IFC Global Trade Finance Program Expands to Rwanda

*BCR becomes the first beneficiary
* Boosting International Trade Prospects for Local Businesses

The International Financing Cooperation (IFC), a member of the World Bank Group, announced on Thursday Novermber 29, that Banque Commerciale du Rwanda (BCR) is the first bank in Rwanda to join IFC’s Global Trade Finance Program.
According to a press release issued by the World Bank office in Kigali, IFC will issue guarantees of up to $2 million against the bank’s underlying trade transactions, covering payment risk and helping increase Rwanda’s global trade volumes.
The release notes that the transaction is IFC’s third in Rwanda in less than a year, reflecting a commitment to increasing activities that support the country’s sustainable economic growth.
IFC is focusing on mobilizing investments and providing advisory services in key sectors for maximum development impact, including financial markets, tourism, agribusiness, infrastructure, and construction.
“Working with IFC will greatly increase our capacity to facilitate trade between Rwanda and other countries, promoting the private sector and contributing more to economic development,” said David Kuwana, Managing Director of BCR. “We see this as a first step in a collaborative partnership with IFC.”
The IFC Global Trade Finance Program was launched in 2005 to support trade with emerging markets worldwide and promote flows of goods and services between developing countries. IFC provides guarantee coverage of bank risk in emerging markets, allowing recipients to expand their trade finance transactions within an extensive network of countries and banks and to enhance their trade finance coverage.
“Trade finance is part of IFC’s strategy to help Africa become fully engaged in global trade,” said IFC Executive Vice President and CEO Lars Thunell (Above), who signed the agreement during a two-day visit to Rwanda. “I look forward to working with BCR to create opportunities for economic growth.”
To date, the IFC Global Trade Finance Program has provided about $1.5 billion worth of guarantees to issuing banks in developing countries. The program has supported $2.2 billion in trade globally since 2005, of which $1.2 billion was trade involving a Sub-Saharan African nation. The program includes 29 issuing banks as participants in 15 countries of Sub-Saharan Africa, including such conflict-affected countries as Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. In conjunction with Rwanda Investment and Export Promotion Agency (RIEPA), Lars addressed a press conference on FRIDAY November 30. Lars visit is to discuss with the Government of Rwanda and The private Sector, IFC activities and how best IFC can help Rwanda achieve its development objectives.

Democracy will never work in a third world country

Recalling our African history and Ugandan national motto that "For God and my country", I think it’s either now or never that we accept the fact.

Democracy as we define it right away from Primary school assumes one principle that cannot be left out; ALL PEOPLE OF A COMMUNITY/COUNTRY/STATE/PROVINCE HAVE A PERFECT UNDERSTANDING OF THE POLITICS AND ECONOMY OF THE AREA.

Well, in the developed world, majority will cast their vote based on reason or at least basing on inherited love for a particular political party which their predecessors supported or founded and this approximates the assumption underlying democracy.

Just a reminder, the democracy we are talking about today is more American than Greek! Americans formulated their Democratic Principles after discontent with the British way of doing things, but all the same the two societies are the exact mirror reflections of the African societies of the Third world like in Uganda and many other African countries.

Sincerely, at times people say that intellectuals tend to under look other people and they said that when professor Kanyeihamba one time implied that peasants' votes should not carry the same weight as those of their educated sons and daughters. I strongly agree with the learned justice's implications because in third world countries like my motherland, the illiteracy levels are still very low and it actually makes no sense for me to go and cast my vote to any African leader basing on the a better expression of ideas in a certain party manifesto ahead of any opposition contestant and yet another country votes for that leader also basing on the fact that the said leader's agent has sponsored him a waragi bottle.

Some times it is hard to admit the truth except if it has marks on our body like signs of AIDS or disability, but we need to contemplate and accept that provided that our society is still like that then the concept of Democracy shall never work here and therefore trying to imitate the maturity in multiparty politics of the Unites States is a mere DREAM! The Ugandan President M7 for instance has always communicated this clearly and still some people seem to have failed to get his point right. Ok if you are one of them, here it is; A society needs a revolutionary and visionary leader who should be given the chance to steer the country through a period of continued development and transformation and lead it to TAKE-OFF stage and then you can start talking about Democracy and multi-partyism.

Ofcourse, someone like Dr Kiiza Besigye of Uganda or Morgan Tsvangirai, the Zimbabwe’s main opposition leader, will never come to admit the fact that revolutionary leaders like M7, Rober Mugabe or Paul Kagame are not just average men/ boys that they watched grow! Leaders like M7 and many great leaders of this world is a wise man and a great reader and that is what makes one a great leader!!!! M7, Kagame and Mugabe have read widely about dictatorial regimes, transformation of countries in far East Asia and believe me such leaders have mastered African society.

For instance M7 has maintained strategic flexibility despite harboring his own ideology (movement democracy) and will always swing around a 'multi-party' democracy which never is!

To drive the point home, I have this to say "For the West to promote Multi Party Democracy in low developed Africa; it is re-inventing the wheel i.e. pre-independence civil wars and slave trade." The argument here is not against multiparty democracy, but just like the formulas in mathematics, it’s not universally applicable and thus third world is among the EXCEPTIONS.

You will agree with me that it takes courage to agree to this and admit that if we are to take off, then we need to leave revolutionary leaders like M7, Kagame, Col. Umar Gadafi of Libya and Mugabe to steer the continent to greater heights for they have a ‘vision’ and then think of true democracy.

African Diaspora key to the continent’s development

*WB meets with Diaspora groups to discuss increased engagement, cooperation
African Diaspora defined as peoples of African descent/origin living outside the continent play an increasingly important role in the continent’s development, both through the financial resources they send back to their home countries and through their professional expertise. According to a 2005 World Bank report, remittances flows from the African Diaspora are in excess of $4-6 billion per year and a significant number of professionals from the continent are currently living outside of Africa.
In order to engage with these groups and support the African Union’s ongoing effort to work with the African Diaspora, the World Bank on Thursday November 29, held an African Diaspora Open House in Washington with over 200 representatives from groups based in the United States and Canada to discuss opportunities for closer collaboration.
Among other initiatives, the World Bank announced that it will collaborate with the African Union in exploring the possibilities for the development of a Diaspora Remittances Investment Fund, which will be based on global experiences that exploit the benefits of and leverage remittances to finance Diaspora-led development activities, in a manner similar to existing mechanisms in Latin America.
The World Bank is also exploring multiple approaches for working with the African Diaspora, including through:
• Engagement of the Diaspora—in collaboration with African member countries— in the design and implementation of the ongoing portfolio of World Bank-assisted projects (338 projects for about $22 billion), and in the planned pipeline of proposed new World Bank-assisted projects over the FY08 - FY10 period (estimated at 248 projects for about $13 billion)
• Partnerships with private sector organizations, notably multi-national corporations with strong business interests in Africa;
• Support for Diaspora to build on ongoing efforts through a blended strategy of "virtual" participation; short, medium and long term placements; return and retention; and institutional networks;
• Dialogue with donors to contribute to a proposed African Diaspora Engagement and Facilitation Fund to support program activities;
• Facilitation of policy-relevant networks on topical issues such as sub/regional integrated infrastructure, energy, transportation, and research on diverse topics;
• Support to African governments in creating the enabling policy and institutional environment to harness Diaspora potential; strengthening Africa’s response to globalization, among others.
"The World Bank is in a very strategic position to assist in the mobilization of the African Diaspora in support of economic development on the ground in Africa” says Melvin P. Foote, President of the Constituency for Africa (CFA) a 16 year-old Washington, D.C. based network of organizations, groups and individuals committed to the progress and empowerment of Africa and African people worldwide. “Engaging the Diaspora in providing technical assistance in Africa may well create the necessary synergy to transform how development will be pursued on the continent in the future”.
More than a third of Africa’s highly qualified human resources are presently in the Diaspora. Studies show that the most educated Africans increasingly opt not to return to the continent and stay in their host country after completion of their studies. A survey of African PhD students in the U.S. and Canada in 1986-96 showed that about 44 per cent decided to stay. The impact of the non-return has been debilitating on Africa’s public and private sector, in some cases forcing countries to rely on high rates of international consultants to tackle development work. A partnership with the African Diaspora for the continent’s development is thus essential to enable Africa to increase its capacity to use and apply knowledge and increase its access to financial resources.
With support from African governments, the World Bank hopes to use its engagement with the African Diaspora to strengthen the performance of its extensive portfolio of investment and development policy loans in the region (about US$22 billion) by better engaging the African Diaspora with government support, in the over US$6 billion of technical assistance which is financed by this portfolio.

