Ugandans should arise, save the national museum
The Opinion of The Sunday Vision December 20, 2009 entitled “Come to the aid of Uganda Museum†was essentially about the closure of the museum by Kampala City Council lawyers.
By Dr. Ephraim Kamuhangire
The Opinion of The Sunday Vision December 20, 2009 entitled “Come to the aid of Uganda Museum†was essentially about the closure of the museum by Kampala City Council lawyers.
Failure to pay outstanding property rate arrears amounting to sh9m was the reason for the closure.
To me this was a simple matter because the incident happened on Wednesday, December 16, 2009 and it lasted one day. On Friday, December 18, 2009 the museum was open and business was back to normal.
As this story unfolds, however, there is a worse threat to the survival of the Uganda Museum than its temporary closure which requires immediate rescue from the powers that be. Ugandans will soon witness bulldozers excavating the grounds of the Uganda Museum and a 60-storeyed skyscrapper will replace it and will be called the Tourism House.
I do not know whether the destruction of the only remaining national cultural heritage institution is intentional, but it will be a tragedy.
The Sunday Vision opinion writer did not investigate the matter to find out the circumstances which had led the museum to accumulate sh9m.
Kampala City Council lawyers were told time and time again that the Uganda Museum is a Government property which does not pay ground rent, but they could not take heed. They are charging the Uganda Museum Board of Trustees which lost its authority of supervising the museum by Decree No.12 of 1977.
As such , arguments like the management of the Uganda Museum lacks the capacity to run our national treasure, that the museum is in a derelict state and the museum’s displays are outdated in the opinion were not well-researched.
The opinion should have based the call to rescue the museum from the abyss on the realisation that Uganda has a rich cultural heritage which, if marketed and developed would make the museum popular.
Since the museum would be popular, the management would not have problems meeting their financial obligations.
The opinion should further have tried to find out why the service of the Museums and Monuments Department is neglected by the tourism ministry, in particular, and the Government, in general, to the extent we have only one national museum and no operating national monument.
Monuments like Fort Lugard were lost to the Uganda Muslim Supreme Council and the Mengo government without a protracted protest by the central government.
Other gazetted sites and monuments are in shambles. Very good and strategic sites were earmarked for the relocation of the Soroti and Kabale regional museums in the respective municipalities.
Both sites were surveyed and the land title for the Kabale site is in the Uganda Land Commission, while the processing of that for the Soroti Museum stopped at the Mbale Regional Lands and Surveys office.
My fears are that with the growing urbanisation pressures in the two municipalities, the offer may run out of time and this may lead to their cancellation and reallocation to other needy applicants.
The lack of seriousness on the part of the Government is also true of our national cultural heritage treasures of Bigo bya Mugyenyi and Ntusi, whose land titles are lying unclaimed in the Uganda Land Commission.
Uganda boasts of unique rock painting sites at Nyero, in Kumi district and Lolui (Dolwe) islands in Lake Victoria. Over 1,000 sites were identified throughout the country and a data bank was established about them.
An attempt had been made to transform the function of the Museums and Monuments Department into a semi-autonomous Museums and Monuments Agency using part of a World Bank funding to the tourism ministry.
The funding for this component amounted to about $1m (sh22b). The requirements for the change of status of the department were met and the Ministry of Public Service (June 2001) and Cabinet (November 2003) sanctioned the creation of the Uganda Museums and Monuments Agency.
However, in November 2005, the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development, in its judgement, saw no justification for creating the agency and that chapter was closed without an appeal by the tourism ministry, in spite of the effort, time and World Bank funds which were extended to the project.
If the World Bank saw it justifiable to fund an activity for almost 10 years, on what basis did the finance ministry have to halt it?
For 10 years the financial needs of the Department of Museums and Monuments such as salaries and allowances for staff were catered for under the Department of Tourism.
This subordination of the department within the ministry was witnessed during the preparations for CHOGM. The commissioner for tourism was responsible for the establishment of the cultural village in the Uganda Museum grounds instead of the Ag. Commissioner for Museums and Monuments who would have handled the activity more professionally.
Two years after CHOGM, the Cultural Village is a “ghost site†which, if not attended to, the grassthatched huts will soon disintegrate and the sh1b and the purpose for which they were put up will be lost.
If the story that the tourism ministry is planning to construct a 60-storied Tourism House is true, at the expense of the national interest of preserving, promoting, presenting and developing its cultural heritage, then this is where every Ugandan should rise up and come to the aid of the Uganda Museum. We should arise and protest the destruction of the museum.
We should arise and request the Government to appreciate the importance of our cultural heritage and promote it rather than sweep it under the carpet.
It is a fact that cultural tourism can be more sustainable than natural tourism. Natural and political calamities affect nature-based tourism. The ADF in the Rwenzori Mountains, for example, halted tourism activities there for a long time while the Uganda Museum, of all the valuable and vulnerable institutions within Kampala was not looted during the upheavals of 1971, 1979 and 1985.
