Part II: Kiyingi-How Museveni violated the Constitution and compromised the 2016 election
by Joseph Earnest May 11, 2015
Newscast Media HOUSTON, Texas—In one of his surviving speeches that is the most popular and most cited in the legal profession, Cicero launched a case in the year 63 BC called In Catilinam (Against Catiline) against one of Rome's most repugnant figures called Lucius Sergius Catilina.
Catiline had broken Roman law, and for a while put Rome under siege. However, the most powerful and brilliant mind of classical antiquity, Marcus Tullius Cicero, would not let Catiline and his men deprive Romans of their freedom and liberties.
The speech is very powerful—it cannot be digested in one sitting. As the Senate convenes, Cicero opens his speech addressing Catiline before the Senate as follows:
"How far, I ask you Catiline, do you mean to stretch our patience? How much longer will your frenzy continue to frustrate us? At what point will your unrestrained recklessness stop flaunting itself? Have the nightly guards on the Palatine, have the patrols in the streets, have the fears of the people, have the gatherings of all loyal citizens, have the faces and expressions of the senators here had no effect on you at all?
"Your country, Catiline, addresses you, and, though silent, somehow speaks to you in these terms: 'For years now, no crime has been committed that has not been committed by you...You have managed to not merely ignore the laws and the courts, but to overrun and shatter them.'
"What poisoner, anywhere in Italy, what gladiator, what brigand, what cut-throat, what assassin, what forger of wills, what swindler, what glutton, what spendthrift, what adulterer, what loose woman, what corrupter of the youth, what corrupt man himself, what degraded individual can be found, who does not admit to having lived on closest terms with Catiline?
"For my part, I am certain that these men are going to meet their doom, that punishment long due for their treachery, wickedness, criminality and self-indulgence is either imminent, or at the very least on its way...My consulship cannot cure these men, but if it removes them, it will have extended the life of our state not for some short period, but for centuries to come...The internal war is all that remains: the plots are within, the danger is within, the enemy is within! Our struggle is against decadence, against madness, against crime." (Cicero Oration, Against Catiline, paragraphs 1-11, 63BC).
The speech was given in four parts, but after the first part of the speech, Catiline and all his men fled Rome into exile knowing they would not be able to survive the Roman mob.
The cornerstones that regulate the conduct of any society are laws and statutes, whether religious(divine) or secular(civil). If the laws aren't enforced in any society, it will eventually collapse, left to its own devices.
In his radio interview with Voice of Uganda Radio, Kiyingi said he had evidence that shows Museveni violated the Constitution, which means he believes Museveni has rendered himself unfit for command.
"He failed to govern Uganda, based on principles of national interest and common good enshrined in the national objective and directive principles of state policy, and here he broke Article 8 section (a) of the Uganda Constitution. Therefore, we have a mandate, we have a legal basis, even under the Constitution Museveni made himself, to effect a change in Uganda," Kiyingi said.
He then cites the following areas that he asserts Museveni has violated: Article 22 (Denying citizens protection of right to life), Article 23 section 2 (Protecting the personal liberty of the citizens), Article 24 (Protecting the citizens from inhumane treatment, who were trying to express their opinions about the sorry state of the nation using peaceful demonstrations), Article 29 (Denying the citizens the freedom of assembly and association, restriction of meetings, stopping peaceful "Walk to Work" demonstrations), Article 99 section 2 (Executing the Constitution and all laws made under it), Article 99 section 3 (Promoting the welfare of the citizens, and protecting the territorial integrity of Uganda), Article 237 (Protecting the environment for the common good of Ugandans, i.e. Mabira Forest and Sese Islands), Article 107 section (b)(2) (Invasion of the DRC, Congo, with consequent ruling against Uganda in the International Court (of Justice) for Uganda to compensate the DRC in billions of dollars).
Article 107. Removal of President.
(1) The President may be removed from office in accordance with this article on any of the following grounds -
(b) misconduct or misbehavior-
(i) that he or she has conducted himself or herself in a manner which brings or is likely to bring the office of President into hatred, ridicule, contempt or disrepute.
Article 107 section (b)(2) states: The President may be removed from office in accordance with this article on any of the following grounds - (b) misconduct or misbehavior-
(ii) that he or she has dishonestly done any act or omission which is prejudicial or inimical to the economy or security of Uganda.
The ruling by the International Court of Justice against Uganda that Kiyingi is talking about is an order issued on December 19, 2005 in Democratic Republic of Congo v. Uganda. The ruling in part reads:
"The Court concludes that Uganda has violated the sovereignty and also the territorial integrity of the DRC. Uganda’s actions equally constituted an interference in the internal affairs of the DRC and in the civil war raging there. The unlawful military intervention by Uganda was of such magnitude and duration that the Court considers it to be a grave violation of the prohibition on the use of force expressed in Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Charter.
"Having examined the case file, the Court considers that it has credible evidence sufficient to conclude that the Ugandan armed forces, in the course of their military intervention, committed acts of killing, torture and other forms of inhumane treatment of the civilian population, destroyed villages and civilian buildings, failed to distinguish between civilian and military targets and to protect the civilian population in fighting with other combatants, incited ethnic conflict and took no steps to put an end to such conflicts, was involved in the training of child soldiers, and failed to take measures to ensure the respect for human rights and international humanitarian law in Ituri.
"Thus, the Court concludes that Uganda is internationally responsible for acts of looting, plundering and exploitation of the DRC’s natural resources committed by members of the UPDF in the territory of the DRC, for violating its obligation of vigilance in regard to these acts and for failing to comply with its obligations under Article 43 of the Hague Regulations of 1907 as an occupying Power in Ituri in respect of all acts of looting, plundering and exploitation of natural resources in the occupied territory." (pop-up) Full Judgment in PDF.