W'Kabirigi news up date: News analysis on regional Security

W'Kabirigi news up date: News analysis on regional Security

W'Kabirigi news up date: Regional Security:

W'Kabirigi news up date: Regional Security:

Post Chogm street talk

Britain vetoed Rwanda Membership

According to serious and unreliable shop talk from Munyonyo country resort beach in Uganda, that hosted a a retreat of CommoWealth Heads of Government Meeting retreat, Britain strongly opposed Rwanda's entry into the former British colony club. Reasons are not yet clear why Britain one of the Rwanda's bi-lateral donor objected to the request that has been docketed for about seven years now. The unserious rumour confirms that Rwanda's happy moment into the english speaking club was vetoed by Britain. Sources are stating that the Ugandan President Gen Yoweri Kaguta Museveni who had invinted President Paul Kagame to Chogm as his special guest, tried very much to push his neigbor's entrance and UK refused. Kagame who according to a source had earlier on delivered a strong and moving speech during the Chogm business forum, was accompanied by over 70 government and business executives.

Rwandan Govt seeks $9.6 Billion to end poverty

Kigali

The Government of Rwanda says there is a strong political will to bring down the worrying numbers of poor people in the country through a series of programmes over the coming years. But to do that, the Government is seeking about Rwf 5.151 trillion (about $9.6B)from both donors and the already over stretched tax-payers. The submission was made today, Monday December 26, during a donor meeting held at Serena Hotel in Kigali.

For the past year, government developed a new flagship poverty eradication plan - the Economic Development and poverty Redaction Strategy (EDPRS) for the next five years that was also launched during the meeting. The plan seeks to address Rwanda's medium term needs, namely increasing skills, transform agriculture, reduce business costs by putting up necessary infrastructure and reform the financial sector.

Regional MPs for a strategic planning workshop in Kigali

The Great Lakes Parliamentary Forum on Peace- AMANI Forum is on December 28-2 orgnanizing a workshop on strategic planning in Kigali, Rwanda.
According to a press release on Novermber 23, by the Rwandan parliament, during the workshop, the members of Parliament from Rwanda, DRCongo, Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya, Burundi and Zambia are expected to develop a five year Strategic Plan for engagement of Parliamentarians in peace building and conflict mitigation in the Great Lakes region. The development of the strategy is geared towards ensuring that the Forum maintains a distinctive role capable of adding value and complementing the work of other actors currently engaged in peacebuilding and conflict mitigation.
 
It is also aimed at providing a platform for increased engagement of MPs in the consolidation of peace and stability in the region as well as supporting other processes aimed at achieving this noble goal. To this effect, AMANI Forum has planned to hold its 2nd   Strategic Planning Workshop from 28 November to 2 December 2007 at La Palisse Hotel in Kigali, Rwanda.
 
AMANI Forum has been undertaking a process of Strategic Planning aimed at defining the organisation’s strategy for the period 2008-2012. The first of the series of these processes was the inception workshop held in Naivasha, Kenya in October 2007. This was followed by regional consultations with members and other stake holders at National level. Through this process, National Chapters have been able to participate in identifying emerging opportunities and challenges since the last strategic plan; outlining the conditions for responding to the opportunities and challenges as well as thinking through some of the innovations that AMANI can appropriate in response to the conditions and opportunities

The workshop will be attended by Members of the AMANI Forum Regional Executive Committee, Chairpersons of the seven National regional Chapters.

Regional Security:

Tripartite talks: reason for optimism in Great Lakes stability

Major highlights

*Regional security much better due to change in Rwanda’s foreign policy
*Current disagreements over negative forces not alarm for war
*DR Congo problem not Nkunda, has legitimate reasons
*Congo army too weak to defeat Nkunda
*MONUC should be reviewed
*Over $6 billion spent on MONUC

At the last Tripartite meeting held in Kampala, Uganda, Ministers of Foreign Affairs and those of Defense from Uganda, DR Congo, Rwanda and Burundi, met to discuss the security crisis in the region. This was at the height of raising tension in the eastern DR Congo in North Kivu, between Congolese army and forces loyal to renegade General Laurent Nkunda. Congo is said to be home to several rebel groups like Rwanda’s Interahamwe (FDRL), Uganda’s Lord Resistance Army (LRA), PRA and ADF, all fighting the Uganda Government.
Sulah Nuwamanya interviewed Mouro de Lourenzo, a Resident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research and a keen observer of issues related to the Great Lakes Region.
Below are excerpts of his assessment of security situation in the region.
QN. What is your assessment of the tripartite talks sponsored by United States Government?

Laurenzo: These talks have been going on for quite some time in different locations amongst the four countries of Uganda, DR Congo, Burundi and Rwanda. It’s a mechanism which US devised to try to make a contribution to the peace process in the region. This is to make sure that security in the face of this whole thing has a mutual forum where regional leaders could exchange views and try to resolve problems before they generate into a crisis. So, the meeting in Uganda was planned long in advance as one of the regular series of the meetings to resolve security problems in the Great Lakes Region. I think, however, that it was, it’s lucky that it came at this time of the rising tensions in North Kivu of the Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DR Congo).

Qn. Do you think anything came out of the meeting in Kampala as compared to the previous ones, given the fact that the ministers failed to agree on a number of vital issues like the list of the ‘negative’ forces?

Laurenzo: I think it’s normal that they disagree and there is nothing to be alarmed about. The process exists, it didn’t exist before and it’s a normal political space where these issues can be sorted out. For many months there have been disagreements on who should be on the list of ‘negative’ forces and this should not be seen as a failure and I think in each meeting they make a decimal progress. Countries have different views and so long as disagreements are being resolved in a form like this, there are all reasons for optimism in the region.

Qn. What is your assessment of the general security situation in the Great Lakes region?

Laurenzo: On one level the security situation in the region is much better than it has been for many years. This is I think is largely due to a system in the change of Rwanda’s foreign policy over the last few years. Rwanda has really made a strategic decision to improve the nature of its relationship with all its neighbors, Burundi, Uganda and DR Congo in particular. The quality of Rwanda’s bilateral relationship with those countries is much better than it has been before. I think that decision by Rwanda is a single biggest factor that contributed to a more normal policy in the region. Now you have a situation in North Kivu which has been there for some time and which some people have mistakenly been trying to personalize and make it seem like just one person named General Nkunda. And its like, if you deal with him, the problem will go away and of course it’s a very big mistake. It’s really a deep problem which has been attributed to many wars in DR Congo since 1960s and simply putting one person on the list of ‘negative’ forces or removing him from the scene will not make the problem go away. The DR Congo crisis in north Kivu is the most significant problem in the region right now and its very deep and not about one person.