Apart from the destruction of Captain Lugard’s Fort at Old Kampala for the establishment of the National Mosque, the destruction of the Nakasero Fort (Armoury) and the old hospital which had served as the headquarters of the information ministry for the development of the AYA International Hotel, the old Cabinet office, to mention a few old buildings which should have been preserved. Is this 60-storied Tourism House going to be a tourist attraction? Skyscrappers are the monotony some tourists escape from to come and see our natural and cultural heritage attractions, some of which, like the Uganda Museum, we are soon depriving them of seeing.
It should be noted that some of our national parks are old settlements whose enormous cultural heritage lies undeveloped and yet it could add value to the nature-based tourism that is promoted there. Here I am talking of Queen Elizabeth National Park which was part of Busongora; Lake Mburo National Park whose scattered mounds tell of old human settlements; Murchison Falls National Park whose rain water gullies have exposed lots and lots of iron, pottery and bone.
Also the settlements of Pawir and Lobong; Mgahinga Mountain National Park whose caves are famous as refugee sanctuaries and communication links between Bufumbira and Rwanda, Kidepo National Park whose fossil and palaeontological sites add to Karamoja’s importance as a cradle.
Uganda boasts of having both cultural and natural tourism potential and if they are treated equally, a lot of benefits would accrue from the venture. Site museums would be established at the headquarters of national parks and included for visitation within the parks’ tourist circuits.
The Uganda Wildlife Authority should liaise with the museums and monuments department to introduce cultural tourism in national parks with cultural heritage.
Museums and monuments the world over are better managed as semi-autonomous or autonomous institutions. They are field-oriented in their operations with heavy capital expenditure budgets.
Our Museums and Monuments Department cannot rise to its expectations when it does not have a capital expenditure budget to establish museums throughout the country, when it does not have funds to develop the numerous sites throughout the country.
Rather than destroy the only remaining cultural institution, the tourism ministry should promote its field operations by setting up a development fund to rehabilitate and develop those sites and monuments which bear tourism potential.
More national, regional, district museums should be established and private museums should be encouraged. The ministry should reactivate the department’s earlier efforts to change its status to a semi-autonomous museums and monuments agency.
I call upon the tourism ministry to ponder and appreciate the importance of the Museums and Monuments Department to national development.
The tourism house can be built elsewhere within Kampala rather than within the grounds of the Uganda Museum.
The writer is a retired
commissioner for museums and monuments
The Opinion of The Sunday Vision December 20, 2009 entitled “Come to the aid of Uganda Museum†was essentially about the closure of the museum by Kampala City Council lawyers.
Failure to pay outstanding property rate arrears amounting to sh9m was the reason for the closure.
To me this was a simple matter because the incident happened on Wednesday, December 16, 2009 and it lasted one day. On Friday, December 18, 2009 the museum was open and business was back to normal.
As this story unfolds, however, there is a worse threat to the survival of the Uganda Museum than its temporary closure which requires immediate rescue from the powers that be. Ugandans will soon witness bulldozers excavating the grounds of the Uganda Museum and a 60-storeyed skyscrapper will replace it and will be called the Tourism House.
I do not know whether the destruction of the only remaining national cultural heritage institution is intentional, but it will be a tragedy.
The Sunday Vision opinion writer did not investigate the matter to find out the circumstances which had led the museum to accumulate sh9m.
Kampala City Council lawyers were told time and time again that the Uganda Museum is a Government property which does not pay ground rent, but they could not take heed. They are charging the Uganda Museum Board of Trustees which lost its authority of supervising the museum by Decree No.12 of 1977.
As such , arguments like the management of the Uganda Museum lacks the capacity to run our national treasure, that the museum is in a derelict state and the museum’s displays are outdated in the opinion were not well-researched.
The opinion should have based the call to rescue the museum from the abyss on the realisation that Uganda has a rich cultural heritage which, if marketed and developed would make the museum popular.
Since the museum would be popular, the management would not have problems meeting their financial obligations.
The opinion should further have tried to find out why the service of the Museums and Monuments Department is neglected by the tourism ministry, in particular, and the Government, in general, to the extent we have only one national museum and no operating national monument.
Monuments like Fort Lugard were lost to the Uganda Muslim Supreme Council and the Mengo government without a protracted protest by the central government.
Other gazetted sites and monuments are in shambles. Very good and strategic sites were earmarked for the relocation of the Soroti and Kabale regional museums in the respective municipalities.
Both sites were surveyed and the land title for the Kabale site is in the Uganda Land Commission, while the processing of that for the Soroti Museum stopped at the Mbale Regional Lands and Surveys office.
My fears are that with the growing urbanisation pressures in the two municipalities, the offer may run out of time and this may lead to their cancellation and reallocation to other needy applicants.
