Last week’s Sunday Vision Editorial reported President Museveni’s call to “amendment…the election laws to enable Ugandans living in the Diaspora to exercise their constitutional right to vote.” This idea is welcome, pertinent and timely considering the fact that “in 2006 alone, they [Ugandans in the diaspora] remitted 685m dollars to the treasury” as the Editor added. The Editor also quoted the US from where Uganda could “borrow a leaf from.”  

Prior to investigating whether the US could be used as Uganda’s role model in such a plan considering all the differences between the two, our most daunting question to ask is whether these Ugandans in the diaspora, I inclusive, should be allowed to vote come 2011 as the president seem to wish? I will say NO. Hey, before I am crucified for such a negative stand on the matter, let’s from the onset ignore the cost implication(s) of such a plan and thus concentrate on its basic implications on Uganda’s electioneering process.

The last two presidential elections, contested in court by the opposition, were marred with vote stuffing, voter intimidation, bribery and other irregularities, as the judges handling these cases agreed. Adding to this, and among other challenges, not all Ugandans voted as their names were either missing on the voter registers or were intimidated to a level where they felt that casting their vote would inflict more pain on them or would not make any difference. Lastly, cases were rampant of officials at polling stations reporting figures that were divergent from the votes cast at their respective polling stations.

With such a poor state of the electioneering process in the country, I am forced to add a few more questions to an already long list of questions: as a starting-point to such an inquiry, how can we ensure that the process works efficiently in the diaspora when it is a failure at home? Who is going to give us the actual figures of the eligible voters in the diaspora when we do not know the actual number of voters at home? How can we, as citizens, verify that those voters are actually Ugandans?

Ahead of answering any of the above questions, can we have a glimpse at the presidents’ message – “constitutional right[s]” and ask how many of such due rights Ugandans enjoy at the moment as compared to the rights that we as Ugandans deserve? Can we then rank these rights in relation to our own scale of preference and tackle each at a time before we embark on such a strategy that will in the real sense have a cost implication that will inevitably exceed the amount of money we actually need, for example, to equip all health centres in the country with appropriate malaria drugs!

As things stand, we need to realize that the current government is willing to invest in any strategies that will keep them well ahead of the opposition as we await another haunting electioneering process where innocent Ugandans will lose their lives, be more corrupted, harassed/bitten, and deprived of their due rights.

Unless our Electoral Commission is ‘privatized’, possibly to Scandinavians, Ugandans will always dream of a perfect electioneering process. And as we think of voting rights for all Ugandans irrespective of where they live, let us first clean-up the process at home and then think of the diaspora thereafter.

This is an opportune time for all Ugandans to stand-up in defence of what we have achieved so far as a leeway to redeeming the Pearl of Africa. We all need to make an investment into such an endeavour.

For God and My Country.  

Today's Sunday Vision Editorial reported President Museveni’s call to “amendment…the election laws to enable Ugandans living in the Diaspora to exercise their constitutional right to vote.” This is indeed pertinent and timely considering the fact that “in 2006 alone, they remitted 685m dollars to the treasury.” The Editor simplistically quotes the US from where Uganda could “borrow a leaf from.”

My daunting question, however, is whether these Ugandans, I inclusive, should be allowed to vote come 2011? I will say NO. Before I am crucified for such a negative stand on the matter, let’s from the onset ignore the cost implication of such a plan and therefore concentrate on its implications on Uganda’s electioneering process.

The last two presidential elections, contested in court by the opposition, were marred with vote stuffing, intimidation and other irregularities, agreed all the judges that were involved in the case. Adding to this, not all Ugandans voted as their names were missing on voter registers or were intimidated to a level where they felt that casting their votes would inflict more pain on them or would not make any difference. Lastly, cases were rampant of officials at polling stations reporting figures that were divergent from the votes cast at their stations.

With such a poor state of the process in the country, the list of questions to ask is so long but a few can work: as a starting point, how can we ensure that the process works efficiently in the diaspora when it is a failure at home? Who is going to give us the actual figures of these people when we do not know the actual numbers of voters at home? How can we, as citizens, verify that they are actually Ugandans?

The President’s stand should be justified by simply saying that voting is a right and should therefore not be based on remittances because it is vital to recognize the fact that not all of them send anything home.

As things stand, we need to realize that the current government is willing to invest in any strategies that will keep them well ahead of the opposition as we await another haunting electioneering process where innocent Ugandans will be corrupted, bitten, and deprived of their rights. Unless the Electoral Commission is ‘privatized’, possibly to Scandinavians, Ugandans will always dream of a perfect electioneering process. Let us clean-up the process at home and then think of the diaspora thereafter.

This is an opportune time for all Ugandans to stand-up in defense of what we have achieved so far as a leeway to redeeming the Pearl of Africa. We all need to make an investment into such an endeavor. For God and My Country.  

