Is UHRC really a burden to the tax payer?
Oct 08, 2003
THE Cabinet proposal to scrap the Uganda Human Rights Commission (UHRC) has caused an uproar among a cross-section of Ugandans
By Joshua Kato
THE Cabinet proposal to scrap the Uganda Human Rights Commission (UHRC) has caused an uproar among a cross-section of Ugandans.
The Government cites the costs of running the commissions as one of the main reason for wanting to scrap the commission and has proposed that the work being done by the commission be passed over to the office of the Inspector General of Government (IGG).
The Uganda Human Rights Commission was set up at the recommendation of a probe set up in 1987, into human rights abuses ever since the country attained independence in 1961.
The UHRC has a total of seven commissioners and one secretary, who include Margaret Sekagya, the chairperson, Aliro Omara, Constantine Karusoke, Fauzat Wangadya, Adrian Sibo, John-Mary Waligo, Veronica Eragu and Aneri Wangolo, the secretary.
Each commissioner earns on average sh4.5m. The Government hopes to save at least sh500m a year on the commissioners’ salaries in addition to what will be saved from paying support staff and on vehicle maintenance.
Government, however, funds only 25% of the commission’s budget, while 75% is obtained from donors who include Danida, the European Union, SIDA, Irish Basket Fund, UNDP and the British government.
Those who are against the commission being scrapped argue that its value outweighs the cost of maintaining it.
“If the commission is scrapped we shall have moved 10 steps backwards as far as human rights monitoring is concerned,†says Dunstan Kiwanuka, a lawyer with the Platform for Labour Action.
One of the commissioners says the UHRC is a voice of the abused.
“The fact that we condemn atrocities committed by security forces is good for democracy,†he adds.
Most of the cases received by the UHRC are connected to former prisoners who were tortured in prisons. This is why the Uganda Prisoners Aid Foundations is also disappointed by the proposal.
“It appears a deliberate move to stifle people’s rights and freedoms,†says J.K Zirabamuzale, the chairperson of the foundation.
The donor community is equally disturbed by the proposal. “All countries have human rights watch- dogs. If Uganda wants to remove its own, it is very bad for democracy,†says an EU member.
Another commissioner fears there may be other reasons for wanting to do away with the UHRC.
“When a picture of a man whose back was full of torture marks and whose manhood was destroyed appeared in the papers, the Government was not happy.â€
He says they fear that the exposure of torture by security agents might be used as a tool against the Movement Government in the 2006 elections.
The high profile cases that the UHRC has handled include the execution of two soldiers in Karamoja last year, which the UHRC referred to as barbaric.
The UHCR has also condemned 17 of the 39 clauses in the Terrorism Act which have since been changed.
When Col. Kizza Besigye felt that his rights had been violated by the state, he ran to the UHRC. He left the country, however, before judgement could be taken.
The UHRC has consistently condemned the activities of rebels in the the country and has called for a speedy solution, through peaceful means.
Between January and September 2002, the UHRC received 669 complaints from all over the country. These included torture and inhuman treatment, property, the right to a fair hearing, child maintenance and domestic violence.
The commission passes judgement or dismisses these cases, if the evidence is insufficient.
From January 2001 to September 2002, the UHRC has ruled on 29 cases and awarded sh170m to successful petitioners as compensation.
Between 1998 and 2000, UHRC heard 10 cases and awarded sh29m to successful petitioners as compensation. The commission has also mediated in more than 105 cases. The Government’s proposal to pass the UHRC’s work on to the IGG’s office has met with opposition.
“What new powers is the IGG going to be given, when even the little power he had is being reduced?†asks Kiwanuka.
“The IGG should be left to deal with the task of fighting corruption in the country, which is big enough as it is, rather than to defend the rights of Ugandans.
THE Cabinet proposal to scrap the Uganda Human Rights Commission (UHRC) has caused an uproar among a cross-section of Ugandans.
The Government cites the costs of running the commissions as one of the main reason for wanting to scrap the commission and has proposed that the work being done by the commission be passed over to the office of the Inspector General of Government (IGG).
The Uganda Human Rights Commission was set up at the recommendation of a probe set up in 1987, into human rights abuses ever since the country attained independence in 1961.
The UHRC has a total of seven commissioners and one secretary, who include Margaret Sekagya, the chairperson, Aliro Omara, Constantine Karusoke, Fauzat Wangadya, Adrian Sibo, John-Mary Waligo, Veronica Eragu and Aneri Wangolo, the secretary.
Each commissioner earns on average sh4.5m. The Government hopes to save at least sh500m a year on the commissioners’ salaries in addition to what will be saved from paying support staff and on vehicle maintenance.
Government, however, funds only 25% of the commission’s budget, while 75% is obtained from donors who include Danida, the European Union, SIDA, Irish Basket Fund, UNDP and the British government.
Those who are against the commission being scrapped argue that its value outweighs the cost of maintaining it.
“If the commission is scrapped we shall have moved 10 steps backwards as far as human rights monitoring is concerned,†says Dunstan Kiwanuka, a lawyer with the Platform for Labour Action.
One of the commissioners says the UHRC is a voice of the abused.
“The fact that we condemn atrocities committed by security forces is good for democracy,†he adds.
Most of the cases received by the UHRC are connected to former prisoners who were tortured in prisons. This is why the Uganda Prisoners Aid Foundations is also disappointed by the proposal.
“It appears a deliberate move to stifle people’s rights and freedoms,†says J.K Zirabamuzale, the chairperson of the foundation.
The donor community is equally disturbed by the proposal. “All countries have human rights watch- dogs. If Uganda wants to remove its own, it is very bad for democracy,†says an EU member.
Another commissioner fears there may be other reasons for wanting to do away with the UHRC.
“When a picture of a man whose back was full of torture marks and whose manhood was destroyed appeared in the papers, the Government was not happy.â€
He says they fear that the exposure of torture by security agents might be used as a tool against the Movement Government in the 2006 elections.
The high profile cases that the UHRC has handled include the execution of two soldiers in Karamoja last year, which the UHRC referred to as barbaric.
The UHCR has also condemned 17 of the 39 clauses in the Terrorism Act which have since been changed.
When Col. Kizza Besigye felt that his rights had been violated by the state, he ran to the UHRC. He left the country, however, before judgement could be taken.
The UHRC has consistently condemned the activities of rebels in the the country and has called for a speedy solution, through peaceful means.
Between January and September 2002, the UHRC received 669 complaints from all over the country. These included torture and inhuman treatment, property, the right to a fair hearing, child maintenance and domestic violence.
The commission passes judgement or dismisses these cases, if the evidence is insufficient.
From January 2001 to September 2002, the UHRC has ruled on 29 cases and awarded sh170m to successful petitioners as compensation.
Between 1998 and 2000, UHRC heard 10 cases and awarded sh29m to successful petitioners as compensation. The commission has also mediated in more than 105 cases. The Government’s proposal to pass the UHRC’s work on to the IGG’s office has met with opposition.
“What new powers is the IGG going to be given, when even the little power he had is being reduced?†asks Kiwanuka.
“The IGG should be left to deal with the task of fighting corruption in the country, which is big enough as it is, rather than to defend the rights of Ugandans.