The facts, the figures and their implications
Over the last two weeks, the dispute on "indigenous people of Bunyoro"versus Bafuruki has dominated political debate in Uganda. Sparked off by President Yoweri Museveni's letter to the Minister for the Presidency, Beatrice Wabudeya, the debate has been short on facts and figures. Now, The Independent brings you the statistics the ethnic composition of Bunyoro Kingdom.
According to Museveni, the “indigenous people of Bunyoro†comprise the Banyoro, Bagungu, Bachope, Buruli, Banyala and Bahuma. Apparently, the evidence shows, that Banyoro are the most populous ethnic group with 43% followed by Bakiga with 13%, Alur 12%, Bagungu 4%, Lugbara 4%, Acholi 4%, Bafumbira 3% and non Ugandans who are 5%.
Yet with less than half the total population of Bunyoro's four districts: Hoima, Masindi, Kibaale and Buliisa, there are 10 Banyoro MPs out of 14 MPs from the region; the others comprise of two Bagungu and two Bakiga. This means that in spite of the influx of Bafuruki into the kingdom, Banyoro "natives" have not been politically sidelined as the president's letter seems to suggest.
Secondly, all the four districts have indigenous people as chairmen of LCV “ Masindi (Steven Biriija) and Bulisa (Fred Lukumu) both Bagungu (natives of the area) while Hoima (George Bagonza and Kibale (George Nyamyaka) are led by Banyoro. Therefore, the democratic process has progressively ensured the dominance of the indigenous people in top jobs. This also means that to ring-fence elective offices for the indigenous people would mean disenfranchising the majority of the population of the region.
Our statistics come from the 2002 Census, and were compiled by Uganda's Deepening Democracy Programme, a multi-donor project, and by our Independent team. Migration of non-indigenous people (commonly known as 'Bafuruki') into Bunyoro has been heavy, and has affected local politics. Namely, there are now several non-indigenous elected officials in Bunyoro “ but mainly in lower local council jobs.
Yet Museveni's letter calls for ring-fencing the top jobs only for the "indigenous groups of the area". While music to the ears of some Banyoro leaders, this was a slap in the face to Bakiga and other non-indigenous people who have over the years migrated in large numbers into the region and penetrated the political sphere of Bunyoro.
According to the census, the Banyoro are the majority in Hoima district, comprising 57% of the population, but they do not constitute a majority in any of the three other districts in Bunyoro. The Banyoro make up 47% of the population of Kibaale, 31% of Masindi, and merely 2% of the population of Buliisa.
Indeed, in Kibaale where almost half of the population is Banyoro, the MP for Bugangaizi constituency is Bakeine Mabel Lilian Kamugisha, a Mukiga and the other, for Buyaga, Barnabas Tinkasiimire, is also a Mukiga. In Buliisa, the MPs are Steven Biraahwa, a Mugungu and MP for Buliisa County, and Beatrice Mpairwe, a Mugungu and Woman MP for Buliisa. Here, the "œindigenous people" hold the top jobs.
Museveni is essentially trying to grant political favors to “indigenous people" (actually read ethnic Banyoro) at the expense of democratically elected officials, including those who were elected in populations that were primarily non-Banyoro. But why is the President courting Bunyoro at this time? Moreover, why would he do so at the expense of angering and alienating the Bakiga and others who have long been some of his strongest supporters?
Though officially internal, the letter was circulated widely enough for one to question how accidental its leakage really was. The inflammatory contents of the President's suggestions have left many observers and analysts scratching their heads as to the logic of such a move. Nonetheless, the letter's contents, and perhaps even its release, are part of a calculated political strategy, however counterintuitive it may at first appear to alienate a group like the Bakiga. The cost of such a strategy, however, may fall squarely on the shoulders of ordinary citizens as ethnic tensions rise in their communities.
Wherever Museveni goes, he is faced with innumerable demands, requests and complaints “ there are no teachers, say the masses “ schools are burning, there is no medicine, and no food. Responding to at least some of these requests is important for Museveni's continued support from the populace. So as he mixes among the wananchi, Museveni hands cash-stuffed envelopes to men, women and even school children “ for food, for school fees, for health care.
Bunyoro is no different. But on top of the usual requests, some Banyoro and other 'indigenous' people, especially those in positions of power, have another problem “ that their 'territory' is being represented or governed by migrants (although as we have seen this is an exception to the rule as most MPs and LCV chairperson are'indigenous'). The election of non-Banyoro officials in the region is not in and of itself a problem, and one can easily think of analogous examples in other regions throughout the county. But mass migration and political representation by those from non-indigenous groups may become controversial in the context of Bunyoro's violent history under British imperialism.

