Why Iguru will sue Britain
Apr 13, 2004
THE king of the Bunyoro-Kitara Kingdom, Solomon Gafabusa Iguru, is set to sue Britain for what he calls the pillage, plunder and massive loss of lives and property in Bunyoro during British colonial rule. Some people have said the king is unrealistic and unserious in his intentions while others have
You say you are suing Britain. Can you tell us why?
Yes, we are suing Britain. Our case rests on facts. British forces violated the human rights of our population. Repairing the damages they inflicted on our people is long overdue. The British forces committed extra judicial killings, they destroyed our food, they starved the population, they denied pregnant women and children nutrition, they let loose undisciplined troops that spread syphilis among our people.
They denied the population access to means of producing food when they expelled families out of thousands of arable land, declaring them wild life reserves in 1913 thus institutionalising hunger.
As if they had not done enough harm to our people, British colonial elements made the population that formerly grew food crops for their families and raised livestock for animal protein into growers of a toxic and poisonous substance called tobacco. Today, my subjects are starving and malnourished growers of tobacco, a crop that poisons its growers, the people who handle it and all those who consume it. There have been criminal British beneficiaries since 1927 to the present day and all along the British Crown has been aware of this. My subjects deserve a better livelihood than being producers of poison. The British are liable according to International law.
How much evidence have you gathered to back up your allegations?
We have a lot of records which we discovered from the Public records Office in Surry, London. We also have some evidence from the Uganda Archives in Entebbe, the palace here which my father left, the hospital records, and the people .
The British are arguing that you don’t have a case since those atrocities were committed long ago when the United Nations Protocols you are basing on to sue were not in existence?
We are suing the British Crown under international customary law. These customary laws existed long before the Un Protocols. We are suing the British for criminal violations of human rights and such violations have been recognised by the international community since1714. So the existence or nonexistence of UN protocols at that time does not disqualify our case.
Why and how?
Because international law existed and there was international respect for it.
The British are saying this customary law wasn’t commonly agreed on. There was no such code as customary law until after World War Two.
(Getting angry): The law was there, but it wasn’t codified. Codifying simply means writing the law down. The law existed long before it was written down.
Is there any specific international law or laws that recognises it? There are conventions, which existed long before the UN protocols came into force. I would be able to cite for you specific ones if I looked into the law books. But even if you looked at the protocols, specifically Protocol 1 in article 3; it says the law will be applied in retrospect. This means it can be used to solve situations that existed long before in came into force.
What about the British’s argument that these alleged atrocities happened long ago and you are therefore not justified in suing now?
Crime is crime. What amount of time has gone by does not exonerate the British. What they did was criminal, and criminal acts have no time limit. They cannot hide behind the clock of time.
Where exactly are you going to file the case?
In the International Criminal Court, where the Uganda Government recently sued Joseph Kony, British courts, or in the Uganda courts.
Oh, you are not going to the International Court of Justice as earlier indicated?
I think that is government to government. We would have liked to go there if the Uganda Government would file the case on our behalf. Since they have not done that, as a leader of Banyoro, I can sue in the above courts. There are many open alternatives, which my lawyers are looking at.
So you haven’t yet decided?
The decision will depend on the legal advice I get at particular times.
What exactly do you want from Britain? Compensation, reparations, or restitution?
To repair the damages they caused. I want them to fight syphilis which their soldiers spread to the Banyoro, to stop poisoning of people by making them grow tobacco, to stop the malnutrition that resulted from their policies. I want them to repair so that my subjects can live a better life.
Will you accept an out-of-court settlement?
Yes. If the British genuinely agree to settle this out of court.
What would be your terms for such a settlement?
That they effectively repair the damages, which they left behind.
Britain’s Daily Telegraph newspaper reported after visiting you last month that your suit is likely to bankrupt Britain. What do you think about it?
That is a lie. Because the figures we asked are very clear. It is 3.7b pound sterling and not trillions. That reporter intended to ridicule us before the British public. We are not out to make Britain bankrupt. We are seeking justice.
Some people have said that instead of suing the British, you should seek close cooperation and convince them to fund development programmes in Bunyoro?
We did that before and they referred us to the Uganda Government. Which they said is responsible for developing our area. We have exhausted that avenue because the British were adamant. They don’t want to deal with us directly.
Is there consensus among your subjects on the case? Have you sought their opinion?
Most of my subjects are supporting the case, except a few people who don’t understand our history.
How are you going to raise the money to pay for the lawsuit?
(Hesitates): I’m mobilising funds from my subjects and our friends. You can also contribute and we get justice for our long-suffering people.
How has the Uganda Government reacted to your intended suit?
They have said nothing so far. The president was supportive when we showed him the evidence and he said there was a possible ground to indict the British. He handed this matter to the Attorney General who has not yet given me a feedback. But we do know that the Uganda Government is handling this matter at its own level.
Do you like Britain personally?
Why I have no problem with Britain. I studied in England. I have a lot of British friends. They always come here to visit me and I always entertain them. What I want is the repair of the damages the British Crown caused to our people.
What drives you in this case? What is motivating you to sue? Is it the money, concern for your people, or just seeking justice?
It is really concern for my people. The people who have been sunk to poverty, whom they spread syphilis to, people trapped in malnutrition, in tobacco growing. My people deserve better.
Do you think you will win the case?
