December 11, 2018 at 12:01 pm #204563
At the morning of this week, Yoweri Museveni sent silent message to Uganda. While officiating at Transparent Uganda’s Anti-Corruption Dialogue, he passively communicated to us that he has failed on corruption and awarded opposition through Oguttu and Luzindana for championing the battle against corruption. In his speech, he scoffed at those that believed that he can’t literally fight and completely erase corruption because he lacks the Good will to do so. He said they belonged to Butabika and actually “they should’ve stayed there for a good time” he added.
Well, in this case I really belong to Butabika because I strongly believe Yoweri Museveni can fight and erase corruption but he won’t do so because he is the supreme benefactor.
We have worked, talked and actually proposed policies for Uganda to get rid of corruption. At fighting corruption, the war doesn’t segregate and in fact the major advocates have always been us in the opposition because we have seen days in this corrupt environment! But in the quest to rid Uganda of corruption, we often forget one basic Fact: the corruption may be a plague to common Ugandans, but its a vital governing tool for the regime. Research shows that corruption exists almost everywhere in the world; in democracies but such corruption in the democracies is petty in both nature and sum. That one is sharply different from the massive looting by regime officials in dictatorships like in Uganda. I’m telling you,by the end of this article, you will concur with my opinion on why Museveni won’t and can’t seriously fight corruption but will keep making great speeches about it and taking no metallic action.
The other day I was reading from the daily monitor about his sweetheart Sam Kuteesa and the FBI case in the USA. In the USA court, Museveni himself and Kuteesa are accused of taking a bribe of $500,000 from a Chinese anthropologist Jin Ho. The money was used in 2016 elections and the bribe was to sooth the big man’s eye when time comes to strike oil deals. For Kuteesa, he’s a renown corruption guru but whether Yoweri Museveni took a bribe or not, a President’s name to be listed and his picture exhibited in the court of corruption charges is so so sad. Kizza Besigye called him to apologise but I say he must go! Many of his men are corrupt and he knows but let’s focus on Kuteesa for today’s debate;
Sam Kuteesa alone has a long list of corruption cases but his loyalty to the emperor makes all cases mere dust. Kutesa’s past corruption cases
2017: The leaked so-called Paradise Papers reveal that Kutesa in 2012 hired Appleby, a company renowned for creating offshore account for the rich and powerful, to form a company for him in the tax haven of Seychelles in an attempt to his money and dodge taxes.
1993: Kutesa’s first publicly known corruption deal. In 1993, when ground handling at Entebbe International Airport was privatised, a company called Effortes, a subsidiary of Caleb International owned by President Museveni’s brother, Caleb Akandwanaho aka Salim Saleh and Global Airlink owned by Kutesa unfairly took 40% according to a parliament investigation.
1995: Kutesa, as board chairman, used an accounting firm close to him to undervalue the ENHAS shares, which he later sold to himself and Salim Saleh cheaply. Saleh acquired 45% shares for $3.75 million and sold them at $9.45 million. Kutesa was the minister of state for Investment and Planning.
1998: A parliamentary committee investigating the privatisation of Uganda Airlines Corporation concludes that it had been “manipulated and taken advantage of by Kutesa and “a few politically powerful people who sacrifice the people’s interests.”
1999: Parliament censures Kutesa.
2001: President Museveni re-appointed him after elections because he allegedly financed that election with $500,000.
1997: During privatisation of 80% of Sheraton Hotel, Kutesa, then minister for Investment and Planning is named by a parliamentary committee for soliciting a bribe of between $2-6 million together with Mayanja Nkanji, who was Justice Minister, Mathew Rukikaire, who was the minister of state for privatisation and Salim Saleh. The IGG found that three ministers had influenced the award.
2001: Kutesa is named among members of President Museveni’s campaign task force that was fronting Lithotec, a South African company to bag a tender to supply ballot papers. The others were his nephew, Sam Rwakoojo, who is the Secretary to the Electoral Commission and Enos Tumusiime, a high-flying city lawyer. IGG investigations revealed that Lithotec’s competitor–Skipco Property Limited- had been wrongly disqualified from the tender and the contract was cancelled. Nevertheless, Lithotec got the contract to supply ballots for the presidential elections.
2001 November: Lithotec gets another contract to supply ballots for the local government elections. The government “loses” US$ 1 million in deal.
2009: Kutesa is mentioned in elections related deal worth $15 million. A US firm which had been pre-qualified for the deal attributed suspension of the award to competing interests of presidential insiders. Kutesa was connected to a competing firm from Bangladesh.
