Rwenzori attacks: Security forces still grappling with the catastrophe

On Saturday July 5, a group of what was then described as unknown people made 13 coordinated attacks in the Rwenzori region districts of Bundibugyo, Kasese and Ntoroko.

They were armed with machetes, spears, knives and bows and arrows.
Although government initially described the attacks as tribal clashes between the Bakonzo and Bamba communities, the profile of the attacks could not be characterised as tribal: The attackers, thought to be Bakonzo, did not kill any member of the Bamba community.

Save for one incident in which 11 members of the Basongora community in Bigando, Kasese District, all the attacks were made on police and military personnel.
The attackers have been identified (by confession) as members of the Bakonzo community. And although they attacked military and police personnel in a manner that reflects national rebellion, their motivation seems to be tribal sentiments.

With a history of conflict and violence that dates back to the early days of colonial administration, any act of violence in the Rwenzori region, small or otherwise, tends to trigger off fears of opening old wounds and national rebellion.

Whereas the attackers were subdued by the superior Uganda Peoples Defence Forces, there is still a greater need for understanding the history and dynamics of conflict and violence in the region.

After the Rwenzori attacks of July 5, the State pointed an accusing finger at Omusinga (King) Charles Wesley Mumbere of the Bakonzo community’s Rwenzururu Kingdom.

And when he learnt that he was about to be arrested, he went on the offensive. He dared the State to carry out the arrest.

Some people have said there was no such plan to arrest the king, but the story we have (on solid authority) is that such an order (to arrest Mumbere) was indeed issued. The executors of the order were only planning to manage the expected fallout when the order was cancelled.

It is said a retired UPDF general advised President Museveni against the arrest of King Mumbere. The general is said to have reasoned that the Rwenzori region is so fragile in terms of national security that “we can’t afford a situation where a whole community has a grudge to settle against the government”.

Good reasoning by the general. Indeed, all armed rebellions in the Rwenzori region have revolved around Omusinga Mumbere and his father: people have died fighting for him, in his name, his idea of a Bakonzo kingdom (Rwenzururu Kingdom) or merely taking advantage of his name (like the rebel group NALU and ADF).

However, with the retired military general’s counsel, State agencies involved in the matter of the July 5 attacks seem to have been thrown off balance.

The middle ground (for the hawks) was to try the suspected attackers in the military General Court Martial. Trouble with the trial of civilians in a military court is that it is open to challenge.

Indeed, people associated with the attacks are under trial in the General Court Martial. But most of the people on trial are not the people involved in the attacks. These are said to be the people arrested in the cordon and search swoops that were carried out by security agencies in the aftermath of the attacks.

However, the irony is that the real attackers who confessed and later surrendered have been granted amnesty from criminal responsibility. Even the cases in the General Court Martial also don’t seem to be moving forward very well.

As time goes on and the July 5 incident recedes in collective memory, the prosecution is likely to withdraw the charges or the defence lawyers manage to wriggle their clients out of the military court.

Most of the people who were involved in the Bundibugyo and Ntoroko attacks are said to have been killed by the UPDF. But the killers at the weighbridge in Kasese Municipality and Bigando in Kitswamba Sub-county in Kasese District seem to be easier to bring to book.

Testimonies by prosecution witnesses talk of definite identities of the people involved in the Bigando murders. The truth, however, is that no one has bothered to investigate these seemingly solvable cases of murder in Kasese.

The Inspector General of Police has responded to the situation by recruiting armed crime preventers in the region. He has also ‘adopted’ those who surrendered as crime preventers.

Without looking at this as some kind of employment, the security, military and civil policing in the Rwenzori region should rather remain in the hands of the central government until some aspects of tribal frictions are ironed out or reduced.

The State’s response to the attacks must, therefore, address the restoration of peace, security and confidence of communities in State agencies.

LESSONS

The July 5 attacks should be reviewed in a manner that seeks to understand the cause, not what it was. It would therefore offer us an opportunity to address the unending security challenges of the region.

King Mumbere called for a commission of inquiry into the incident. But the experience of Ugandans with commissions of inquiry is not encouraging.

What is needed is not a commission of inquiry, but a change of attitude by the military, security and policing actors in the region. With a changed attitude, information in the possession of security services is enough to guide the political leadership on how to act.

But the security services have decided to hide behind the explanation of tribal conflicts between the Basongora and Bakonzo in Kasese, the Bakonzo and Bamba in Bundibugyo and what is assumed (by the State) as King Mumbere’s imperial attitude in the region. Even the Banyabindi, with no record of conflict with Bakonzo, now claim victimisation under the hands of Bakonzo.

State agencies are just playing along; even assuming and blaming the atrocities of the former Rwenzururu Kingdom rebel army on the entire Bakonzo community.
In the circumstances, no one is interested in the number of Bakonzo killed by the Rwenzururu Kingdom armed men; only deaths of the other communities in the region count.

And as would be expected, the tribal leaders of this or that particular community are taking advantage of the government’s seeming failure to understand the situation on the ground.

The State has propped up one community over the other; vilified and portrayed one community as a danger to the other. They have portrayed one community victims and the other villains. Words like genocide have been thrown around.
This scenario is likely to expose the communities to outside negative forces.

[email protected]