The London Guardian reported, after the judgment, Kinshasa welcomed the ruling and and said it would seek $6-$10bn (£3.4-£5.6bn) in compensation, an estimate the court said would be appropriate.
The findings by the ICJ would also mean, Uganda under Museveni's watch, violated the International Criminal Court's (ICC) Rome Statute of which Uganda is a signatory.
Article 7(e), Article 7 (h) and Article 7(k) - Crimes against humanity and Rome Statute Article 5(d): Crime of Aggression Rome Statute Article 7(e): For the purpose of this Statute, “Crimes against humanity” means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law.
The empowering provisions of the Ugandan Constitution Dr. Kiyingi is most likely referring to are: Article 3 sections (4) to (5), Defence of the Constitution—
(4) All citizens of Uganda shall have the right and duty at all times-
(a) to defend this Constitution, and in particular, to resist any person or
group of persons seeking to overthrow the established constitutional order; and
(b) to do all in their power to restore this Constitution after it has been suspended, overthrown, abrogated or amended contrary to its provisions.
(5) Any person or group of persons who, as required by clause (4) of this article, resists the suspension, overthrow, abrogation or amendment of this Constitution commits no offence.
Accordingly, if it is true that Kiyingi possesses ample evidence, that Museveni has violated or abrogated the Constitution, then the very Constitution says he (Kiyingi) "commits no offense" and compels him to "resist any person" who violates the Constitution, and to "do all in his power" to restore it.
There is a possibility that once Museveni reflects on his actions, he may decide not to run again for president in 2016, but instead retire in the sunset.
Would the West continue a relationship with the person who replaces Museveni? One only need look at Idi Amin after he came to power. Even though the U.S. government made it clear to the Government of Uganda (GoU) that it did not have a normal relationship with Idi Amin, the U.S. was on board and worked with Idi Amin anyway.
A March 13, 1971 declassified document from the State Department to the American Embassy in Kampala states in part:
"Since the January 25, military coup in Uganda, we have gradually expanded our working relationship with the new government of General Idi Amin Dada but have made it clear we do not regard our relations fully normalized..." (pop-up) PDF.
In yet another telegram the US government (USG) writes: "...We agree with the Embassy that we should make clear to the new Ugandan Government that USG welcomes its gestures of friendship and looks forward to carrying on diplomatic relations in fullest sense at earliest appropriate moment." (pop-up) PDF.
Likewise, if the international community was willing to work with Amin, they have no reason to discontinue the programs they have in Uganda under a Kiyingi presidency.
In regard to electoral reforms for the 2016 general election, many have asked Kiyingi why he would even run since the NRM machine controls the voting and tallying of the votes. Kiyingi said he predicted almost two years ago that the 2016 election had been compromised in favor or Museveni.
"We have evidence that Museveni has already rigged the 2016 election," Kiyingi told his radio audience.
Previous allegations continue to dog Museveni, like the essay written by Jewish author and investigative journalist Helen Epstein, called The General Challenges The Dictator, that was published in the April 24, 2014 issue of the New York Review of Books.
Epstein alleges that to finance the election-rigging in the previous cycle, Museveni’s agents had removed some $350 million from the Ugandan treasury. The Central Bank printed more money to pay civil service salaries and other expenses, but inflation soared, along with fuel and food prices, and hundreds of angry people turned out for Kizza Besigye’s marches. Despite the crackdown, demands for an end to the Museveni regime grew louder. “Are you stupid [to continue voting for the same leader that cannot pave your road]?” one of the formerly jailed. MPs asked a cheering crowd of constituents shortly after his release. (pop-up)
Kiyingi, who is Museveni's most formidable opponent, broke down how Museveni has already rigged the 2016 election as follows:
Based on Kiyingi's numbers, 2 million immigrants have been imported into Uganda by Museveni in the past last three years. Jewish media outlet Haaretz identifies where some of them are coming from, and also reveals that there is a secret agreement that Museveni signed to re-route refugees intended for Israel into Uganda. (pop-up)
In all, Kiyingi claims 3.5 million non-Ugandans have been issued ID cards. He then looks at the recent census and asserts that the correct number of legitimate Ugandan citizens is actually 29.5 million, but during the census, the numbers were massaged to reflect a total of 33 million Ugandans. This, Kiyingi says, gives Museveni an additional 3.5 million votes, totaling 7 million bogus votes. Therefore, with a head start of half the voting population, a person with 7 million has already won even before the election has begun.
The new chairperson of the electoral commission of the ruling NRM and Makerere University lecturer Tanga Odoi, confidently announced that Museveni will win in 2016. If a winner is already announced by the chairperson of the electoral commission, almost a year before elections take place, what hope does the voter have?
"Any person who is eligible should come and stand but will have an uphill task," Odoi said. "President Museveni will win the next election," he revealed in an interview with the Weekly Observer. (pop-up)
If Museveni has already won the election, why would Kiyingi even bother attempting to run yet it appears to be a done deal? Kiyingi answers the question posed by a caller from Acholi on Voice of Uganda Radio by saying Museveni still has a chance to implement electoral reforms, so he (Kiyingi) will not despair. He however warned that if the reforms are ignored, then the Constitution will prevail.
In the interview, just like he told Yahoo News, "[President Museveni] knows very well if there is a free and fair election in Uganda, I'd beat him hands down," Kiyingi says Museveni has put a target on his back and sent out over 100 assassins to kill Kiyingi and prevent him from going back to Uganda to run for president.
If Kiyingi weren't a threat, why go through all the trouble of silencing him by any means necessary? Continue to Part III to find out more about the 118 Kiyingi assassins>>
Part II: Kiyingi-How Museveni compromised 2016 election
Join the Newscast Media social networks
for current events and multimedia content.