2005: Kutesa is named in a deal described by Bright Rwamirama, who at the time was the privatisation committee chairman, as “outright robbery”. The deal involved the privatisation of Uganda Diary Cooperation Ltd (UDCL). While the entity was valued at $9 million with an annual turnover of $12 million, President Museveni blocked a process by the privatisation unit to have the entity’s 70 % sold to the best bidder, and instead decided to offer it to a Malaysian company called Malee Sampran PCL for three years at a nominal fee of $ 1. It emerged that Malee was to incorporate a company named Pan African Foods Ltd (PAFL), which would take over DCL. It later emerged that Malee was a smokescreen for PAFL, which despite being unregistered was connected to Kutesa.
2000: Kutesa mentioned in the deal to procure a technology, called an Intelligent Network Monitoring/verification System (INMS), estimated to cost the Ugandan taxpayer about Shs100 billion.
2012: Kutesa, through his son-in-law, Albert Muganga, was cited in a fight to secure a deal for the construction of the Standard Gauge Railway for the Chinese company called CCECC.
2012: Kutesa is mentioned in the deals surrounding the construction of Karuma and Isimba power dams.
2014: He is accused of corruption in a battle over his candidature for UN General Assembly presidency in 2014. More than 9,000 people signed an online petition urging the U.S. to block him. Despite the campaign, Kutesa was elected.
Kuteesa is just one on the long list of the regime’s bigwigs; Muhwezi, Specioza,Saley,Tumwebaze, Mbabazi, and now the BoU administration who are now on the shooting line. Why is it coming now after such a looming time? Who wronged the big man for him to release the dogs on them? Or someone must be sacrificed to won those becoming big headed? Why is Bagyenda suffering alone in all this? Could she have worked and executed all these orders alone? Why has Katuntu failed to “Balance the Boat”?
etc. But the question in out heads is: why does Museveni keep these people around him whilst hoodwinking us to fight graft? Here is the answer:
Whereas we assume That corruption is more prevalent in dictatorial regimes is no mere coincidence. While democracies derive their legitimacy and popular support through competitive elections and the rule of law, dictatorships depend on the support of a small group of political and social elites, the military, the bureaucracy and the secret police. Oba ofuna? Because these elites and constituencies do not have any core values other than self-serving instincts, their loyalty and support are fickle and must be secured by constant bribes in the form of special privileges and/or gifts and grants. They not only have ostensibly legal perks such as free world-class health care, lavish official residence, and expensive junkets, but also make huge illicit profits by rigging government contracts and looting public wealth in shady privatisation deals. Hahahaaa… Just like above, the Dairy corporation is the most annoying it was bought at 3700= ($1).
To the extent that corruption has been internalised into the practice of governing in the regime, the state’s control of the economy becomes indispensable. Without such control, the junta loses its capacity to deliver the bribes to its key constituencies. So it is easy to understand why the junta loves to keep the economy in the firm grip of the state. Even in autocracies that appear to be reforming their economies, such as China and Vietnam, the ruling Communist parties have maintained the state’s monopoly in the most important sectors, such as banking, financial services, natural resources, telecom, energy and transportation. Dictated by the regime survival imperative, such state intervention simply perpetuates corruption.
Corruption serves another crucial political purpose for dictatorships because it can be used as an easy excuse to discipline followers and get rid of rivals. Because corruption under dictatorial rule is so pervasive, and the boundaries between what is legal and what is not are hopelessly blurred, dictators have enormous discretion in deciding whom to prosecute and whom to protect. As a result, second-tier regime loyalists are forever at the mercy of the top-level leaders, who from time to time decide to make an example of a few “rotten apples” to show who is the real boss. Okitegeera? Its from here that I believe that someone in BoU went arrogant or defiant of the boss in one way and boom! Do you remember the Bukenya corruption saga, Byandala,Kuteesa2007, and now BoU string? Many have been accused, charged and some sentenced like Kazinda and Teddy Cheye. We all know that when some of the regime officials are threatened and charged, its not those offences that are the real charges,but political disloyalty and arrogance. So throwing them to the public and judicial arena is a gesture to show them who the real boss is. Nonetheless, a few can be sacrificed to call others to order. The “Kill the cat to warn the dogs” phenomenon.