Museveni

The wordings in the title of this post are imported from today's article by 'Emperor Onyango-Obbo' LOL in The Daily Monitor - Uganda's 'Truth Everyday'. In his article Obbo tackles what has haunted the government [read President Museveni] of late and pushed it [read him for Museveni] to almost regretting why it (government [read him for Museveni]) accepted the return of traditional rulers and or institutions.

In the government’s [read President Museveni's] theorising, traditional rulers are not supposed to actively participate or ‘meddle’ into politics. This is preposterous and absurd and reminds one of an old Banyankole/Bakiga adage of Kaburabuza…otagishara, otagiteeka konka nshange yahiire, literally meaning that a boss was instructing his or her subject that ‘they do not want them to cut the meat, or to cook it, but they wanted to find it ready for consumption.’ Under normal circumstances, how can that one happen?

Relating it to Kingship, how can we expect to have a King that will not prevail when the lives of his subjects are at stake? How do you expect the Kabaka of Buganda, with due respect, to keep quiet when an important issue like land is haunting his subjects? What would be the essence of creating an institution just for emblematical purposes? In my view, if the King kept quiet and took government’s obnoxious directive of none-political participation, it would then mean that the King is an accomplice in such sinister and selfish motives by the government! And in this case, there would not be any reason to have him or the institution itself!  

While looking the Ankole Kingdom, however, Obbo failed to present to the readers a comprehensive background to the challenges that will always impede the restoration of the Kingdom. The Baganda were far much better organised and united in the build-up to the restoration of their Kingdom, so did the Banyoro and the Batoro, irrespective of some minor challenges. On the other hand, the Banynkole are still divided on the same issue and kingship is minimally idolised in the area unlike in other parts of the country.

Many authors and commentators on such line of argument have blamed the existence of two traditionally competing groups – the Bairu (majority agriculturalists) and Bahima (minoirty cattle keepers) on such a failure, but I personally believe that kingship has presently lost meaning to the current generation with respect to how history portrayed it and thus the would-be benefits of such an endeavour. Small clans that were despised in the past have risen to big ranks today and the return of such an institution would mean an alteration to the status quo and most people, including Mr. Museveni, would love to have Kingship in Ankole ‘liquidated’ – so to speak. The restoration of the King, as Obbo rightly put it, would then mean that he (Mr. Museveni) will need another title – sebbagabe. It is from this that the Museveni factor plays part. He decidedly refuted the restoration of the King to ‘safeguard’ his status in the area where he enjoys an overwhelming popularity and thus political support. It is worth noting that regardless of his other personal and hidden motives, Mr. Museveni has many supporters than opponents on his stand to refuse the coronation of Prince Barigye.

Considering how the Buganda Kingdom has challenged the government to re-think its strategies on a number of occasions, which is for the better of course, gives an impression that Kingdoms should play an important role of renegotiating for their own people or checking government policies. This means that if the other Kingdoms and or Chiefdoms took such a stance towards the government, then Ugandans would be happy for having alternative institutions with power to arbitrate on their behalf.

In the absence of such powers, Kingdoms remain mere symbols for personal gratification of Kings and their confidants and thus avenues for political manipulation where political consciousness is traded with selfish praise of the Kings from their vulnerable subjects.

However, it is in their dumbness that Kings will find their guarantee for survival as well as that of their Kingdoms, as government [read Mr. Musevei] wants them to. And as Obbo rightly puts it, this is where Mr. Museveni overwhelmingly takes up his much coveted titles of Sebbagabe or King of Kings or Emperor, and as if to add, The Last of the Last Kings of Scotland.

Long live Emperor Museveni.

What happens when the decisions we make today fail to deliver us to our expected goals? Do we only cry foul and suffer the repercussions of our misjudgment? Or we go back to the drawing board and use our experiences learned within the past failed strategy or strategies as a means of crafting how to start afresh?

The latter proves pertinent and rewarding; owing to the fact that life goes on, but does it really address the reality that comes a long with failure? Individual experiences, regardless of their diversity can help in providing a more relevant response. However, as we approach the cognitive process of reaching any decisions, which aspect and or dimensions do we consider? Do we really have a 360 degrees assessment of the issues we are working around? Do we consider the pros and cons of the issue(s) at hand? Or we simply pick aspects that we have answers for and convince ourselves that 'everything is gonna be alright?'

What happens when we have to make some decisions in a split of a second? In such a case, there is need to realise that we have to have problem-solving techniques at our fingertips, alas, the likelihood of plunging ourselves into disaster is very high. It is not that every aspect will require one to come up with solutions in a split of a second nor is it true that we will always have time on us to make decisions. The concept of decision making thus becomes one among the integral attributes that each and everyone will have to master as a matter of fact.

