{UAH} Col. Pecos Kutesa had moved a motion for the inclusion of the Bahima as a distinct ethic community?

Karerega,
Uganda was created in Berlin in 1884 and recreated several times by the colonialist.During the CA debates a list of indigenous tribes were annexed to the third schedule of constitution as indigenous tribes of Uganda as at February 1, 1926. Three questions about this schedule (premised on article 10 (a). First why the date Feb.1, 1926? Anything peculiar or significant about that date? Please Mulindwa Edward should mark this date in his diary as we continue with this debate on UAH.

Secondly, Col. Pecos Kutesa had moved a motion for the inclusion of the Bahima as a distinct ethic community. What happened to that motion?

Thirdly, an ethnic group call Barundi were included as no 28. Which group was this? Are they from present day Burundi?

We also have "Banyarwanda" a word which in ordinary Bantu languages mean citizens of Rwanda (the tribes are Hutu, Tutsi and Twa). Also interesting in the indigenous communities in Uganda has kept rising, from 15 in 1962 constitution, to about 20 in 1967 constitution, to 56 in 1995 Constitution to 65 in 2005 constitutional amendment. Some people have argued that these numbers change to accommodate more voters who would have otherwise be non citizens.

The provisions in the constitution on indigenous communities are about citizenship and not who contributed to which struggle. Unfortunately one of the ways of determining a Uganda citizen is looking at his/her (1) tribe (2) whether that tribe was an indigenous tribe living in Uganda by 1st Feb 1926 (a day when the present map of Uganda was gazzetted) and (3) whether his ancestors were living within that territory. Therefore you can belong to the named tribes without necessarily being a Ugandan. This has nothing to contribution to struggles of whatsoever nature. that is why Rwijema died a Rwandese despite his stay in Uganda and contribution.

There are broader issues of boundaries and creation of many African states which we all accept. But the term Citizenship has a defined meaning which limits it only within the boundaries of a given territory, in this case a territory called Uganda whose boundaries were determine on 1st Feb 1926 (never mind who determined it). Anyone within that territory on that day became a Uganda. Unless the boundaries change we cannot call Baganda living in Kagera, or Alur in DRC or Karimojong in Kenya Ugandans. No, that is outside the definition.

 It would be totally wrong for ANYONE to assume Kagame is a Ugandan because he is Rwandese that will be Uganda colonising a territory of a country called Rwanda. So Banyarwanda can never be Rwandese despite the fact that a colonial error divided the tribes. If in 1995 Ugandans chose to define citizens by parametres of 1926, we should go by the same parametres.

Besides in 1995 the word Banyarwanda or Barundi never had a different meaning from Rwandan or Burundi citizens and they still are. If we want we should have used Hutu and Tutsi which are tribe names (and not countries). You may also need to know that there is citizenship by registration etc. If we really should acknowledge those who fought in NRM wars as Ugandans we should have registered them as citizens under the same constitution.

That brings me also to question why its sectarian to call Banyarwanda by their tribe but not when pres Museveni refers by tribe to the indiscipline Bamasaba whom he has kept on chasing.

H.O

--
H.OGWAPITI
-----------------------------------------------------
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that  we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic  and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
---Theodore Roosevelt