Therefore all the policies, debates, bills and ideas to fight corruption in Uganda are very good. However the political will of the regime is what is lacking. Jajja doesn’t want corruption out of Uganda because his survival depends on it. He gives bribes openly to MPs during heated debates and the most recent is Togikwatako. He calls them gifts though. But why does his gifts target seasons when Uganda needs the most of the legislators’ brains? And tomorrow he will address us on corruption and how he is fighting it and how he is serious and how he is committed and how he is tough and how he is a ssaabalwanyi and how Kizza-Besigye is bad and how opposition is out for sale and how maize price is going up and how road are becoming better and how security is good and how bazzukulu are lousy and how USA are liars and how Kuteesa is a good man and how he won’t go…
I want to reiterate that corruption being prevalent in Uganda is not coincidental.
Ugandans have only one way to seriously begin on the battle to wipe out corruption: that way is to push for regime change, now!
By Muzinyabigere HuzaJanuary 7, 2019 at 1:06 pm #204574
Crane Bank Robbery By Sudhir Ruparelia
On July 19, 2010, Mahmoud Barwani and Mohammed Yoosuf, all known to embattled Ugandan businessman, Sudhir Ruparelia, decided to open a company in Kampala.
The company was named Infinity Investments Ltd. The duo would be directors in their new outfit.
Four days after opening the company, (July 23 2010), the two directors drove to Crane Bank where they applied for credit facilities in the form Direct Loans ($2.5m, Shs 5.8bn) and Over Draft (OD) Shs 1bn.
The proposal to the bank’s loan committee for sanction was made on August 14, 2010.
The securities offered against these facilities were Plot M589, Mukabya Road, Plot 1-5, Cornwall Crescent, Plot 45-65, Mpanga Close, Plot M539, Mpanga Close, Plot 880, Industrial Area and Plot M876, Industrial Area.
According to confidential records of Crane Bank contained in an updated and detailed forensic audit report sent to Bank of Uganda, search reports for plots M876 & M880 were received on August 13, 2010.
A day later, a sanction letter was issued (August 14, 2010).
On September 30, 2010, the massive loans were disbursed to Mahmoud Barwani and Mohammed Yoosuf.
Yet, earlier in 2007, lawyer Kiwanuka, Karugire Advocates and Solicitors to Crane Bank had clearly pointed out that Plot 1-5, Cornwall Crescent and Plot M589, Mukabya Road were encumbered by wayleaves such as high power transmission lines that traversed the properties.
Basing on the lawyers’ report, the remaining securities tendered by Infinity’s directors, were not sufficient to cover the bank’s exposure.
Despite this knowledge, Crane Bank accepted these plots as securities.
The credit policy defines bank lending as purpose-based and not-security based. Security is meant to cushion to fall backing face of adversity.
However, Crane Bank continued to advance facilities to Infinity despite clear indications that there was no business in place to warrant the facilities.
Interestingly, when the loans were disbursed, cheques for Shs 6.1bn and $2.68m were drawn in the name of Mahmud Barwani and money deposited on his personal account.
Auditors discovered that Infinity Company had not provided a registered office location at the time of registration and the company secretary at the time was Valentine Ajay, a personal secretary of Sudhir Ruparelia.
The company was never registered for tax hence did not pay tax or file annual returns until 2014.
By setting up an overdraft position which allowed it to put in place standing orders to repay loans’ principal interest from its current accounts, Infinity created an illusion that the loans were performing despite there being very little net cash flow from outside.
On April 1, 2011, the limit for OD increased from Shs 1bn to Shs 2.5bn.
Six months later, Infinity’s credit facilities were renewed and a withdrawal of Shs 1.4bn via cheque number six was made and funds ended up in Barwani’s personal account.
There was a dramatic turn in May 2012 when Crane Bank released the securities and in turn reduced the Shilling OD limit from Shs 2.5bn to Shs 0.7bn. At the time, Infinity was Shs 147m above the new limit.
Auditors said this “left Crane Bank at a weaker position as security coverage dropped to 67 percent.”
On November 2, 2012, the credit facilities were renewed (direct loans $2.42m, Shs 5.61bn and OD Shs 0.75bn) despite arrears of Shs 415m and $66,000 in accounts.
Thereafter, it appears a bailout was given to the company to normalize its accounts.
On November 11, 2012, $86,890 and $126,122 was transferred from Infinity’s USD current account to Shillings loan account to clear arrears in these accounts.
Auditors discovered that the “funds for the transfer had come from a cash deposit of Shs 200,000 by Mohamed Ali and a transfer of $200,000 from Meera Investments Limited.”
Mohamed Ali was a director Premier Commodities and a very close associate of Sudhir Ruparelia.