Qn. DR Congo President Joseph Kabila has openly said that the only solution to the north Kivu problem is to fight General Nkunda other than talk peace. Do you think that’s the most viable solution to the crisis in that part of the world?

Laurenzo: No, I think it’s a mistake for a number of reasons, I don’t think Kabila’s army is strong enough to defeat General Nkunda. Kabila’s army has been getting logistical support from United Nations Mission in DR Congo (MONUC), which I think is a mistake on part of MONUC. Kabila is in a very difficult position because he is surrounded by extremists and in order to make them happy, has to say is going to deal with Nkunda militarily. This is part of what is causing him to develop this very delicate policy but he will fail because by all accounts, his forces are not motivated to get the job well done.
Qn. During the Kampala Tripartite talks, the ministers resolved to call on UN to increase its support to MONUC. What is your assessment of MONUC operations in DR Congo?
Laurenzo: I have some concerns about MONUC as they seem to see their mission nowadays since elections last year, as being essentially for rendering support to the government. They are increasingly willing to take sides and I think that’s very dangerous particularly in the east. So I would urge not just for strengthening MONUC and I think the mission is very necessary. But there is need for a clear political guidance from UN and other major donor countries on what exactly MONUC’s mission is. MONUC’s mission is not and shouldn’t be to intervene on part of Congolese national army. For example, imagine a situation where the Congolese army may engage in some sex scandals or human rights abuses, when they are being supported logistically by MONUC. That’s something that the UN should be concerned about because the action has serious consequences for peace keeping operations in many different countries. MONUC’s reputation has already been heavily damaged by sex scandals, by the issues of gold smuggling by some units. They don’t need to have another stain on their record right now.

Qn. Are you worried that the crisis is likely to worsen, bringing once again the four countries in Congo and causing bloodshed in the region?

Laurenzo: I think that’s much less likely than it was in the past. Again partly because Rwanda’s foreign policy has changed now. Rwanda is not the same country like it was in 1996 and 1998. It has a much larger number of interests in the region and internationally which it would be reluctant to put into jeopardy. The previous military efforts by Rwanda have also weakened the strength of rebel groups, ex-FAR and genocidaires in DR Congo. Nevertheless, the security situation in Congo remains a very serious issue to Rwanda and the region. I don’t think we are going to see a repeat of the kid of wars that rocked the region in 1990s.

Qn. US sponsors the Tripartite talks, what are its interests in the region?

Laurenzo. US, unfortunately doesn’t have significant interests in the Great Lakes Region. That’s why US’s efforts are typically very modest and on a small scale. The tripartite programme which is an initiative of the State Department is an excellent example of the kind of small scale models, not very expensive programmes where US can play a sort of mediating role. It can simply provide a forum for people to speak and coordinate. It saves the US money in long term on humanitarian operations, if the essential dispute can be avoided or kept away in such a narrow forum. I think the US’s interest is to protect the international community investments and MONUC which has now exceeded more than a billion US dollars. The current relative peace in Congo was a hard one, it took a long time and suffering on part of the population. US and the rest of the international community don’t want Congo to slide back into war again. I don’t see any geo-political interest beyond that.

Mr. Sulah Nuwamanya is a journalist in Kigali and the CEO of Rwanda Media holdings whose publication, The Weekly Post, was recently closed by the Rwandan Government for unclear reasons and yet to be made public. Its now over seven months since the closure of the weekly publication after its first edition that recieved a sounding welcome in Kigali.

African poor to share on Gates' $10m

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation will provide US$10 million to the nongovernmental organisation Slum/Shack Dwellers International (SDI) to support the urban poor in Africa, Asia and Latin America to take action to improve their housing, water and sanitation.

It is the first time a major US foundation has made a significant investment to address urban poverty in these regions. The grant is also unusual in that it will go direct to grassroots groups that gather under the umbrella of SDI, enabling them to improve their living conditions and their capacity to negotiate with governments to secure rights to land.

In addition to acting as the intermediary for funding, the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) will provide academic support for the national programmes.

Sheela Patel, chair of SDI's board says: "This grant is to build the capacity of poor communities to demonstrate to their municipalities, governments and international development agencies that self-organised communities of the poor are partners in addressing urban poverty. This assistance will help to build local dialogue and locally sustainable solutions."

To date, these grassroots groups have built or upgraded more than 200,000 homes (see table below). Worldwide, however, about a billion people live in slums or shacks, most of which lack safe water and toilets.

This work urgently needs to be scaled up. The urban poor are tired of waiting for governments to meet their needs. They are ready and willing to improve their living conditions but need financial support to do so.

"It is the poor who will change the city's living conditions," says Jockin Arputham, president of SDI and founder of the National Slum Dwellers Federation in India. "This grant to SDI from the Gates Foundation has enormous potential to show how cities can work for the poor as well as for the rich."

The grant will be channelled over three years into The International Urban Poor Fund, which SDI manages in association which the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED).

Funds from this grant will be used to support the activities of federations of informal savings groups formed by slum or shack dwellers to collectively save money and improve their neighbourhoods by securing tenure, installing toilets, improving water supplies and in some cases building houses.

Improving the physical infrastructure is half the battle. The urban poor need the security that comes with knowing they have the right to live where they do. It is easier to negotiate with governments to gain these rights if officials can see the improvements the federations have made, especially as they are usually cheaper and of better quality than anything local contractors can build.

"This fund is a breakthrough for slum dwellers to achieve their dreams and the opportunity to do things themselves," says Rose Molokoane, chair of the South African Federation of the Urban Poor and an SDI board member.

National and local governments in countries such as Brazil, Malawi, Namibia, the Philippines, South Africa, Thailand and Zambia have recognised the role of the federations and have worked with them as partners in urban development. But more often than not, governments see the urban poor as problems rather than part of the solution.

"Most governments and aid agencies still pay little attention to urban poverty," says Diana Mitlin of IIED's Human Settlements Group. "And when they do, it is to finance professionally designed programmes that struggle to address this problem at an appropriate scale."

"With this funding, the Gates Foundation is sending a much-needed signal to such agencies to rethink their approach. This funding will greatly increase the scale at which the national federations can operate and will support the growth of new federations."

The foundation's grant to SDI is part of the Special Initiatives portfolio of its Global Development Program, which works with motivated partners on focused strategies to increase opportunities for people in the developing world to lift themselves out of hunger and poverty.

Special Initiatives grants allow the foundation to fund compelling, specific opportunities to advance development and to learn about new approaches that can inform and improve the strategies and grant-making of the Global Development Program.

The foundation will also share results and lessons learned with a wide variety of institutions-including municipalities and national governments responsible for urban poor communities-in order to showcase how the poor can become active partners rather than beneficiaries of aid.

"We are pleased to support Slum/Shack Dwellers International and the Urban Poor Fund," said Charles Lyons, director of special initiatives at the Gates Foundation’s Global Development Program.

"This grant will allow SDI to expand on its proven track record and demand-driven model and develop new, innovative ways to give the urban poor effective voices in their communities and nations."

Is Fast Tracking EAC Political Federation tenable?

Rwanda and Burundi officially joined the east African Community in July 2007 but the two countries still have to settle some issues to progressively move with the rest of the member states. There is need to harmonize domestic issues and convincing their legislative body to ratify the treaty; the issue of Political Federation is at its peak. Rwanda and Burundi like their counterparts are supposed to consult their population about Federation about the process. The time table had been already drawn by the former three countries but I believe with Tanzania not supporting fast tracking and with new two countries on board the time table is more likely to be altered. Consultations are likely to take wide range but mostly focus on asking the population which may include Private sector, academicians, politicians, local government, parliamentarians, business sector and the civil society including women and youths on whether to go political federation by expressing fears and opportunities, and what form of federation we should have and as well as time lag for the federation. Also issues of the qualifications and term of office of the president and other central government officials is likely to be top on agenda, how much power should be left to federal states and how much or which powers should be surrendered by federal states to central government.