I have not thought of losing the case. My lawyers are telling me the case is genuine and that I should go ahead. I have already identified lawyers in Uganda and abroad. About whether we shall win or not, that is for the judge to tell.
Ends
Yes, we are suing Britain. Our case rests on facts. British forces violated the human rights of our population. Repairing the damages they inflicted on our people is long overdue. The British forces committed extra judicial killings, they destroyed our food, they starved the population, they denied pregnant women and children nutrition, they let loose undisciplined troops that spread syphilis among our people.
They denied the population access to means of producing food when they expelled families out of thousands of arable land, declaring them wild life reserves in 1913 thus institutionalising hunger.
As if they had not done enough harm to our people, British colonial elements made the population that formerly grew food crops for their families and raised livestock for animal protein into growers of a toxic and poisonous substance called tobacco. Today, my subjects are starving and malnourished growers of tobacco, a crop that poisons its growers, the people who handle it and all those who consume it. There have been criminal British beneficiaries since 1927 to the present day and all along the British Crown has been aware of this. My subjects deserve a better livelihood than being producers of poison. The British are liable according to International law.
How much evidence have you gathered to back up your allegations?
We have a lot of records which we discovered from the Public records Office in Surry, London. We also have some evidence from the Uganda Archives in Entebbe, the palace here which my father left, the hospital records, and the people .
The British are arguing that you don’t have a case since those atrocities were committed long ago when the United Nations Protocols you are basing on to sue were not in existence?
We are suing the British Crown under international customary law. These customary laws existed long before the Un Protocols. We are suing the British for criminal violations of human rights and such violations have been recognised by the international community since1714. So the existence or nonexistence of UN protocols at that time does not disqualify our case.
Why and how?
Because international law existed and there was international respect for it.
The British are saying this customary law wasn’t commonly agreed on. There was no such code as customary law until after World War Two.
(Getting angry): The law was there, but it wasn’t codified. Codifying simply means writing the law down. The law existed long before it was written down.
Is there any specific international law or laws that recognises it? There are conventions, which existed long before the UN protocols came into force. I would be able to cite for you specific ones if I looked into the law books. But even if you looked at the protocols, specifically Protocol 1 in article 3; it says the law will be applied in retrospect. This means it can be used to solve situations that existed long before in came into force.
What about the British’s argument that these alleged atrocities happened long ago and you are therefore not justified in suing now?
Crime is crime. What amount of time has gone by does not exonerate the British. What they did was criminal, and criminal acts have no time limit. They cannot hide behind the clock of time.
Where exactly are you going to file the case?
In the International Criminal Court, where the Uganda Government recently sued Joseph Kony, British courts, or in the Uganda courts.
Oh, you are not going to the International Court of Justice as earlier indicated?
I think that is government to government. We would have liked to go there if the Uganda Government would file the case on our behalf. Since they have not done that, as a leader of Banyoro, I can sue in the above courts. There are many open alternatives, which my lawyers are looking at.
So you haven’t yet decided?
The decision will depend on the legal advice I get at particular times.
What exactly do you want from Britain? Compensation, reparations, or restitution?
To repair the damages they caused. I want them to fight syphilis which their soldiers spread to the Banyoro, to stop poisoning of people by making them grow tobacco, to stop the malnutrition that resulted from their policies. I want them to repair so that my subjects can live a better life.
Will you accept an out-of-court settlement?
Yes. If the British genuinely agree to settle this out of court.
What would be your terms for such a settlement?
That they effectively repair the damages, which they left behind.
Britain’s Daily Telegraph newspaper reported after visiting you last month that your suit is likely to bankrupt Britain. What do you think about it?
That is a lie. Because the figures we asked are very clear. It is 3.7b pound sterling and not trillions. That reporter intended to ridicule us before the British public. We are not out to make Britain bankrupt. We are seeking justice.
Some people have said that instead of suing the British, you should seek close cooperation and convince them to fund development programmes in Bunyoro?
We did that before and they referred us to the Uganda Government. Which they said is responsible for developing our area. We have exhausted that avenue because the British were adamant. They don’t want to deal with us directly.
Is there consensus among your subjects on the case? Have you sought their opinion?
Most of my subjects are supporting the case, except a few people who don’t understand our history.
How are you going to raise the money to pay for the lawsuit?
(Hesitates): I’m mobilising funds from my subjects and our friends. You can also contribute and we get justice for our long-suffering people.
How has the Uganda Government reacted to your intended suit?
They have said nothing so far. The president was supportive when we showed him the evidence and he said there was a possible ground to indict the British. He handed this matter to the Attorney General who has not yet given me a feedback. But we do know that the Uganda Government is handling this matter at its own level.
Do you like Britain personally?
Why I have no problem with Britain. I studied in England. I have a lot of British friends. They always come here to visit me and I always entertain them. What I want is the repair of the damages the British Crown caused to our people.
What drives you in this case? What is motivating you to sue? Is it the money, concern for your people, or just seeking justice?
It is really concern for my people. The people who have been sunk to poverty, whom they spread syphilis to, people trapped in malnutrition, in tobacco growing. My people deserve better.
Do you think you will win the case?
I have not thought of losing the case. My lawyers are telling me the case is genuine and that I should go ahead. I have already identified lawyers in Uganda and abroad. About whether we shall win or not, that is for the judge to tell.
Ends