Indeed, on January 6, 2014, Infinity’s credit facilities worth Shs 12bn were renewed.
Lack of registration details
In April 2014, Oundo & Co Advocates told Crane Bank that Infinity’s mortgage charges could not be registered because documents for several plots were “missing at the files registry.”
A month later, MMAKS Advocates informed Crane Bank that Infinity had never filed annual returns and hence debenture and board resolutions could not be registered.
Investigators observed that it was not a surprise when Crane Bank, 11 months after renewing Infinity’s credit facilities amid mysterious circumstances, requested for payment of facilities advanced to infinity.
“As at then,” said PwC auditors, “Crane Bank’s exposure with Infinity stood at Shs 8.148bn and $3.56m.”
Eventually, the audit report indicated, on December 12, 2014, “Crane Bank wrote off 3.5m and Shs 8.2b advanced to Infinity, making up 20 percent of all write-offs to date.”
The revelations underscore how Crane Bank’s failure to adhere to its credit policy and banking rules led to an accumulation of non-performing loans and erosion of capital before grappling with a liquidity crisis.
As at June 2016, Crane bank’s non-performing loans stood at 14.5 per cent, nearly twice the market average of 8.3 per cent.
The auditor’s fresh finding appear to counter Crane Bank’s claim that its liquidity challenges were caused by a poor economy that suffocated many of its borrowers who failed to service their loans.
Auditors used the example of Infinity to show a long standing pattern of Crane Bank’s dubious loan policy that saw newly formed companies advanced large sums of money barely a week after they had been formed.
Aureco Investments Limited owned by Amina Moghe received billions of shillings eight days after application for a loan.
Auditors implied that Crane Bank’s problems were compounded by advancing loans to companies “even though it should have been clear that there was no business of any kind being conducted by the companies in question.”
For Infinity, Crane Bank wavered the requirement that applicants should have banked with it for 6 months or provide statements from other banks before advances are made to them.
“The same is true for loans to Minutan and Aureco which were justified on the basis of the property held by the promoters,” the audit report reads in part.
Legally, experts advised that borrowers and Crane Bank officers should be “investigated for the charges of embezzlement and conspiracy to defraud under the Anti-corruption Act and the Penal code respectively.”
In the case of Sudhir who owned the bank, the audit report recommended that he should face charges of conspiracy to defraud; making false or misleading statements; embezzlement; causing financial loss; receiving stolen property; influence peddling and nepotism among others.January 7, 2019 at 1:15 pm #204575
Ugandan companies profiting gold from conflict areas
A United Nations report has pinned Ugandan gold companies, African Gold Refinery Ltd (AGR) and Bullion Refinery Ltd, of benefiting from gold smuggled from the volatile Eastern Republic of Congo.
The serious accusations against AGR come against the backdrop of the resignation of businessmen Barnabus Taremwa and Richard Kaijuka from the gold refining company based in Entebbe.
The two businessmen left the company which they co-founded with outgoing Chief Executive Officer Alain Goetz after the latter fell short of putting in place mechanisms of identifying gold smuggled into the country.
Now the Group of Experts on the Democratic Republic of the Congo who report to the United Nations Security Council say the activities of AGR could attract sanctions.
“Two independent sources associated with AGR and Bullion Refinery Ltd. told the Group that the companies were reluctant to disclose the names of their suppliers because they were aware that their activities were not always legal,” the report to the Security Council reads in part.
“In fact, documents concerning a supplier for AGR obtained by the Group show the risk of contamination of the supply chain with gold illegally sourced or traded from the Democratic Republic of the Congo.”
According to the investigation, the supplier, a Congolese national based in Bukavu who provided AGR, in October 2018, with gold worth more than $3 million, travelled with an official document, delivered five months earlier, identifying his occupation as that of an electrician.
The supplier declared to AGR that the gold was sourced from Tanzania.
Initial investigations conducted by the Group suggested that the individual was used as a broker by many Bukavu-based gold smugglers.
AGR did not respond to the Group’s inquiry as to whether it had a policy to verify the accuracy of statements made by Congolese nationals who claim that the gold they sell was not sourced from the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Highly placed sources told us that AGR continues to receive gold from people of all walks of life without determining the source hence being a safe conduit of smuggled gold.
Usually, gold dealers carry licenses showing the source of the gold especially mines and also authorisation of the dealerships.
“There is no evidence to suggest that AGR imports gold through proper custom channels,” reads a government briefing on the operations of the old company.
The findings of the UN experts could lead to Uganda facing sanctions for hosting a facility that exports gold obtained from conflict areas.