As we wait for the consultations we need to refocus on past and see why did EAC collapse so that we do not repeat the same mistakes. Looking back there were three major factors that led to the collapse of the cooperation. These are Intra-community political differences, differences on sharing the benefits from the jointly owned services and lack of policy to redress the situation and low participation of civil society and private sector in the running and decision making of the community. The question today is have we addressed these issues and we are not sure that the same mistake will not be repeated. As the political leaders are supporting the Top –Down approach of federation is Political federation first and this will facilitate other integrations, is this genuine, do we have precedence that we are following or we are just driven by excitement.

I want us to explore critically the reasons put forward for fast tracking federation and the time framework and see if it is realistic.
Meaning of Federation
Political Federation means a compound of polity uniting constituent units (federal states) which includes Tanzania, Uganda, Kenya, Rwanda and Burundi for EAC and a general government each posting powers delegated to its people through constitution.
Political Federation will mean one border, one federal government with a new name, federal anthems, flag, federal court of justice, federal legislature to mention some. We shall have one central government while the current governments will be federal states. The federal states will surrender some of their powers and functions to the central government.

Economically, a federation implies one Central Bank, Common Currency, Custom Union, one capital market (stock exchange centralized).

We have two approaches to Integration or union top-down approaches and bottom-up approach. The first one is commonly known as Kwame Nkrumah’s approach. Political Integration is a tool that brings about integration in other spheres. He urged that “Seek ye the first the political kingdom and everything else shall be added onto you”

The other one is that of bottom-up approach which is known as functionalism. This one assumes that integration is promoted piecemeal through gradual process as to build a web of functional relations in different areas such as trade, investment, infrastructures, culture etc. He advanced that political with this arrangement political federation brings a logical culmination of integration process from below.

The current EAC is taking the two approaches, however of recent emphasis has been put on the first one. The target has been 2010 as the year to have achieved Political Federation. This came after the three East African Head of States (Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya) in 2004 felt that the rate at which federation was moving was very slow and therefore needed to quicken it. They formed a fast tracking federation committee. The committee findings included recommendations such as compression of current stages of Custom Union, Common Market, Monetary Union and Political Federation, an overlapping parallel integration and immediate establishment of East African Federation.

With the entry of Rwanda and Burundi into EAC, there is need to provide enough time to harmonize their internal policies and procedures to that of EAC, sensitize their population about EAC and Political federation. The time frames looks too short for the new entrant to do this and therefore unrealistic. Even the former three EAC members’ population is not fully aware of political federation and therefore we must allocate time for mobilization and education rather than jumping onto it.

Back home to individual member states there are issues to first settle down such as issues of relationship between domestic bodies and the central EAC bodies. Take an example of relationship between EALA and national legislation. Their relationship has not been smooth; EALA makes regular reports to national legislations for discussion and domestication but rarely do national legislation debate EALA reports, this is probably because the domestic politics is inward looking and therefore take precedence. So we need enough time to creating a good working relationship of different institutions nationally and regionally.

There is still political differences in the current EAC members eg domestic deficits, internal problems and thus not easy to forge a political federation. We need time to harmonize this, thus gradual process of integration may allow the opportunity to settle our differences.

I believe that there is need for building a block approach to integration rather than rushing to it. This means making sure that Custom Union works first, then to converge to economic policies, cross border investment and ultimately to Political federation. The political environment is not ripe yet, so we better not rush it.

Normally when any one is to implement a new policy, he looks at the past and where else the policy has been successful to analyse its worthiness and application. We do not have a successful precedent anywhere in the world where Political Federation preceded economic integration. This calls for a critical thinking before action. This does not mean that we can be the people to begin it, if so we need to involve all stake holders in consultative meetings to agree on way forward. These meetings may take two years as minimum. Imagine the fast tracking committee was commissioned in August 2004 and submitted their findings in November 2004, a very short time to have gathered views of all stake holders.

I think the fast tracking political federation is politically driven but we should focus on the entire interests of our citizens rather than few individuals. We need a step by stepe intergration, get economic rights then politics will follow. Probably this will change the Tanzania’s former position on federation. We should not be over ambitious like Nkwame did. Ofcourse political federation is very good but we need not to rush it.

News analysis on regional Security

Tripartite rounds: The Inside story

*Pomp and arrogance as forum becomes a battle ground for member countries
* Uganda , Rwanda battle over PRA
* Burundi withdraws her negative forces list
*DRC, Rwanda disagree over Gen. Nkunda’s inclusion on the negative forces list

WHEN Rwanda, Uganda, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of Congo convened in Washington D.C for the first round table talks in 2004, there was much hope for peace in the region.
The formation of the Tripartite Plus Joint Commission at this time, with facilitation of the United States of America, was seen as a new ray of hope in the stabilization of the Great Lakes Region plagued by civil wars.
Indeed, in the first phase of negotiations the parties seemed to be reaching consensus on most of the pressing issues. The countries were quickly living in harmony.
However, the countries are currently making no headway in this platform. Actually as the talks progress the states seem to have had enough of the talking than real action on the ground. In fact, there seems to be a much more contrast between what is agreed upon in theory and what goes on in practice. The behind the scene actions are taking a center stage, expressing hypocrisy, arrogance and intrigues among the member states. The case in point is DRC’s continual support of Rwanda’s ex-FAR, Interahamwe and other negative forces destabilizing her neighbors like LRA,and ADF of Uganda.
The Rwandan and DRC governments are battling it out over the latter’s halt of military operations against negative forces using Congo soil to fight Kigali.
Rwanda says Congo’s decision to halt military pressure on negative forces is entirely undermining the threats caused by these militias.
On the other side, however, the Ugandan and Rwandan establishments are embroiled in a bitter dispute over the approval of People’s Redemption Army (PRA) on the list of most wanted persons.
Others negative forces already approved include among others the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), FDLR, ADF/NALU, FNL, MLC and FLEC.
Although Uganda played a big role in the signing of the list of wanted persons for other member states that include Congo, Rwanda and Burundi, it has up to now failed to secure a nod on the inclusion of PRA, link to the Ugandan opposition leader of Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) Rtd Col Kiza Besigye on the common list of negative forces.Some critics in the country and observers in the region think the issue of PRA was a creation of Ugandan intellegence aimed at silancing the main opposition and in this case Besigye. He is a former personal physician and ally of President Museveni during and after the 1980-86 Ugandan Bush war,turned political enemy.
The wrangling, particularly, between Rwanda and Uganda on this matter seems to have affected the two countries’ seemingly improving relations that were dirtied by the three consecutive crashes between the two armies (RDF and UPDF respectively).
Uganda wants the rebel group and its commanders included on the list of most wanted but Kigali insists that the intelligence details provided on the negative force are insufficient.
Kampala's "order of battle" or OB as commonly referred to in the security circles, giving detailed operations of PRA as provided to the Kisangani based Intelligence Fusion Cell (IFC) was not adding up, at least according to Rwanda.
"Actually it is not Uganda that is supposed to provide the order of battle on PRA. The OB has to come from IFC, which the fusion cell has not done yet," the Special Presidential Advisor in the Great Lakes Dr Richard Sezibera said.
Dr Sezibera says that unless the tripartite fusion cell comes out with the common order of battle on PRA like they have done on all other negative forces in the region, the issue will remain hanging.
Uganda has listed Samson Mande, Anthony Kyakabare and Edison Muzoora as leaders of PRA.
Although Uganda has tried to show the location, command and control and capacity of the insurgents in the order of battle as requested in the previous meetings, including the one held in DRC’s second largest city of Lubumbashi on July 7, Kigali 's intelligence has made it clear, the report is scanty.
If Kigali authorities, including its foreign affairs minister Dr Charles Murigande, agreed that PRA was a threat to Uganda 's peace and security as well as that of the entire region in the previous tripartite plus forums, it becomes very complex to trace the origin of new orders. This makes it even very tricky for Kigali that has consistly been accused by Ugandan authorities for supporting PRA.
Actually Kampala authorities say the action signals self-interests of some of the countries in the Congo war.
"If there are no bad intentions behind the whole issue Rwanda should come out openly to tell us where the problem is. We are not ready to stop demanding for the inclusion of PRA on the common list," a senior Ugandan security official said, in a statement sent to the TFC.

