DRC plunder, ICC pullout dominate second presidential debate

The audience and the candidates sing the national and East African anthems at the presidential debate at the Kampala Serena Hotel.

What you need to know:

Contention. Museveni, Mbabazi and Besigye weighed in on the incident which resulted in Uganda being slapped with a $10 billion bill as reparation to the DRC for plundering its natural resources

KAMPALA.

The merits and demerits about Uganda’s invasion of Congo almost 18 years ago, took centre stage as the eight presidential candidates debated in the second and last debate ahead of the February 18 presidential polls.

The debate was organised by the Elders Forum, the Inter-religious Council of Uganda and sponsored by UNDP.
The Head of the Department of Political Science and Public Administration at Makerere University, Dr Suzie Muwanga, Voice of America (VoA) editor and host of the flagship Straight Talk Africa programme Shaka Ssali and Dr Joel Serunkuma Kibazo, a consultant, questioned the candidates on foreign policy, peace and security both within Uganda and the region, regional integration, international trade and investment.

The three leading presidential candidates Yoweri Museveni (National Resistance Movement), Amama Mbabazi (Independent) and Dr Kizza Besigye (Forum for Democratic Change), who were serving in the same government at the inception of the conflict, weighed in on the incident, which resulted in Uganda being slapped with a $10 billion bill as reparation to the Democratic Republic of Congo for plundering DRC’s natural resources as well as human rights violations.

Dr Besigye was the first to open the can of worms about the matter, when in response to a question about Uganda’s invasions of other countries, said the country had been dragged to the war without political consensus.

“It was not entirely to sort out the problems that were affecting us or beneficial to the situation in Uganda. As you may know, indeed we have a judgment on our heads in the International Court of Justice to pay something up to $10b. Deploying must be to support the political process; insecurity in these areas is a matter of mismanagement of politics, you can only go to support a political process which is positive. We have not been prudent in the deployment our troops,” he said.

The incumbent then interjected, dismissing Dr Besigye’s allegations as false. “We intervened in Congo to defend ourselves. Congo had been habouring enemies of Uganda for a very long time under Mobutu. We couldn’t accept that. We defeated ADF. Rwenzori is peaceful and Dr Besigye can go there and campaign the way he wants,” Mr Museveni said.

In response, Dr Besigye emphasised that whatever national interests exist, the laws of the country must be respected. “It doesn’t matter how offended you are about people acting against the interests of Uganda, the requirement is that you must seek approval of certain organs. At the time this happened, I was a member of all the organs of government where such a decisions ought to have been taken. Nobody discussed this anywhere. However, well intentioned, especially if it ends up lumping Ugandans of more than $10b on an already highly indebted country, this quite obviously is not excusable.

Mr Museveni also made a veiled accusation against government officials who defended Uganda at The Hague for failing to win the case. But Mr Mbabazi, who was part of the team, could not take it lying down.

“Fortunately, there is an authority on this issue and he is here on this panel and that is the one speaking. You may not know this but I did represent Uganda and I want to inform you that the decision of the International Court of Justice was not based on the legality of the presence of Ugandan troops in Congo. It was based on the evidence presented by Congo on plunder by the Ugandan troops,” Mr Mbabazi said.

There was consensus about Uganda’s withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC) from the two candidates asked to comment on the matter.

“Uganda should have pulled out of ICC yesterday. The Western world has used ICC as a tool against the African continent; we don’t see fairness in the ICC. We should build our justice system within the African continent. By this time, the ICC should have brought on board leaders from the Western world whom we don’t see. I believe we should have moved out of the ICC yesterday,” said Dr Abed Bwanika of the People’s Development Party.

A proponent-turned critic of ICC, President Museveni suggested the establishment of an African Criminal Court to deal with cases from Africa.

“We are against impunity and that is why we supported the ICC but it is not serious. There are so many people who could be tried if they were serious. The way to go is to have our own African Criminal Court, so that we deal with impunity but on our own terms,” he said.