UN investigators said they requested the names of suppliers from AGR and Bullion Refinery Ltd. in order to verify whether the suppliers were involved directly or indirectly in any sanctionable acts in DRC.
In the letters, AGR reiterated its previously expressed willingness to seek the “proper consent” of the suppliers before providing the information to the Group and reiterated that it did not source any “undocumented gold” from DRC.
AGR also stated that Alphonse Katarebe would succeed Alain Goetz as CEO.
But insiders told this investigative website that Alphonse, as he is fondly known, was a mere proxy of Goetz.
“Goetz’s alleged departure is just a smokescreen because Alphonse acts on his orders,” said the source.
In the report to the Security Council , experts noted “with concern the lack of cooperation from the two companies and believes that such a lack impedes its ability to conduct a comprehensive analysis on the compliance by the two companies with the Group’s guidelines on due diligence.”
Several sources, including mining officials, researchers and Kampala -based gold traders, told investigators that Kampala was a recipient of smuggled gold from DRC.
In addition, the Group found that Ugandan authorities lacked a coherent policy to combat smuggling.
The Group also found that Kampala-based gold exporters did not have an efficient system to avoid the contamination of their supply chains with illegally traded gold from the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
It also was observed that in Uganda, the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region certificate is not yet compulsory, explaining the reason they did not request those certificates from suppliers from DRC.
UN experts also noted that the authorities of Uganda have failed to share the results of their investigations into Kampala-based gold traders.
On 1 November 2018, the Group sent a request for information to the Government of Uganda to which it responded that while they were willing to cooperate and work closely with the Group, they had concerns about the short notice of one week to provide the information.January 7, 2019 at 1:20 pm #204576
Sudhir Ruparelia siphoned money from financial institution
Crane Bank made fictitious payments worth Shs 167bn to a ghost company known as Interdico as part of a wider scheme by businessman Sudhir Ruparelia’s associates to siphon money from the financial institution, a fresh forensic investigation has discovered.
The report revealed that Crane Bank registered a Shs 200bn spike in the value of Crane Bank’s buildings in 2014 where the value of land and buildings rose from Shs 81bn to Shs 281bn within the year.
This, auditors said, was part of the clandestine ploy by Crane Bank to misrepresent its performance to project the image of a profitable institution.
In the end, this would help Crane Bank to issue share bonus shares worth billions of shillings among the institution’s owners.
How it started
Earlier in 2012, Crane Bank’s directors had communicated their intention to issue bonus shares to the shareholders through capitalization of retained earnings and in effect increased the bank’s total paid up capital from Shs 100bn to Shs 210bn.
However, BoU declined to approve the request on account of lack of enough retained earnings to support the intended bonus share issues.
The media has seen BoU’s rejection of Crane Bank’s request, showing Sudhir’s schemes, which eventually led to the bank’s downfall, did not start recently.
In another instance, Crane Bank tried to get BoU’s approval to issue Shs 110bn worth of bonus shares.
BoU turned down the request on grounds that the bank’s retained earnings as per the audited 2011 financial statements was Shs 73bn and therefore not enough to cover the intended bonus shares.
These documents prove BoU had on several occasions nipped Sudhir’s alleged fraudulent plans in the bud.
BoU’s refusal meant that Crane Bank had to put on hold the planned bonus share issue.
However, Crane Bank needed to achieve its set target of Shs 110bn worth of retained earnings to be able to actualize the planned issue of bonus shares.
Auditors said in a report restricted as ‘confidential information for the sole benefit and use of Bank of Uganda’, that the falsification of the financial reports in 2012 was “part of a two-pronged approach that also involved under provisioning of non-performing assets with the intention of accumulating enough retained earnings for the suggested bonus issue.”
Fake company Interdico
Since Crane Bank claimed a spike of Shs 200bn in the value of buildings which created the impression that the bank was very profitable; auditors hoped to find genuine construction payments, contracts with contractors, architectural and engineering designs, bills of quantities, construction permits from municipal councils and certificates of work done as confirmation of the actual costs incurred in the construction.
Interestingly, all auditors could be provided with were “payment vouchers” in support of the alleged construction expenses.
“A further review of the spike in the value of buildings showed that it resulted from suspect payments to two companies; Interdico Limited Uganda and AI Construction Limited with the bulk of $64.2m (Shs 167bn) paid to Interdico,” the updated audit report reads in part.