PRA Crisis
A Ugandan diplomat confirmed the bickering but said, the issue is something that will have to be addressed peacefully.
The Ugandan Ambassador to Rwanda, Richard Kabonero said that a win-win solution should be the bottom line in the ongoing political negotiations.
"We have provided all there is to provide on PRA," he says.
To prevent further resentment that would lead to an eventual deadlock in the talks the Tripartite member countries were forced to halt further debate on the rebel group at the recent TPC meeting in Kampala.
According to sources that participated in this meeting Uganda bowed to the decision merely to give room for the consideration of other issues. But the fact remains it is a ‘banked’ grievance.
Unless the countries agree on the existence of PRA, which Rwanda seems not to accept then the little progress made may be lost and the Tripartite plus framework devalued, experts say, adding that there seems to be a lot of mistrust and deception on part of some members who agree to please the facilitators but end up doing the contrary at the end of the day.
"In this scenario the parties should reflect on the Uganda-Congo progress on the most wanted list issue," a source said.
In March this year Uganda convinced DR Congo authorities to drop the names of her minister and a permanent secretary from a "most-wanted persons" list drawn up under the auspices of the Tripartite Plus Joint Commission.
Prior to the agreement between Uganda and Congo on the common list the Kinshasa government had listed Micro-finance State Minister Salim Saleh and the late Defence PS Noble Mayombo (RIP) on Kinshasa 's list of wanted men.
At a meeting of the security sub commission of the TPJC in Kigali last year, according to high placed source, delegations from DRC and Uganda "negotiated until midnight," but Congolese authorities were not bending.
At this meeting, where Uganda 's technical team was led by Octavious Buturo, the deputy chief of Military Intelligence "ended without agreement," the source said, further revealing that DRC wanted the duo indicted for allegedly plundering of Congo 's natural resources during the civil wars and internecine upheavals in the late 1990s.
The Ugandan armed forces entered the DRC in 1998 to fight insurgents who the government said were destabilising Uganda from eastern DRC.
Now under the TPJC arrangement, Burundi , Rwanda , Uganda and the DRC were required to compile a list of "most wanted persons" that is agreeable to all member states.
This list will then be handed over to the African Union and the United Nations to apprehend them.
If the names of the dissidents are forwarded to the Security Council together with the others, they risk being blacklisted by the international community, which usually involves a freeze on assets held outside their home country and a travel ban.
Although the TPJC had hoped to send a complete list of the most-wanted persons in the Great Lakes region to the U.N. Security Council months ago, there is still no indication of a solution in sight.
While Rwanda , Burundi and DRC had agreed on the final lists the countries seem to be going back to the drawing board and the coupled with the ongoing stalemate it could weaken the TPJC, a partnership created to achieve synergy in combating threats to regional security.
Burundi withdraws
Actually it becomes even more challenging at this time when Burundi has withdrawn its list of most wanted persons.
According to sources that participated in the Kampala Tripartite Plus Commission meeting in Kampala on September 15-17, Burundian authorities decided to retract their list allegedly to give chance to political dialogue.
Since the Nkurunziza government started talks to the country’s main threat- FNL PALPEHUTU rebel group, it sees a shot at peace under the ongoing ceasefire.
And, subjecting the rebel group for consideration as a threat would be undermining the peace talks, a move that could spark off fury putting the country at war again.
Other issues that cast uncertainty over the cause of the Tripartite Plus Commission of ending the treat to regional peace and security from negative forces include the putting into order of Congolese armed forces and agreeing on the role of dissident Gen. Laurent Nkunda.
During the recent ministerial meeting in Kampala, it was agreed that the Congolese armed forces (brassage) should be integrated so that they may act against negative forces and assure the security of the local population.
Member delegations appealed to the United Nations Mission to the DRC (Monuc) to intensify efforts in collaboration with Congolese armed forces (FARDC) to eliminate the negative forces through full application of its mandate.
According to the final communiqué all delegations expressed concern about the deteriorating security conditions in eastern Congo, in particular the destabilizing roles of former General Laurent Nkunda and the ex-FAR/Interahamwe.
However, while the countries recognize threats caused by Gen. Nkunda, Rwanda ’s opinion on both the renegade general and MONUC is indifferent.
President Paul Kagame told a press conference in Kigali recently that he held almost all the blame over the escalation of war in Congo on MONUC. On the other hand the Rwandan head of state said that Nkunda is fighting a legitimate war.
In this regard Kagame proposed that millions of dollars spent on the UN peacekeeping mission in DRC should be given to the people to develop themselves or be invested in infrastructure "because MONUC cannot create peace where it isn’t".
Rwanda’s support for Nkunda as portrayed in this scenario by Mr Kagame as well as the view on the UN mission in Congo give an open contradiction on the way forward.
This contradiction is so close to that of Uganda and the DRC.
Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni met with his DRC counterpart Joseph Kabila in Ngurdoto, Arusha , Tanzania on September 7-8, and among others agreed to resolve their differences peacefully.
This much publicized round between Museveni and Kabila was reported to have made far reaching resolutions but, only a few days after the Ngurdoto summit, the Congolese army attacked Uganda on Lake Albert.
Meanwhile as the tripartite plus joint commission negotiations at the political level continue to be marred by accusations and counter accusations the army in this forum has neither made significant progress.
The meeting of Chiefs of General Staff that convened in Bujumbura, the Burundian capital on April 18, 2007 developed actions against negative forces.
The army chiefs developed four scenarios for offensive operations with consensus that military operations against negative forces are imperative in order to restore sustainable peace and stability in the region.
Military scenarios
Among the scenarios created in Bujumbura include Actions taken by the DRC Defense forces, separate planned operations with respect for sovereignty, combined phased operations (joint military action) and appeal to the international community.
But up to now DRC is sticking to scenario one.
Despite constant requests by other member countries to consider other scenarios such as separate planned operations Kinshasa wants more time to exhaust the first package.
But then Congo is also skeptical about offering her soil for battle as stipulated in subsequent scenarios of military action given the implications-foreign army clashes, increased civil war, suffering of Congolese and plunder of her resources may be the order of the day like case was in the past.
The 1998-2002 conflict in eastern DRC, which also involved several other African countries and is generally seen as Africa 's first continental war, directly or indirectly cost over three million lives.
Under scenario one, DRC maintains it will continue to commit its defense forces with support of Tripartite Plus intelligence services to intensify operations against negative forces on its territory.
Most of the member states seem not to be happy with this position and unless alternatives are provided in the process as Kinshasa starts to halt attacks on insurgents then the country risks being invaded silently and this would be another serious disaster and a blow to the talks and the facilitator who has committed a lot of money for her tax payers in hope of stability.
And, unless the member states agree on common modalities and hitches affecting the progress of dialogue such as the PRA, FDRL rebels and the Gen. Nkunda question as soon as possible, the Tripartite Plus Commission will cease to be a peace creating mechanism but rather a talking shop for peddling blamegames and drawing lines of battle/ war.