The question is whether colonialism put the indigenous groups, and the Banyoro in particular, at an unjust disadvantage, either political or economic, that should today be corrected by a form of affirmative action. It is no secret that Bunyoro was laid to waste by British colonialists, with the help of Sudanese mercenaries and the Baganda, who were at the time great rivals of the Bunyoro kingdom. When met with resistance from then Omukama, the Bunyoro King Chwa II Kabalega, the British invaded the kingdom in 1893 and for five years waged a devastating campaign against the Banyoro. One British Capt. Thurston wrote in his war diary, "I have this month and will in future burn their houses, destroy their crops and cut down their banana plantations." Such was the scorched earth campaign that destroyed the lives and livelihoods of many Banyoro. The resulting depopulation and general devastation of the Banyoro is an injustice they will not soon forget.
The question of land has also been a longstanding and related issue. There is the question of the “lost counties†of Buyaga and Bugangaizi, which were Bunyoro territories given to Buganda by the British after the Baganda helped them to defeat Kabalega. A 1964 referendum saw the return of the lost counties to Bunyoro, but they remain predominantly inhabited by non-indigenous people, and some of the land is still owned by Baganda landlords. Interestingly, these are two of the Bunyoro counties represented by non-Banyoro in Parliament. As if to further fan the flames of the wildfire that is the 'Bafuruki Question, Munyoro State Minister for Internal Affairs Matia Kasaija was last weekend reported to have told a meeting of Banyoro that Banyoro should reclaim their land. 'We are saying Bafuruki should go and we distribute the land among ourselves,' he was reported to have said in the Monday edition of the Daily Monitor, "We are not prepared to stop in our struggle. We are not against Bafuruki but what we want is our land and if they [Bafuruki] are to stay on our land, they should stay on it with terms."

The President's proposed affirmative action to correct the numerous historical wrongs now includes the 'ring-fencing' of political positions in Bunyoro, even if these positions already go almost exclusively to those belonging to an indigenous group. But the devastation of Bunyoro under colonialism is not a new revelation. And while it is not the first time Museveni has stepped in to support the Banyoro, his most recent letter is arguably the most dramatic step he has single-handedly taken in an attempt to right historical wrongs in the region. So what is at stake today that has not been so urgent for the past 23 years?
The population of the Banyoro is relatively small, around 700,000, according to the 2002 Census, and constituting about 3% of Uganda’s population. Bunyoro is an NRM stronghold, and in the last election Museveni won nearly 170,000, or 81% of the vote in sub-counties where Banyoro were the most populous ethnic group. So Museveni does not appear in danger of losing many votes in Bunyoro come 2011. In terms of NRM support, Bunyoro performs much the same as the rest of western Uganda.
What sets the region apart, however, is oil. Last Thursday, at the same time Museveni was calling Bunyoro leaders to arrange for a meeting regarding the matter of his letter, British company Tullow Oil announced its latest oil field discovery. This new find would bring the estimated barrels in that region to over 700 million. The Ministry of Energy and Minerals development also recently announced that it is considering the construction of a refinery in the Albertine rift that would produce 50,000 barrels a day. Though Uganda is not likely to begin pumping oil for several years, it looks very much like a huge windfall of cash is on the way. Bunyoro is now looking like the future epicenter of Uganda's economic power, which is all the more reason for Banyoro to start agitating for their rights to the land. The purpose of courting Bunyoro, say some observers like Augustine Ruzindana in last week's Daily Monitor column, is "to ensure uncontroversial access to the oil discovered in the region."
Members of the Bunyoro lobbying group, the Mubende Bunyoro Committee (MBC) have reportedly made numerous visits to the president, requesting for amendments to the oil sharing agreements. Then several weeks ago there was rumour of rebel groups in the Bunyoro region, which may have added on to the need for the central government to ensure the political and general security of the area. Security around the oil fields is already very high, oil companies with their own security units and the Presidential Guard Brigade stationed in the Albertine Graben. One source quoted by the Daily Monitor's article, "President Museveni's new Bunyoro headache", quoted a security source as saying that "Rebel talk benefits local Banyoro politicians who have dropped hints about bad elements. It's meant to attract the President's attention and cause him to tend to their concerns."Thus, Museveni's latest overture may be an attempt to assure any would-be rebels or rabble-rousers that he is on their side.