Interdico was incorporated on February 25, 2013 with registration number 163335 and its shareholders were listed by Crane Bank as Arab Ibrahimbin Mamadbin and Marhiyani Ashwin Manji.
PwC auditors said “other than the incorporation documentation, Interdico does not have any other field documents at the registry. It is also not registered with URA.”
A deeper investigation shows Interdico’s indicated location in the registration documents – Suite Number 63, Plot 4 Pilkington Road, Kampala, belongs to the law offices of Frank Tumusiime & Co Advocates, who denied having knowledge of the company.
Additionally, the telephone number indicated on the invoices was not registered on the Airtel network.
It was discovered that Interdico had an account with Crane Bank but the account opening forms and system mandates were not available.
This account was also not migrated from Branch Power to T24 during the bank’s system change over in February 2015 as it had been closed in March 2014.
It was impossible to establish who the account beneficiaries, agents or signatories were.
Auditors believe the account documents and file were destroyed and the system mandates deleted yet the Financial Institutions Act (FIA), 2004, provides that a financial institution keeps such records for not less than 10 years.
They further hinted on the possibility that actually the account opening documents and file were never created as required by law.
Nevertheless, auditors observed that the “supporting documentation provided in respect of the Interdico payments was suspicious especially in simplicity of the invoices. Through computer forensics we traced the draft invoices to a deleted folder within the computers allocated to two Crane Bank employees within the finance department. These employees were Vivek Sharma (Head of Finance) and P. K. Gupta (Deputy MD).)”
The recovered documents show that the invoices were created on Gupta’s computer on January 28, 2014 at 9:56am and deleted on 24 September, 2016.
“Between them, Sharma and Gupta appear to have prepared a total 33 invoices in the months of January and February 2014 amounting to $65.14m (Shs 170bn),” reads the audit report compiled at the instructions of Bank of Uganda.
Within the same folder in Sharma’s computer, investigators found a ‘draft special resolution to Interdico to open an account’ with Crane Bank.
When Sharma and Gupta were interviewed, they both denied knowledge of the draft invoices in their computers.
The duo claimed they received “signed invoices” from then Managing Director A.R. Kalan.
However, when confronted with the evidence, while not admitting to preparing the invoices, they admitted that the January and February 2014 Interdico Payments were “fictitious payments aimed at concealing a ‘hole’ in the Nostro account (bank account held in foreign currency in another bank – in this case it was the Deutsche Bank – Ed.)”
The investigators added: “We found that personnel in the IT department would be used to pass the Interdico entries in the back end of Branch Power. Some of the entries passed in the account would have the contra entry as the same account so as to hide the destination of the money. These entries would be passed after 8:00pm in the evening when the bank was closed.”
The IT staff who talked to auditors said Sharma would “go with a breakdown and analysis of transactions that he would instruct them to pass in the back end of the system. Sharma would then takeaway the documents with him after the transactions had been effected.”
As such auditors said Crane Bank’s directors did not give complete, true and fair view of the financial position of the bank, its financial performance and cash flows in accordance with International Accounting Standards and the FIA.
This was due to “clear manipulation of the bank’s accounts be senior management in order to show year to year growth…there was also blatant forgery of documents purported to be invoices from Interdico and uttering of the same to bank for payment. Forgery and uttering of false documents is an offence under the penal code.”
Conviction on these offences attracts sentences of over 10 years in jail.April 10, 2019 at 8:10 am #204591
The relevance of impotent men like Besigye
Whoever is recklessly attacking H.E Bobi Wine is either mistaken or dreaming or hallucinating but these diehards must be informed that we have shifted our support from Dr. Kizza to Kyagulanyi. The evolution of change in Uganda will be just like that…..reform agenda to FDC and now people power. The relevance of impotent men like Besigye, TVO, and others who have failed to let us win elections for four consecutive times must stop. Let us try some one else who by far will challenge the musevenism.April 10, 2019 at 8:13 am #204592
Bobi Wine would have been with Muntu than Mao
TAMALE MIRUNDI ON TOP RADIO.
“People Power supporters should start a campaign called SAVE BOBI WINE FROM NOBERT MAO…Bobi Wine God had helped him in politics he should not carry the luggage of failures to bring them back on top…There is no difference between Mao and Besigye, they are all under mafiarism. People Power has started taking over universities even without Bobi Wine campaigning for those Guild President, that’s clear proof that Bobi Wine is bigger and stronger than these failures…Bobi Wine don’t kill ur political career, Mao is being used by mafias, Mao and Besigye are the same. Bobi Wine would have been with Muntu than Mao”