FDC to protest Chogm in Kololo

THE Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) has organised a protest against what they described as the failure by the Commonwealth nations to fulfil the purpose for which the group was set up.

FDC president Dr. Kizza Besigye yesterday said they will hold the activities at Kololo Airstrip today and tomorrow to, among other things, demonstrate, debate and hold rallies in protest against the Commonwealth.

The Inspector General of Police, Kale Kayihura, yesterday gave the go-ahead for the function, but cautioned the public against moving to the airstrip in large groups that may disrupt traffic.

Kayihura, in a letter to FDC, also demanded to know how many people they were expecting at the airstrip.

But Besigye expressed surprise that Kayihura wanted the party to estimate the number of participants.

Addressing journalists on Katonga Road, Besigye, flanked by Chapaa Karuhanga, said the activities would coincide with the Commonwealth summit that will take place tomorrow. For more: www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/13/598404

Queen addresses Ugandan Parliament

Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom is due to address the Parliament of Uganda at the Parliamentary buildings.
Her Majesty is here to open the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting (CHOGM) at the International Conference Centre on Friday.

Ugandans wellcome Queen Elizabeth II in thousands

QUEEN Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom arrived yesterday to a grand welcome. Her Majesty is here to open the Commonbwealth Heads of Government meeting (CHOGM) at the International Conference Centre on Friday.

The Queen’s royal white-and-striped jet touched down at Entebbe International Airport at 5:30pm. It bore a capital “E” that represents her name Elizabeth.

Two minutes later, she stepped out of the aircraft wearing a cream hat and a long-sleeved beige overcoat and a black bag strapped over her left shoulder. She had black gloves and black shoes.

She walked with ease down the staircase closely followed by her husband Prince Phillip, the Duke of Edinburgh, who was wearing a dark suit.

Waiting to receive the royal couple at the tarmac were the British High Commissioner, Francois Gordon, and the Chief of Protocol in the foreign affairs ministry, Richard Ssenyomo. They bowed in honour.

The Queen paused for a couple of seconds looking out towards Lake Victoria. She was last here in 1954 when she came to commission the Owen Falls Dam at Jinja.

Shortly after, the Queen was driven to the refurbished State House in Entebbe in a dark bullet-proof state-of-the-art Range Rover.

President Yoweri Museveni stepped out of State House to wait for the royal visitors at 5:45pm.

At 5:50pm the Queen’s motorcade arrived at State House where she was given a red carpet welcome by the President, with his wife Janet and other high-ranking government officials.

Traditional dancers entertained her as she walked to meet the President. A school-girl presented the Queen with a bouquet of flowers.

After a brief introduction and the playing of the national anthems, the Queen inspected a guard of honour of the Uganda People’s Defence Forces. A 21-gun salute thundered out later.

Inside the State House, the President showed the royal visitors the Uganda Court of Arms and other symbols of Uganda’s heritage.

The President and the visitors then held close-door talks. Minutes later, the royal couple signed the visitor’s book.

Queen Elizabeth became the first head of state to be hosted at the renovated Entebbe State House.

The royals received a tumultuous reception from jubilant Ugandans as the entourage drove from Entebbe.

The decorated Entebbe Road was thronged with crowds who waved both British and Ugandan flags as they surged forward to have a glimpse of the Queen.

The convoy slowed down at Kawuku, Namulanda, Kajjansi, Namasuba, Najjanakumbi, Kibuye and the Clock Tower and the Queen waved at ecstatic
Ugandans.

According to Buckingham Palace officials in the royal entourage, over 100,000 people turned up to receive the Queen.

They said they had never seen such a reception during the Queen’s foreign visits. By 3:00pm excited people had lined up along Entebbe Road.

Security was elaborate along the 40-kilometre road with soldiers on high-rise buildings. A royal air-force helicopter also patrolled the airspace from Entebbe as the convoy snaked its way to Kampala.

Last night, the Queen hosted media executives and editors to a grand reception at the Serena Hotel Kampala.

This morning, she will visit the Mildmay Centre which cares for people living with AIDS. The hospital was established with British assistance.

Her Majesty is also expected to address Parliament today and host a state banquet at the State House Entebbe. The Queen opens the Commonwealth summit tomorrow morning.

This is the Queen’s second visit to Uganda, her first being in 1954 before Uganda became independent. Then she commissioned the Owen Falls Dam which has been renamed Nalubaale.

Her son Prince Charles, the heir to the throne, arrives today. It will be his first visit to Uganda. He is accompanied by his wife, Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall.

The Queen concludes her visit on Saturday. Most of the heads of government are expected today.

International media watch dog protests, no reply

Without legal hearing, Rwanda shutters privately owned newspaper

July 16, 2007

His Excellency Laurent Nkusi
Minister of Information in the Rwandan Prime Minister’s Office
c/o Embassy of the Republic of Rwanda to the United States
1714 New Hampshire Avenue, NW
Washington DC 20009

Via Facsimile: (202) 232-4544

Dear Minister Nkusi:

We are alarmed by the government’s sudden closure of the privately owned English-language newspaper The Weekly Post without a fair hearing, as is guaranteed by Rwandan law. We are also concerned that the paper was the second private newspaper summarily closed down by the government in the last three months, according to CPJ research.

The Weekly Post, founded by former journalists of the pro-government private daily New Times, has not published since receiving a June 6 letter revoking its authorization to publish, just three days after its first edition. The letter, a copy of which CPJ obtained, rescinded a prior authorization granted on May 15. The letter stated the ruling was based on “circumspect investigations,” but did not provide any explanation.

In a telephone interview with CPJ last month, you declared that the ruling was “perhaps” linked to “inaccuracies” in the paper’s application for a publishing license, but declined to comment further. “I have proof that the information they gave us was not authentic,” New Times later quoted you as saying.

None of the allegations have thus far been substantiated, according to the local press. The Rwandan Journalists Association (RJA) did not find any evidence supporting the allegations after reviewing the paper’s documentation, president Gaspard Safari told CPJ. The Weekly Post’s managing director and chief editor Sulah Nuwamanya denied the accusations, adding that you allegedly turned down his repeated requests for a meeting. The ban was not linked to the content of the paper, he said.

You have been quoted in news reports as saying that the closure was not related to the paper’s ties to neighboring Uganda, where it is printed by the state daily New Vision. Yet in recent years Rwanda and Uganda have had strained relations ever since your armies clashed in nearby Democratic Republic of Congo.

A day after the ruling, the New Times quoted you as saying that “the law that governs media gives the Minister mandate to withdraw the license.” But Rwanda’s 2002 press law requires a court order to close down any media outlet, according to CPJ research and legal expert François Rwangampuhwe. “There is nothing in the press law supporting the minister’s action,” Safari added.

The state-run High Council of the Press (HCP), the body mandated under Article 74 of the press law with an advisory power on decisions to ban or suspend media outlets, was not informed of the ruling until several days after the fact, HCP Executive Secretary Patrice Mulama told CPJ.

In a June 28 letter, a copy of which CPJ obtained, the HCP requested an explanation of the closure and the holding of a fair hearing for the benefit of the paper, pursuant to Article 18 of Rwanda’s constitution.