But in the politically advantageous process of courting oil-rich Bunyoro, Museveni has snubbed the Bakiga, and other 'Bafuruki'. The Bakiga, who comprise around 32% of Kibaale, have, like the rest of western Uganda, historically supported Museveni. In total, they number nearly 2 million, a population nearly three times the size of the Banyoro. Museveni has even taken a swing at Buganda, whom he repeatedly referred to as 'Mengo sub-imperialists' in his letter. He also appears to be sidelining the demands of Buganda, including their long-standing request for federo, and instead turning his attention to their former rivals, the Banyoro.
The backlash against Museveni's proposal by Bakiga, like Kibaale MP Tinkasiimire who has loudly denounced the plan, will likely make it impossible to succeed in 'ring-fencing' elected positions in Bunyoro. Many others have also criticized the proposition, arguing that it will set an unfair, unconstitutional and dangerous precedent. In his Abu Mayanja lecture last week, Prof. Mahmood Mamdani said of the ring-fencing proposal, "If implemented, this policy will divide Ugandans all over the country into two groups, one defined as indigenous and the other as non-indigenous, and escalate tensions between them."
Given the uproar the proposal has caused, it is very likely that the matter will soon be dropped. While non-indigenous in the region, particularly the political types, may feel somewhat betrayed by the initial idea, Museveni will probably not lose much support once the matter is off the table. More importantly, however, he will have publicly demonstrated to the indigenous groups that he is concerned for their political, if not economic, well-being. Given that Museveni already wins much of the Banyoro vote, consolidating his support in Bunyoro will probably mean more for the oil project than the election in 2011.
Several analysts have argued, however, that with his letter, Museveni has opened a Pandora’s Box of ethnic demands and subsequent tensions. Many of them are based upon historical wrongs, such as that of Bunyoro, or the late former president Milton Obote's assault on the Buganda kingdom, or the 20-year long conflict in northern Uganda. But how does one determine who deserves affirmative action? And at whose expense will it come? Some may find it ironic that those who make the loudest ethnic demands“ like the Buganda and Bunyoro kingdoms “ are the same groups with the lowest poverty levels, highest literacy rates, and highest percentage of households with an employment income, business enterprises and a permanent dwelling. This is not to say that development is unnecessary for those groups who are better off, but that government policies “ like political or economic affirmative action “ may be better directed towards addressing issues concerning all the people of Uganda, and not only an ethnically organised few.
Playing ethnic politics is a quick and easy political strategy for Museveni. Being seen to grant favors to the political or cultural leadership of an ethnic group may be one of the cheapest and easiest ways to win a political support, by way of an ethnic block vote. Forty-seven years after the end of colonialism in Uganda, the divide and rule strategy is back in play. Unfortunately, the costs of such a strategy, including rising ethnic tensions, fall not on the ruler, but on the ruled.

written by Lubowa Hwenry, August 19, 2009
written by Voice of Reason, August 19, 2009
1.The basis of compiling the statistics and the complications of identifying people by ethnicity you wrote about in your earlier article deflates the arguements you are advancing.
2. You should be aware that before M7 letter there has ben quiet pressure to constrain 'Bafuruki' not to contest some positions. The case of Kibaale is well known but there are others.
3. My advise is don't rely on the published figures, (they could be like Kigundu's EC) go for the feelings underneath a semblance of harmony, thenyou will realise the contrary to your thesis. Otherwise. I prefer qualitative findings on deep seated matters like these they bring out reality...fears, anxieties etc.
4. The President beats you with his multi-sources through his intelligence and political sources.
Send your foot journalists down there
written by Mwenda -Get real, August 19, 2009
YES OIL IS A STRATEGIC RESOURCE -A BIG ONE AND INTERESTS ARE NOT JUST LOCAL/REGIONAL BUT INTER. TO KEEP TRANSACTION COSTS ESPECIALLY SECURITY ONES YOU HAVE TO LOOK AHEAD AND PREEMPTY THE WOULD BE FUNDERS OF OIL MILITANTS. SO HARMONISE THE REGION PARTICULARLY PAY ATTENTION TO THE INDIGENEOUS WHO CAN CONVINCED BASED ON PERCEIVED INJUSTICES BUT ALSO CONSIDER OTHERS. OTHERWISE YOU RISK SPENDING MORE QUELLING ..... M7 IS A STRATEGIST INSPITE OF ....THIS IS URGENT BUT OTHER ISSUES ELSE WHERE HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED
written by Mafutta Mingi, August 19, 2009
written by baingana, August 19, 2009
Let the indigenous people be encouraged to work hard rather than spending valuable time lamenting about Bafuruki, Baganda, British etc. Even if the Bafuruki were to miraculously leave Bunyoro and get all the land from Baganda, National Parks, Forest reserves etc, the indigenous will never develop with their present attitude. They will AGAIN (emphasis mine) sell the land to other people, from outside Bunyoro. Who sold land in Buliisa?
