country has hosted and continues to host refugees from the neighboring countries of South Sudan, Somalia, Burundi, Rwanda and DR Congo. These, among other factors have made the country a hotbed of humanitarian action over the years, and a focus of the global humanitarian elite.
It is this history that has, in part made the country to enact robust Humanitarian policies and frameworks with the help of the UN system and Western donors, many of which are then considered best practices internationally but which are never put in practice. As the adage goes, policy and practice are two different things.
Having a Ministry for refugees, which would immediately collapse without the UNHCR funding (because the ministry is not a government priority when allocating the national budget) does not show a country committed at heart to the plight of refugees. Having a minister for refugees, appointed as part of the wider complicated calculus of the president’s patrimonial distribution of jobs to different tribes to hold onto power in this country of 65 ethnic groups and 43 languages is no deliberate effort to help refugees. After all, our 80 ministers include The Minister for ‘National Guidance’, The Minister for ‘Ethics and Integrity’, and ‘The Minister Without Potfolio!’
Having refugee committees in districts that are entirely useless without the UN and Western donors, denotes the same cosmeticism.
I have been to refugee ‘host communities’, districts bearing the blunt of the South Sudan refugee calamity. In Adjumani and Moyo districts, has anyone spoken to these natives on what they make of the mammoth fracas that has engulfed them? Some of these districts are some of the poorest in the entire country. The enormous burden refugees are adding on the already barely existing public services is indescribable. A school that already had a terrible teacher:pupil ratio, say 1:300 per class is now forced to fit 1000 kids in that same class. A small health center/clinic that barely had enough supplies for the local population has to make amends with a multiplication of numbers of clients it has to serve, most from the refugee population. The devastation of the environment as a million people collect firewood and till a small piece of land, the destruction of the already impassable roads by heavy relief carrying trucks, is too much for the local people to stomach. The government or donors do very little, if anything to increase dispatches of materials to cater for this avalanche of increase in population. Yet the local people have no right to even complain about this injustice. Recently I was in Yumbe district, the epicenter of this crisis (the famous Bidi Bidi, Africa’s largest refugee camp is found here), and local youth were staging a demonstration, a rarity in this reclusively brutal regime, attacking the big international charities that have blanketed this area, complaining that they bring their own workers and do not give any jobs to the locals who are qualified for them. They destroyed signs (there are so many signs in this area, you can call it the signpost capital of the world; many fighting for visibility). The RDC (Resident District Commissioner – The president’s ear in each district, normally a paramilitary officer, part of the complex patronage system the regime uses to police the state) easily quashed the protest before any international news picked it up. Because of these frustrations, resentment of local communities is not far off the surface and can you blame them? Some see refugees and the ‘largesse’ from the UNHCR given exclusively to them as unfair (Some refugees sell their relief items to their poor hosts!). People in many parts of Uganda are dying of hunger and others are in serious food shortages and yet we continue this international charade of ‘welcoming’ the helpless we cannot afford to look after.
The Daily Monitor last year reported of people dying of Hunger in Uganda. This year, the crisis has worsened
Don’t get me wrong; Ugandans understand what it means to be displaced due to our tumultuous history. I personally come from Kisoro, a tiny enclave in the extreme south west sandwiched between the Democratic Republic of The Congo and Rwanda. I was a refugee onetime, an internally displaced person when the RPF-Habyarimana bombs in 1994 could spill over and kill some of our people. At some point during that time we hosted 3 Rwandan refugee families in our own home.
What is disgusting  in this international chorus of praise of Museveni’s ‘progressive’ refugee policies is its lack of context and understanding of Museveni the politician. His incursion into South Sudan on the side of Salva Kiir’s SPLA when he fell out with his Veep Riech Machar in 2013 exacerbated this refugee calamity in the first place. Manyanalysts believe Riech Marchar would have won that war in weeks had Museveni not intervened since most principals in the conflict disagreed with Kiir’s ‘sole candidature’ plot and his unconstitutional tendencies and, in the beginning at least, Machar had the upper hand. Museveni’s intervention may have reduced deaths at the start but was actually catastrophic in that it prolonged the war and led, in part at least, to the current crisis.