The Weekly Post was the second newspaper summarily closed down in Rwanda this year. On April 5, the private French-language bimonthly Afrique Libération was indefinitely suspended on the grounds that it could not publish until the completion of a criminal defamation suit against director Bonaventure Bizumuremyi, according to a copy of an official letter from your office obtained by CPJ.

We are concerned that these summary closures show a disturbing pattern of intimidation and harassment of the media, as well as disrespect of due process in Rwanda.

In light of this, we urgently call on you to explain your decision to shut down the newspaper and explain why a court order was not sought in this case, as is required by law. We ask that you rescind the ban and allow The Weekly Post to resume publication immediately. We finally urge you to respect freedom of the press as guaranteed under Article 34 of the Constitution.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter. We look forward to your reply.


Sincerely,

Joel Simon
Executive Director

Weekly post editor fleeing story, the innevitable

Fleeing; Story Of Eleneus Akanga
I could see it coming: a series of articles regarded as controversial by those responsible for the payroll at The New Times; one too many clashes with the second in command; and a decline in the number of assignments
I waas being given. It was only a matter of time, I suspected, before something unfolded. An article quoting President Paul Kagame saying he never wanted to be president, another about the education ministry’s goof over teachers from neighbouring Kenya, and some stinging opinions in my Sunday column, had all put me among the cream of Rwandan journalism. So when the Chinese came looking for someone to tour Beijing, my name was suggested.



I had handled many assignments, but getting this one would be difficult, reason being Mr Ignatius Kabagambe—the then-managing editor of The New Times and a man whose position as the president’s cousin had earned him an immediate recall from Kampala—was also interested. He was looking at the five-day trip to Beijing as the equivalent of an invitation to the Lord’s Supper. wKabagambe immediately began campaigning for the assignment. He quickly arranged for me to be sent to The Nation in Nairobi for training and subsequently used my busy schedule as proof that I was unfit for the assignment.

Kabagambe believed that my one month-stay in Nairobi would keep me busy and ensure that he landed the trip of his life. He could not have been more wrong. The Banyarwanda have a saying that you can never argue with the person who is burying you and it came to pass but while at Makerere University, a Muganda friend of mine had told me that God eats no Donuts. So I banked on this.

Kabagambe dozed off and by the time he woke up, the Beijing-bound plane was on the runway without him. His acrimonious attempts to control events and gag his way into the China assignment had come to a deserved end.

Meanwhile, in Kenya my lessons went well, I learnt a lot, and even came back a better scribe.

Kabagambe never forgave me for this. Even if he had missed the plane by his own error, he was determined to ensure I never lived to celebrate or remind him later of what he had missed. Getting rid of me became his only option.

First, for him to do it in a way that no one would question, his allegations had to be strong and convincing. As second in command at the paper, Kabagambe could not just fire me on a whim. I had authority at the paper and had won fans in Kigali and across the country. In order for the boss, David Kabuye, to ratify my marching orders, I had to be portrayed not only as a threat to the progress of the company, but also as a serially incompetent journalist.

Kabagambe told Kabuye that I was lazy, a non-performer, and that I had failed to write enough stories. The idea of counting stories had become popular at the paper and what mattered most according to those in charge was not quality but quantity. My reporting had utterly disregarded this contemptible school of though; Kabagambe was sure to nick me on that account.

But despite all Kabagambe’s moaning, Kabuye believed in second chances and saw no reason to show me the exit just yet. This angered Kabagambe who wanted to be in full control and immediately started vying for Kabuye’s post. After all, his belief was that he had been brought in to head The New Times and not to play second fiddle to someone unwilling to do his bidding.

Using his position as Kagame’s cousin, he began peddling a lie to the National Security Service that I was a Ugandan spy. If incompetence at The New Times wasn’t serving his interests, the state security would certainly sell-out right away. From a darling reporter to a suspected spy, my troubles had begun.

On February 17, 2007, after a local journalist had been beaten into a coma by unknown thugs, I set out—with the blessing of Kabagambe himself—to work on a story which, little did I know, would not only cost me my job, but make me the most wanted journalist in Rwanda.

The story was about the growth in uncertainty and fear among journalists after a series of coordinated attacks against the media that included beatings, intimidating phone calls, and other similar abuses.

It was soon published, but promptly raised dust at the president’s office. Kabagambe was quick to lay the blame at my door. He summoned me into his office and told me that my story had been exaggerated and untrue. Stunned, I asked whether he had not realised as much when he edited and accepted the piece. But just as I knew at the time, you can never argue with a superior lest a warning letter become part of your possession.

With the rod heating up fast over the story, Kabuye was sent into a forced leave of absence, originally intended to be only for a month. Kabagambe then became the acting editor in chief. It was Kabagambe’s dream come true; Akanga would leave at once!

It therefore did not surprise me when, on Sunday, March 31, I was served a sacking letter. In it, I was accused of writing an unfounded and exaggerated story and of discrediting Rwanda in front of its development partners. It hypocritically ended wishing me the best of luck in my future endeavours.

A week later, I joined forces with Julius Mwesigye, a former news editor fired just two days after me, Isa Kainamura, the former webmaster who had resigned of her own accord, and Sulah Nuwamanya, the former upcountry news editor, who had also resigned in protest of the ill-treatment of friends. Together, we decided to start a weekly newspaper called The Weekly Post. I am certain we were right to do so.

With the paper’s registration complete and everything else in order, we hit the streets of Kigali, Kampala, and Bujumbura on June 4 and 5, 2007. Surprised by the move and wary that The New Times was under threat; Kabagambe rushed to Emmanuel Ndahiro, the Board Chairman of The New Times and head of National Security Service, to plead for our closure.

Permeated with enough lies and a handful of unsubstantiated evidence, Dr. Ndahiro ordered for The Weekly Post’s closure through Information Minister, Prof. Laurent Nkusi. State agents were deployed to watch our movements, who we met and who talked to.

Word went around that we had received money from both the American embassy and the Ugandan government. But realising that the America link was unlikely to hold water, especially since it is US government policy that embassies don’t give financial assistance to media outlets, it was dropped.


Grudges

wanda and Uganda have nursed grudges against each other ever since the infamous Kisangani clashes in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The two continue to accuse each other of using their nationals to spy on either side of the border in an endless cat and mouse game. Sadly, it is the innocent citizens who continue to suffer.

With the paper off the streets and pressure mounting from both within and without, the protagonists of the closure had to find legitimate reasons to shut us down. Their superiors needed answers and the quicker the answers permeated into the top circle, the fewer the disappointment.

In authoritarian states, there is nothing more important than state security. It was no wonder that it quickly went to the top of the agenda.

The image of our weekly newspaper was abruptly transformed from just a mere source of news and revenue for its founders to an incredible Ugandan government tool of infiltration. The fact that the Ugandan government had bankrolled our existence, they argued, made us more likely to be used to jeopardise the security of Rwanda.

Names of those within the weekly who looked more malleable to the interests of Kampala were put forward and their files were immediately taken to the offices of the National Security Services (NSS). With a concocted version of the story and perhaps a good number of incriminating pages inserted in our files by the detractors, the NSS boss could not avoid calling for an immediate closure.

This he did irrespective of how illegal the action was likely to be. He was not going to allow his country’s enemy to operate right under his nose and as boss to The New Times; he certainly was not in for any sort of competition.

Using Information Minister Nkusi as the scapegoat, the NSS issued an order to shut down the weekly with immediate effect. On June 6, the maverick professor famously backtracked on his earlier decision and ordered the cancellation of our operating licence.

