Netters,
It is rather unfortunate that once again, the enemies of federalism seem to have managed to mislead the gullible into believing that federo is about changing the ethnic composition of any region. The truth of the matter is that federo and ethnicity have nothing to do with each other: neither needs the other to exist and prosper.
But then again, other than maybe sex, what can outsell fear? Apartheid managed to exist for many decades because its purveyors and those who benefited from it �sold� it to the masses, couched in terms of fear (of what would happen if Africans got access to democracy) � in spite of the fact that all who practiced apartheid for whatever reason, jolly well knew that it was wrong and reprehensible morally, and otherwise.
In Uganda, detractors of federo hide behind ethnicity and conjure up all kinds horrible fantasies that would somehow befall the land if federo were practiced. Fortunately, the tide turned against them quite sometime ago, as evidenced by the fact that the overwhelming majority of the people of Buganda (the most cosmopolitan of Uganda�s regions) want federo. It is up to us, federalists, to encourage them to explain the advantages of federo to their kinsmen.
When federo comes to be in Uganda, not only the Baganda will benefit. Everyone will benefit, both within and without Buganda. What will change is not the ethnic makeup of any region, but rather the pathways of money flow and hence (decision-making) power.
However, we need to be honest and let everyone know that federo is not freebie: it comes with certain responsibilities. Just like coming of age and leaving one�s parents and setting out on one�s own, it does not mean one abandons or is abandoned by the parents. Far from it. One is still a child in the eyes of one�s parents, albeit an adult one. It is the dynamics of the parent-child relationship, which change. So it is with federo, to a surprising extent.
Those who presently cling to power, their hangers-on and sycophants, may be among the losers when federo comes to pass. An idea whose time has come is usually hard to resist.
We, federalists of whatever political persuations and ethnicity, ought be relentless, persistent, and consistent in 'preaching the federo gospel', until the Federal Republic of Uganda becomes a reality -- however long it takes for the rest of Uganda to mature to this undeniable truth! The alternative is too frightening to evenn ponder.
----Original Message Follows----
From: Beti Kamya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [FedsNet] It is NPC Dr. Kiyonga's job to explain Federo!
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 06:25:12 +0000 (GMT)
Actually, they do not need to be Baganda, but are
deemed to be. Is not interesting that the Odoki
Commission reported 97 % of all views in Buganda as
favouring federo, yet baganda perhaps make up a
smaller fraction of people who live in Buganda?
beti
--- joernest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Are you
really sure that these three that you have
> referred to are Baganda? Some of these are
> descendants of Banyarwanda and Bahaya.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: M. Kibuka
> To: FedsNet (E-mail)
> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 8:50 AM
> Subject: [FedsNet] It is NPC Dr. Kiyonga's job to
> explain Federo!
>
>
> Explain federo to Uganda
>
>
>
> By Beti O. Kamya
>
> On Monday February 27, it was reported in
> the New Vision that National Political Commissar
> Crispus Kiyonga had advised Baganda to teach the
> rest of Uganda the benefits of federo.
>
> I don't know whether NPCs receive a job
> description when they assume office but I would
> expect the teaching of different political systems
> would be his job. Oh, I know he is supposed to show
> that the Movement "system" is the best of them all,
> but he should appear to provide all the information.
>
>
> Clearly, the Baganda's interest would be to
> bring out the good in federo and, as much as
> possible, cover up or, at best, defend the
> negatives, if any. Someone needs to go over NPC's
> role with him once again.
>
> But the Baganda must bear in mind that it
> has always been a Muganda to shoot down federo -
> remember Binaisa with his "pigeon hole constitution"
> that abolished federo? Remember "Chief Prince"
> Besweeri Mulondo and his "snake in a pot" fear?
> Think of Bidandi Ssali and his misgivings on federo?
>
>
> Most likely, a Muganda will be used to
> hammer the nails in federo's coffin even this time,
> so if Buganda is to take NPC Kiyonga's advice
> seriously and wisely, they need to work on fellow
> Baganda, such as Prof Gilbert Bukenya and one-time
> federo champion fellow Prof Apollo Nsibambi.
>
> Mengo did an excellent job on federo. It is
> a pity that it was overshadowed by the "Kampala in
> Buganda" debate. But still, well-intentioned
> democrats who are not sure about federo should ask
> what the system's disadvantages are and what harm it
> would inflict on other Ugandan communities who opt
> not to have it in their areas. So far, what comes
> through are the advantages, yet many people still
> have misgivings. Can someone who really believes
> federo is not good for Uganda come out clearly and
> give us her / his reasons or, better still, can NPC
> Kiyonga tell us about the negatives, because so far,
> all we hear clearly are the positives. If this does
> not come through clearly, it will continue to sound
> as if people who do not wish Buganda well won't let
> her have it, for no good reason.
>
> Just so that I do not leave this page
> without educating those that might have not yet read
> Katikkiro Ssemwogere's document, one of the main
> advantages of a Federal system of governance is that
> its autonomy allows it to handle local issues fully,
> authoritatively and expeditiously, without involving
> everybody else who may have little interest in the
> matter. A common example quoted these days are
> frequent earthquakes in Tooro and cattle rustling on
> Karamoja. Both are very serious matters to the
> respective communities but are not really national
> issues.
>
> A federal arrangement would allow each
> community to give emphasis to these catastrophies,
> including making of by-laws that would apply only in
> the relevant respects and in those regions. If, in
> the case of insecurity in Northern Uganda, we were
> under a federal arrangement, the federal government
> of Northern Uganda would have declared it a
> "Disaster area", and sought international and
> national support without having to beg the central
> government of Uganda.
>
> The writer is the Spokesperson, Reform
> Agenda
>
> Published on: Sunday, 9th February, 2003
>