written by Frank, August 19, 2009
What about a munyoro being elected outside bunyoro?Think twice.
written by Baingana -to reply usefully, August 19, 2009
One wonders whether you read the comment of Voice of Reason carefully or your were anxious to "encourage" the indigeneous people to work hard meaning they are lazy. They used to say cattle keepers of a certain region were lazy but how they came to dominate a country I am still studying it. Steotyping is always unfortunate, what if the spirit of Kabalega possed these people again?
written by Dr Kaggwa, August 19, 2009
written by a guest, August 19, 2009
written by Muganda, August 20, 2009
written by Moses, August 20, 2009
The other day Joe Powell reminded readers on the Uganda Talks blog that not every article that gets published in the Independent is by Andrew Mwenda.
No doubt Mwenda is the cog and wheel on which the Independent spins but the article on 'Museveni's tribal politics' is by Melina Platas. Guys give the other Independent writers credit.
Lastly, please before you address your questions/comments to Mwenda check out the byline. Thanks.
written by Thank you for the sensitisatio, August 20, 2009
Thank you for the sensitisation. Certainly I was wondering how Mwenda could have been completely out of touch (unreal)using statstics the way they were used in 'Museveni's tribal politics' and the ealier artcle on how identify various groups in Bunyoro. The two and their theses were inconsistent I was a bit mystified. Let Melina Platas note that two parallel forces at work-ring fencing has been on informally and so it affects what you see but also pop sec figures are based on self disclosure and so to say Banyoro were completely at peace with current MPs is misnomer.
written by Aisha Namuddu, August 20, 2009
So a peasant mufuruki, suspicious that the enumerators may report on him/her, will claim to belong to the dominant powerful group, ie Munyoro. But a munyoro cannot claim to be a mufuruki in his land.
The truth therefore could be that the Banyoro could be around 30 or twenty percent left in Bunyoro.
written by Melina Platas, August 20, 2009
First of all, I don't know what you mean by "Thant is why the artcle is probably not real". As Moses noted, articles at the Independent are written by those whose byline(s) appear below the headline.
Second of all, your main points are unclear to me as well. 1) that ring-fencing has been going on informally -- are you suggesting that already elected officials in Bunyoro are voted into power because they belong to an indigenous group? If so, then why would it be necessary to formalise it? It defeats the president's argument. 2) (and this concern has been expressed by others) I recognise that the ethnicity data are based on self-disclosure. There is therefore some margin of error that is unavoidable if one wants to use published statistics and not a sample (random or otherwise) on the ground. Unfortunately this is a problem that is unavoidable as you cannot guarantee that someone is not misrepresenting him or herself to an interviewer. Nevertheless, unless someone has the resources to carry out their own census, these are the most reliable figures available to my knowledge. Moreover, even if one were to carry out one's own census, one would still run into the hazards of self-disclosure.
written by Melina Platas, August 20, 2009
someone is not misrepresenting him or herself to the interviewer. But unless one has the resources to carry out one's own census, to my knowledge, these are the most reliable and recent ethnicity data available at the moment. In any case, even if one was to do one's own census, the problem of self-disclosure would remain.
written by Informal ring fencing-Melina P, August 20, 2009
Whereas in Western Countries the formal legal regimes determines most of the things, in many third world countries Uganda include the informal regimes dominates. The LV Chair in Kibaale was ring-fenced in 2000 when Fred Rulemera (mufuruki) was elected and forced to step down informally by the President. Then the current Chairman took the seat "unopposed" 2000-2004 and again 2004-to date . No legality but it is well understood. So the Presidents letter is seeking to formalise what already exists to some extent. So informal power works that way, if for example a Mufuruki forces his/her to Parliament the President can ignore that one and appoint a Munyoro who lost to a ministerial post. That is what I mean by informal (unofficial) ring fencing. Your statistics can not capture those. That is why I said qualitative data on deep seated matters is superior.