He gave no reasons. Impeccable sources have alleged that the letter was indeed pre-written and the minister merely appended his signature.

It was such a blow, especially because it was served to us as we tried to put our heads together for the second edition. I will always remember the sad look on the face of every member of The Weekly Post as we held a crisis meeting over the infamous directive.

To make matters worse, Ignatius Kabagambe, then acting manager of The New Times, was the first to call our office. We decided on seeing his mobile phone call that he be put on a loud speaker so we could all hear what he was saying. Unfortunately for us, or fortunately for him, it was one of his journalists, Ignatius Ssuuna. He was using his boss’s mobile phone.

During my time at The New Times, I remember Kabagambe telling off reporters who requested to use his phone and instructing them to use the editorial phone instead. I still cannot find explanations as to why he was so willing this time around, to offer his mobile for the story.

Was it a big fish story, one that the Times wanted so badly? How had he suddenly known that we had just received the minister’s letter and what on earth was he confirming? We could have settled for the events as being an impeccable coincidence had he not bragged about our closure. Why did he then tell one of his reporters Joseph Mudingu, to “forget ever joining the Post because it has been effectively stopped”?


Spies
Whatever the case, this was just the beginning of a bad spell. With the letter now in our possession, we were declared official Ugandan spies. Hordes of NSS operatives, amazingly including those that we knew, were deployed with orders to follow each and every one of us, monitor who we met, when we met them, and if possible, provide feedback on such deliberations.

Our phones were put under surveillance and sometimes tapped. It became obvious that whenever we made appointments over our phones to meet anywhere around Kigali, we always found company.

As expected, we made attempts to seek justice because much as we were not sure of what was likely to happen, we always knew that we were innocent and thought that at one time, those in positions of power and influence would listen to our side of the story and be able to judge accordingly. But no one came to our rescue. Not even the High Council of the Press (HCP), an organ set up to ensure harmony between the state and the press.

On June 28, under some pressure from members of the diplomatic corps in Kigali, the HCP was forced to write to the minister after a session pointing out his mistake and advising that he rescinds his decision to close us down and ensures that justice is done.

Although the HCP action was a response to our letter seeking justice, we never got a copy of the letter they sent to the minister.

We were told on several occasions that the minister’s letter had been written in Kinyarwanda so we couldn’t get a copy because our original letter was in English. After continued pressure to have a copy, Patrice Mulama, the HCP executive secretary, came up with a spin; the copy was ready but the HCP president was nowhere to sign it. Nonetheless, at the end of the day, we were told there was no letter for us.

It was now becoming very clear that something was afoot and the more any of us inquired, the more we became the subject of debate within the NSS. I remember Rwanda Television relaying a doctored version of a press conference by Professor Nkusi where he was shown answering some of my questions, but deliberately cutting out the part where I was asking.

But the mother of all jokes was when, after a futile attempt to attend President Kagame’s monthly press conference, he told reporters that he knew nothing about the Weekly Post. If this was surprising, it was not as startling as instructing fellow journalists not to ask any questions about the Post’s closure.

That is when it became apparent that things were indeed serious.

Had it not been for a tip from a strong confidant within the NSS, my fate would have been different. And like Canadian journalist Madelaine Drohan told me, no story or situation is worth one’s life.

A spy is the last thing you want to be called in a country like Rwanda, which is extremely intolerant of even the mildest forms of critical reporting. I knew that if I did not leave, the alternative would have been worse.

The nagging of media freedom in Rwanda

Rwanda Shuts Week-Old Weekly

While media freedom might seem worrying in East Africa, it is bleak in Rwanda and Burundi that joined the community this June.

Journalists are still sacked from state media under unclear circumstances and newspapers closed without giving reasons. Such was the fate of The Weekly Post of Rwanda, which was summarily closed on 6 June after publishing only one issue.

Prof. Laurent Nkusi, the Minister of information in the Prime Minister’s office said in a letter addressed to the publishers that, “after circumspect investigations of the information you had provided when you applied for the registration of an English newspaper, The Weekly Post, of the Rwanda Media Holdings Limited Company, I regret to inform you that the acknowledgement receipt N’ 789/03.10 of May 15, 2007, which allowed you to publish the aforesaid newspaper, is from today 6 June 2007 cancelled.”

An acknowledgement receipt is issued before a newspaper is allowed to operate in Rwanda and The Weekly Post got it on 2 May.

The newspaper was started by journalists who had been sacked or resigned from the state-owned The New Times. They include Sulah Nuwamanya, a former New Times editor in charge of upcountry news, is the chief executive of the weekly printed in Uganda at the government-owned The New Vision.

Others are Errenious Akaga, a former senior political journalist at New Times, Issa Kainamura who was The New Times Web master and Julius Mwesigwa, formerly news editor.

Prof. Nkusi told ET on 11 June 11 that, “at the moment there is no answer I can give for” the closure, confirming speculation that the Rwanda intelligence feared the paper was linked to Uganda, with whom relations are still uneasy.

“We are sure there is no reason at all because we fully complied with the law,” Weekly Post CEO Sulah Nuwamanya told ET in an interview.

“Our company (Rwanda Media Holdings) is fully registered and has a commercial registration certificate from the Registrar of Companies. Among the activities of the company included the publication of the newspaper,” adds Nuwamanya.

He said after obtaining the commercial registration certificate, the company filed the newspaper project proposal with the prime minister’s office which registers news papers.

Among the requirements to run a newspaper in Rwanda is an application letter showing the editorial line and the initial capital, format, the language, a company statute, a news paper project proposal, and proof that the managing director and editor of the paper have never been imprisoned. In addition to all these Nuwamanya says his company submitted even its profile.

“We fully complied with the law and that is why our documents were processed within one week and we received an acknowledgement receipt from the ministry allowing The Weekly Post registration and operation,” says Nuwamanya.

Nuwamanya says his newspaper intended to cover East Africa regional with a Rwanda - Burundi perspective.

Analysts believe the Weekly Post was closed because its Rwandese founders all originate from Uganda and it was therefore perceived in security circles as pro-Ugandan. The relations between Rwanda and Uganda are yet to warm up since their armies clashed in late 90s in Democratic Republic of Congo.

Independent sources claim the order to close the newspaper could have originated from the powerful National Security Services (NSS) and the information minister was just a conveyor.
Nuwamanya dispelled such fears, stating: “We are full Rwandans who were only participating in the socio-economic and political development of our country. We wanted to be part of a professional and vibrant media industry promote our country's image in the region through our newspaper.”

He said the newspaper was funded from their savings although there was no law barring external financing.

Pressed to comment about the Ugandan roots and connection, Nuwamanya denied reports linking The Weekly Post to Rtd Maj. David Kabuye, the former Managing Director of The New Times.

“we worked with him so he knows and sympathized with us, but he was not one of the founders, Nuwamanya said.

The High Council of the Press in Rwanda is responsible for regulating the media industry. However, newspapers are registered by the minister of information who no exclusive powers to deregister any newspaper once it is operational.

If a newspaper offends the law, the minister of information writes to the High Council of the Press, which is supposed to start an arbitration process.

The process takes time and there is no provision that allows the minister to terminate a license like in the case of The Weekly Post, sources knowledgeable in the law told ET.

Nuwamanya said they were exploring all the options including arbitration and had written to the director of the Cabinet as well as petitioned the High Council of the Press, which will sit on June 27 to decide on the matter. The Council secretary, Mr. Patrice Murama, told ET, “we are aware of that decision and we are looking into it”.

“We feel there is an invisible hand that we cannot easily identify,” Nuwamanya said, without ruling out sabotage by their former employer turned competitor.

Sulah