At this point, it becomes realistic that there's a need for quiet environs, ones where we can retreat and be able to hear our own heartbeat or one that we can even hear our fingers grow. This is where we can have meetings with our inner-selves and thus reach decisions that we will be able to uphold come rain or sunshine.
Every decision will ultimately be each individual’s best preference, leaving other factors constant, but there are at least some guiding principles that we will have to follow, regardless of the many different decisions that we got to make at a time. Within such different steps, I reckon that each stage is as vital as what we intend to achieve. Most important, as I believe, is an on-going review of each and every step taken in pursuit of our goals. The justification for this is verity that we are living in a none-static world and the faster we master its dynamism, the easier it becomes for us to be at the top of the game.
In such a case, rule number one will thus state that, as times change, so do ideas. This thus calls for nothing like rigidity but flexibility. However, the principle of flexibility should not be over-stated as it can detract one's intended outcomes. Carefully reached at decisions will always deliver expected results.

It's factual world-over that Beer is cheaper than Gas.
This therefore means that;

We should all Drink than Drive
We would in this case Save Money and also the Environment
We would support local economies (in cases where such beer in locally manufactured)
We would also support agriculture and thus benefit the poor farmers
And also build our social capital.

Drink and Drink BUT STOP DRIVING
Also remember that 'Alcohol and Cars don't mix', so if you decide to drink, don't drive and vice versa.

But as you take my advice, which is your decision, I think you will be pleased to know that I quit drinking.
But I won't be driving either...

Till next time.
Don't drink and drive.

Yeah, a very big part of school is over and the next one is yet to come, but at the moment, what's the plan?

I will be doing a politics course over the summer and learning something in the Estates business... I will also add in some more time in my upcoming book and concentrating on making chances my publishers want to see in it... I also need to embark on strengthening my CBO and ensuring that it contributes to the transformation of people's lives...

My football league will also see my presence, though far away and I will do a lot of campaining for its support.

There's no doubt that I have been a Man Utd fan since seven after seeing [not watching] the teams photo in a magazine, but at this rate, I am mad at the team itself and the current 'Ronaldo' virus! I know he's at his best and probably trying to do what he can do only this season - securing a big money move to Real 'Mad'rid, but I am as well incensed by his lack of resolve and Utd's failure to recognize that with or without him the team will move on. Sir Bobby was there, Eric was at Old Tra..., Beck's and Van were there, and all these were regarded as the Utds' greatest, but when there time came, they moved on and the Red Devils are still moving on and haunting the poor Blues, Gunners and whoever you can mention.
In the actual sense, I do not mind any more which decisions this guy is yet to make, but am sure that someone within the team or from wherever, will come and occupy his space when he lives. My prediction is also that irrespective of his decision, he will not take any other upper hand in the game like he did last season.
I will not delete this post... I will leave it on my blog and come next season, we shall see what will come by. Come on Ronaldo, just go wherever you want, Derby, West Ham or Celtic, but remember that football is like a stage, where actions come and go, your time might not be up, it will without any doubts come...and as fans or our the clubs we support, we will always be there. Remember that 86% of football fans owe their allegiance to clubs than names.
Whether you stay or not, am no longer on your fans list...I know you do not need me as your fan, neither will you know me because I am your fan, but every time I buy a ticket to watch a game, I will supporting Utd not you as a person.
Cheers Ronaldo and have fun as you retire at 23 with Madrid!

Yours Sincerely,
Utd Fan.  

Do we really know how to use our phones? Do we at all consider the implications of when we call people (the timing), the message(s) we intend to convey or why we call, how we deliver our messages, and of course the tone we use on phone (considering both the environ we're in when we call and the people that we call)?

The questions are indeed many, but the above can do me some service in trying to explore the manners we have on phone. It was a few minutes back (it's now 04:30 AM) when my phone rung and as usual, I woke up to the tune of Tindatine, which is my phone ring tone. On placing the green, my caller asked with a rather harsh voice, "where are you?" By this time, I was still in a state of 'half-sleep half-awake' and I had no idea of what I could say in reply. I cannot have a recollection of my first response but I am sure that I begged to know who was calling and the essence of calling me at such a time.

Without going into further details, the call was totally unimportant and my caller completely had neither 'phone etiquette' or respect for me. The timing was wrong, the message to convey was totally off-the-mark, it conveyed in a wrong manner, the list can go on.

Going to my caller's first message, I want to ask whether it is in morally right to call someone and simply asking 'where they are?' without having the courtesy of exchanging greetings? I personally find this very offensive irrespective of who is calling.

I therefore think that much as it is at times important to convey certain messages, the packaging of such messages will matter in the same proportion with the importance of the messages itself and so does the timing of the phone call. We also need to ensure that we try much as we can to ensure that we press these calls in environs that will allow effective communication without any background noise that will impede whoever we are calling from listening properly. It is also not good manners to make phone calls and then speak at the top of ones voice while in public. It disrupts people's attention and can be very irritating.

I will add to this post....