There are ‘too many’ NGOs, local officials told me, that they barely know who is doing what – Picture taken in Yumbe District, near the Uganda-South Sudan Border
Finally, those that initially praised Uganda’s efforts are now starting to raise important questions, questions which should have been raised from the very beginning. Questions of readiness. Headlines have now flipped to read; “Uganda at Breaking point with South Sudan Refugees”; ‘Fear of Disease Outbreaks’, ‘Chaos on the Horizon as Uganda struggles with refugee influx’, etc. How anyone couldn’t have seen this coming in 2013 is beyond my comprehension. Uganda’s refugee policy therefore is incompetent and naive to say the least, and this is neither good for the refugees nor the long suffering Ugandans hosting them. Once you tell this one sided story of success, you deny the world a chance to critically look at the situation and help Uganda to do a better job.
Let’s look at other cunning acts president Museveni has done to placate the Western World so it turns a blind eye to his dictatorial tendencies at home.
SOMALIA
There is no sadder story than the incursion of UPDF into Somalia to the Ugandan citizen. Our army was the first to put boots on the ground when Somalia was literally a failed state, ungovernable, and when the medievally brutal Islamic Courts Union (now Alshabab) were still fully in charge of most of that country. Our poor sons and daughters were bundled on old Russian planes and flown to Mogadishu so we could start our bidding for the U.S and other Western ‘Allies’ as our president is a champion of the ‘war on terror’ in the great lakes region and The Horn Of Africa.
Museveni did not seek parliamentary approval for such an undertaking that was soon going to result in thousands of body bags containing barely 21 year old Ugandan infantrymen dying for a project whose objectives they barely knew. Of course Museveni sold this whole thing from a pan African perspective. A fellow African country (well Somalia then was really not even a ‘country; there was no State to talk about) is in trouble so we have to help. With no regard to the casualties he surely knew would be of tragic proportions, our strongman sent our young boys and girls to die so he could burnish his international credentials as the stabilising factor of the Great Lakes region and the Horn Of Africa. Sure enough the American Dollars and the EU Euros poured in. Our long suffering rank and file troops would soon be lucky to be among those with such an abrupt chance to go and earn $400 a month. Who could blame them when the average salary among these long suffering troops is about $100 a month when they are serving at home?
And so the body bags began returning. Unlike in America where a town comes out in force to welcome the remains of a young hello that has fallen fighting overseas, ours return in the dead of the night. Wailings take place in far-flung villages by inconsolable mothers in their hurts, quietly burying sons they barely knew the cause for which they died. Nobody knows exactly how many Ugandan troops have died in Somalia since our first incursion there in 2007. But conservative estimates put the number from low thousands to over ten thousand. Who are these dead troops? What are their names? Which part of the country do they come from? Do/did they have families, kids? That we have no privilege of ever knowing.
Uganda now has troops in South Sudan, Central African Republic and Of course Somalia under the same ‘Pan Africanism’ mantle. Few of those missions, if any are in the national interest. But they serve a very important purpose for one man. Selling Museveni’s  ‘Strong, anti-terrorist, statesman, pan-African’ image to the West and the Rest of Africa, which keeps the dollars coming in, which dollars subsidize the runaway corruption of his generals and provide a little bit of public goods where his thieving henchmen has meant that it is impossible for the state to provide those goods sufficiently on its own.
And so he stays in power because at least a significant chunk of the population doesn’t go hungry, a few kilometres of roads are built, and the Ugandan, instead of erupting at the colossus of his exploitation, now is a little content that he can ‘at least sleep’ (unlike in the Idi Amin days), and eat, even if barely, so he chooses to keep quiet, to die another day.
The ‘Progressive Refugee Policy’ farce serves the exact same purpose for the Museveni regime.
HAPPY EASTER!
Bernard Sabiti is a Ugandan researcher and analyst of African politics