PART 2: OF MUGANGA AND HIS PARTICULAR PREDICAMENT

Part 1

I have seen lawyers argue about the legality and constitutionality of Dr. Muganga’s ministerial appointment. Those in support argue that the constitution’s only requirement for someone to serve in high office, is that the said someone be Ugandan and that whether or not they hold other forms of citizenship is irrelevant. Those against it argue that the Uganda Citizenship and Immigration Control Act, which operationalises the constitution, requires that people appointed to certain positions, of which “Cabinet Minister and other Ministers” are part, must not hold dual citizenship. And by virtue of the fact that Muganga holds citizenship of at least two countries, he currently would not qualify for the position.

I am no lawyer and would not want to offer uninformed positions on legal matters simply for the sake of it. All I would say as an unlearned person, is that there seems to be very legitimate legal questions to be asked in regard to Muganga’s citizenship status and those qualified to do so, ought to help us untangle this mess. 

But political appointments, just like vetting processes, are not merely legal. They are also political. And from a political perspective, I might have a word or two to say. With matters such as these, there are three categories of things we must examine; the known, the known unknowns and the the unknown uknowns. For avoidance of speculation, I limit the ‘known’ to what Muganga himself has said as well as verifiable information.

First, Muganga has severally acknowledged that he at some point in the past, applied for and received Rwandan citizenship. An article by the Rwandan Times on May 14th 2013 identifies him as a Rwandan national living in Canada. According to Muganga, he subsequently obtained Canadian citizenship (meaning that for a period of time, he held three citizenships; Ugandan, Rwandan and Canadian). However, he did not register his third (Canadian citizenship) with the Rwanda authorities. Because Rwandan law requires that this be done within 60 days, Muganga assumed he had lost Rwandan citizenship and proceeded to hand over his National ID and passport to the Rwandan High Commission in Canada. 

The key point in this narrative, is that Muganga assumed that by submitting his National ID and passport to the Rwandan High Commission and by not registering his Canadian citizenship within the required 60 days, he had lost his Rwandan citizenship. That is an extremely huge assumption that cannot be overlooked. With no confirmation from the Rwandan authorities that his citizenship was revoked, this is mere speculation. Any reasonable vetting committee would have questions about such assumptions. Given his high profile and the nature of his appointment, one wonders why he didn’t at the very least, approach the Rwandan government to provide some kind of official confirmation of his citizenship status. With friends like Frank Gashumba, a boss like Sudhir Ruparelia and the goodwill of the appointing authority, I can’t imagine this would be a big ask. In any case, what we know is that he did not present any such evidence to the public, to whom he is now appealing for sympathy and support. What he has so far presented as evidence are: his parents’ final resting place in Mukono, a testimony by a supposed LC chairperson, a few (heartfelt) tears and a threat by his dear friend Gashumba of M23-like repercussions should the current public sentiment towards Ugandans of Rwandese origin continue. 

Some may find this emotionally moving while others may find it diversionary at best and extremely reckless at worst. What no one will find it, is compelling evidence of his citizenship status. 

It is noteworthy at this point, that even if the question of his Rwandan citizenship were resolved, he would still need, under current law, to demonstrate that his Canadian citizenship too has been renounced. I do not spend much time on this as it does not seem to have been a matter of contention. 

There are some who argue that the law in its current form is not fair as it bars very knowledgeable, experienced and able Ugandans (who have citizenship elsewhere) to serve in high office. I have a lot of sympathy for this argument and would point to other countries such as the UK in which, one could theoretically become Prime Minister without relinquishing their citizenship in another country (whether the British public would allow that to happen is a different matter altogether). But like my favourite politician, Gen. Mugisha Muntu likes saying, we must deal with things as they are, not as we wish them to be. And as they stand, Ugandan law does not permit people with dual citizenship to serve in certain offices. End of!

The second known piece of information, is that Muganga has publicly referred to what sounds like an audio recording of a telephone conversation between himself and the deputy speaker of parliament in which the latter is reassuring the former about the vetting process, insisting it was simply a procedural matter that has precedence. Moving on to the known unknowns, Muganga uses this conversation as proof that his fate had already been sealed before he was even vetted. Let’s take a minute and think about it; this is a man that is a vetting process away from being in charge of sensitive personal and confidential data. The Uganda ministerial oath includes a section in which one swears not to “directly or indirectly reveal any matter as shall come to (one’s) knowledge in the discharge of (one’s) duties and committed to (one’s) secrecy”. We do not know whether this ‘recording’ is genuine, but if it is, it was clearly confidential. Is this the kind of person that we want to be in charge of a docket that oversees national identity and passport registration? A person who, when faced with legitimate legal questions, resorts to emotional appeals and public display of desperation instead of clear intellectual engagement? 

The last known unknown I think is relevant to this debate, is what the president is going to do next. According to vetting procedure, he is able to engage parliament on the matter and try to get a resolution. He of course can also replace Dr. Muganga’s appointment with someone deemed better suited for the role. What he will do, I do not know. 

But we must also be warry of the unknown unknown. A pandora’s box has been opened by this saga. The bottle has been rubbed and the genie of ethnicity, identity and nationalism has been let loose. I’ve had conversations with fellow Ugandans I consider friends that are genuinely tired of having their citizenship called into question and scared of the days ahead because they happen to be Banyarwanda by ethnicity. I’ve seen videos of some prominent commentators calling upon Baganda to be ready to kill any and all M23-like Banyarwanda (the distinction between those and other Ugandan Banyarwanda is lost on me). I’ve seen otherwise perfectly reasonable people I have known for ages spew such sectarian vitriol, I have had to reconsider whether I knew them at all. What happens next? Your guess is as good as mine.

In part 3, I turn to a question I believe has never really been resolved; who is a Ugandan?

Written by

Ganzi Isharaza

Follow

Did this story move you? Every gift goes directly to Ganzi Isharaza — writers on Muwado earn from reader appreciation, not algorithms. Even $1 makes a difference.

Gift Once Gift Monthly