The lack of seriousness on the part of the Government is also true of our national cultural heritage treasures of Bigo bya Mugyenyi and Ntusi, whose land titles are lying unclaimed in the Uganda Land Commission.
Uganda boasts of unique rock painting sites at Nyero, in Kumi district and Lolui (Dolwe) islands in Lake Victoria. Over 1,000 sites were identified throughout the country and a data bank was established about them.
An attempt had been made to transform the function of the Museums and Monuments Department into a semi-autonomous Museums and Monuments Agency using part of a World Bank funding to the tourism ministry.
The funding for this component amounted to about $1m (sh22b). The requirements for the change of status of the department were met and the Ministry of Public Service (June 2001) and Cabinet (November 2003) sanctioned the creation of the Uganda Museums and Monuments Agency.
However, in November 2005, the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development, in its judgement, saw no justification for creating the agency and that chapter was closed without an appeal by the tourism ministry, in spite of the effort, time and World Bank funds which were extended to the project.
If the World Bank saw it justifiable to fund an activity for almost 10 years, on what basis did the finance ministry have to halt it?
For 10 years the financial needs of the Department of Museums and Monuments such as salaries and allowances for staff were catered for under the Department of Tourism.
This subordination of the department within the ministry was witnessed during the preparations for CHOGM. The commissioner for tourism was responsible for the establishment of the cultural village in the Uganda Museum grounds instead of the Ag. Commissioner for Museums and Monuments who would have handled the activity more professionally.
Two years after CHOGM, the Cultural Village is a “ghost site†which, if not attended to, the grassthatched huts will soon disintegrate and the sh1b and the purpose for which they were put up will be lost.
If the story that the tourism ministry is planning to construct a 60-storied Tourism House is true, at the expense of the national interest of preserving, promoting, presenting and developing its cultural heritage, then this is where every Ugandan should rise up and come to the aid of the Uganda Museum. We should arise and protest the destruction of the museum.
We should arise and request the Government to appreciate the importance of our cultural heritage and promote it rather than sweep it under the carpet.
It is a fact that cultural tourism can be more sustainable than natural tourism. Natural and political calamities affect nature-based tourism. The ADF in the Rwenzori Mountains, for example, halted tourism activities there for a long time while the Uganda Museum, of all the valuable and vulnerable institutions within Kampala was not looted during the upheavals of 1971, 1979 and 1985.
Apart from the destruction of Captain Lugard’s Fort at Old Kampala for the establishment of the National Mosque, the destruction of the Nakasero Fort (Armoury) and the old hospital which had served as the headquarters of the information ministry for the development of the AYA International Hotel, the old Cabinet office, to mention a few old buildings which should have been preserved. Is this 60-storied Tourism House going to be a tourist attraction? Skyscrappers are the monotony some tourists escape from to come and see our natural and cultural heritage attractions, some of which, like the Uganda Museum, we are soon depriving them of seeing.
It should be noted that some of our national parks are old settlements whose enormous cultural heritage lies undeveloped and yet it could add value to the nature-based tourism that is promoted there. Here I am talking of Queen Elizabeth National Park which was part of Busongora; Lake Mburo National Park whose scattered mounds tell of old human settlements; Murchison Falls National Park whose rain water gullies have exposed lots and lots of iron, pottery and bone.
Also the settlements of Pawir and Lobong; Mgahinga Mountain National Park whose caves are famous as refugee sanctuaries and communication links between Bufumbira and Rwanda, Kidepo National Park whose fossil and palaeontological sites add to Karamoja’s importance as a cradle.
Uganda boasts of having both cultural and natural tourism potential and if they are treated equally, a lot of benefits would accrue from the venture. Site museums would be established at the headquarters of national parks and included for visitation within the parks’ tourist circuits.
The Uganda Wildlife Authority should liaise with the museums and monuments department to introduce cultural tourism in national parks with cultural heritage.
Museums and monuments the world over are better managed as semi-autonomous or autonomous institutions. They are field-oriented in their operations with heavy capital expenditure budgets.
Our Museums and Monuments Department cannot rise to its expectations when it does not have a capital expenditure budget to establish museums throughout the country, when it does not have funds to develop the numerous sites throughout the country.
Rather than destroy the only remaining cultural institution, the tourism ministry should promote its field operations by setting up a development fund to rehabilitate and develop those sites and monuments which bear tourism potential.
More national, regional, district museums should be established and private museums should be encouraged. The ministry should reactivate the department’s earlier efforts to change its status to a semi-autonomous museums and monuments agency.
I call upon the tourism ministry to ponder and appreciate the importance of the Museums and Monuments Department to national development.
The tourism house can be built elsewhere within Kampala rather than within the grounds of the Uganda Museum.
The writer is a retired
commissioner for museums and monuments