written by Melina continued, August 20, 2009
When you read Namuddu 's contribution "The ... Banyoro could be around 30 or twenty % left in Bunyoro." (above). In other words your data although seems to be coming from an authentic source it is suspicious when used in the issue under discussion. I can see your frustration, but to be 'real' is expensive. This is the same problem with Baingana (above). So to be real is to get behind the figures, beyond the apperent what you people call the news behind the news. Then one needs to realise that to keep the Transaction costs (not production) for oil all measures for peace must be pursued. In Nigeria oil militants make oil expensive through security, blown pipelines etc. So why not treat Banyoro but alos Bafuruki in that area carefully. There could be people ready to put distablizing money in that area, (Banyoro or bafuruki oil miltants), deny them obvious chance to tap into some anger like that of Banyoro -that is being REAL, not those figures
written by Basoga-Benne, August 21, 2009
Ring fence the cream posts i n the country to one Ethinic group, Ring fence poverty to the indegineous, Ring fence the abusers from the rule of law, Ring fence the high command posts from the "Hutu's", Ring fence Kalamojongs from the mining areas
Ring fence Kampala from Buganda,
**** off the industries in Jinia to tactifuly Ring fence Basoga from local jobs.....
Ring fence, Ring fence.....
Where would it stop!!
.
TEAR GAS, RING FENCE, TEAR GAS.
RING FENCE INVESTORS FROM THE THE WRATH OF THE INDEGINOUES...
NRM CONTINUA....
written by MUGIIIIIIIIIII, August 22, 2009
Yes he is a major shareholder in the paper,but could you please start giving credit to the other journalists who write most of the articles.
written by Mwesige John, August 23, 2009
NASOMA mu Bukedde ow'enjawulo eyafuluma nga August 31 olw'okukuza amatikkira ga Ssaabasajja Kabaka aga 16 nga waliwo ebika ebiteekateeka okutongozebwa oluvannyuma lw'okudibya ebimu ebitakyalimu bantu.
Ku lw'obulungi bw'okwegatta kwa Buganda, Uganda ne Afirika yonna, nze omu ku batawagira kutondawo bika na mawanga amalala. Ndowooza nti kuba kukecula mu Baganda, Bannayuganda n'Abaddugavu bonna obugujuguju. Naye olw'obwenkanya, tosobola kuziba kkubo abantu ababa baagala okwetengerera lye baba bakutte bwe kiba ddala nga kyetaagisa.
Wabula waliwo ebika ebyali byatongozebwa endagaano ya 1900 we yakolerwa, kyokka ate nga tebiweddeewo, naye nga bizze byerabirwa bannnyinibyo ne balowooza nti baboolebwa era awo we wava bannabyabufuzi okubakozesa batwekutuleko. Mu bika ebyo mwemuli ekya Engabi Emmooli. Luno lwe lwabanga olulyo olulangira olwafugwanga obwali obwakabaka bwa Bwera kati Mawogola olwekutula ku kika ky'Ababiito abaafuganga e Bunyoro ne lwegatta ku Buganda era Ssaabasajja Kabaka n'abatongoza obutaka bwabwe e Bulera n'e Kyebando mu Mawogola gye baagabana Mayiro. Omukulu w'ekika kyabwe aliko ye Mutaka Muntu Frank Museveni akaayanira obwami obw'essaza lya Muteesa e Mawogola oba waakiri okwebuuzibwangako nga Kabaka alonda abaami b'ennono mu saza eryo, okutongozebwa ng'omukulu wa Engabi Emmooli ow'akasolya era n'okutuulanga mu lukiiko lw'abataka ab'obusolya.
Ndowooza era nti Abanubbi abaaleetebwa Capt.Fredrick Lugard mu 1890, kati emyaka 119 egiyise, ate nga bawulize nnyo eri Ssaabasajja Kabaka, nga kino baakiragidde e Bombo ku Lwokusatu nga July 12, ku mukolo gw'okukuza olunaku lw'abavubuka mu nsi yonna, poliisi bwe yagaanye okukuba ekitiibwa kya Buganda, kyokka bo ne bakiyimba, basaanidde okutongozebwa ng'ekika. Eky'omukisa omulungi Ssekabaka Daudi Chwa ll yabawa eggombolola e Bombo mu saza ly'e Bulemeezi era mu lukiiko e Mengo baakkiikirirwanga Mustafa Ramadhan oluvannyuma eyafuuka Minisita ku Idi Amin.
Issa Koma, Bombo."
written by Muganda, August 24, 2009
written by Thank you Muganda, August 24, 2009
written by a guest, August 24, 2009
written by Voice of reseason, August 25, 2009
I have followed the discussion on the article "The facts, the figures and their implications" and my humble view is that, to redeem your image of A BALANCED, ANALYTICAL paper, consider doing a rejoinder where you don't just report implications of facts and figures BUT INTERPRETE them and may be with some qualitative data. A stance of RAW CRITICISM can be intellectually blunting. Andrew and your team I know you can do better.






