Category: Press Releases

By Regina Kayoyo

The African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (African Children‘s Charter) was adopted by the then Organization of African Unity in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia on July 11, 1990 and came into force on November 29, 1999. In the same year, the Organization of African Unity declared June 16, as the Day of the African Child.

This day honors those who participated in the Soweto Uprising in 1976 in South Africa. On that day, about 10,000 black schoolchildren marched in a single file more than half a mile long, protesting the poor quality of their education and demanding their right to be taught in their own language.  With a loss of over 700 children who met with fierce police brutality, we remember their sacrifice every year as their efforts continue to raise awareness of not only the continuing need for improvement of the education provided to African children, but also protecting all children’s rights.

16^th June marked 25 years of celebrating the Day of African Child, these celebrations were held under the theme, ‘Conflict and Crisis in Africa: Protecting all children’s rights’. To commemorate this day, FRA held a dissemination workshop in Soroti on the linkage between the right to food and child trafficking.

Many people in Uganda, regardless of whether they are rights holders or rights bearers, have limited appreciation and knowledge of the right to food as an entitlement with duties and responsibilities but also the consequences of its abuse. In this regard, FRA sought to inform and increase citizen’s awareness of their right to food, entitlements and vigilance on issues that hinder people from enjoying this right as well as the far reaching consequences of failure to attain this right which among others include children’s vulnerability trafficking.

Child trafficking has been defined at the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of children, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over the child, for the purpose of exploitation. Although not a widely known phenomenon, this gravely prevalent practise can take the censored form of child movement and transfers from one area to another.

Among the objectives of this gathering was the need to spread awareness on this practise as the most common and worst form of violence against children especially the girl child, that exposes them to all forms of vulnerabilities to abuse. It is a very serious human rights and development issue that is affecting children in many parts of Uganda although it’s worse in vulnerable post conflict areas. Children are trafficked primarily because of their vulnerability caused by the rampant poverty.

Much as poverty constitutes of numerous aspects, it has been further established that lack of adequate food is one of the major factors, which forces parents and children alike into vulnerability to child trafficking. Limited food makes it difficult for children to concentrate in school, it also forces poor parents into surrendering their children to potential traffickers.

In the promotion of human rights and good governance, it has become evident that hungry populations are vulnerable to a number of shocks and their resilience is minimal and therefore they can’t actively participate in pursuing other human rights. As such, the right to food is the only right in the Bill of Rights that is described as “fundamental”. This right should thus be held as such, especially for children.

So what can be done then, stakeholders that this gathering proposed the need for an in-depth investigation on the causes of child trafficking which could inform multi-sectoral actors to facilitate well-co-ordinated multi-sectoral interventions to address the problem of child trafficking.  Many proposed awareness campaigns on the negative effects of child trafficking (on the victim, household and community), with target-specific programmes including the children, the need to boost agricultural production through the provision of improved planting material, extension information among other was suggested as well as an approach to settling the food insecurity issue in the household.

By Matilda Nakawungu

May 24, 2016 Farmers, CSOs, Honourable Members of Parliament, Agriculturalists, Scientists, and a variety of other stakeholders met at the NTV People’s Parliament for a lively debate over whether Uganda should pass or redraft the National Biosafety and Biotechnology Bill, 2012.

The bill, which was sent back to the Committee on Science and Technology in November 2013, is intended to facilitate “the safe development and application of modern biotechnology, to designate a national focal point and a competent authority and to provide mechanisms to regulate research, development and general release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and for related matters in Uganda.” However, the Bill sparked so much discussion with a number of the participants arguing that it is simply a tool being employed by developers of GMOs to facilitate the introduction, development and trade of these products.

“We need to get this Bill out of Parliament,” urged Food Rights Alliance executive director Ms. Agnes Kirabo, stating that it must be withdrawn and redrafted after proper consultation with all stakeholders. She believes the current bill does not sufficiently address the dangers that GMOs pose to farmers and consumers.

Several doctors and scientists testified to these dangers, raising concerns that GMOs have previously been correlated with increasing rates of cancer, infertility, obesity, and other risks. “The technology is best to build weapons of terrorism, not agriculture,” one doctor commented.

Researchers from the National Agriculture Research Organisation (NARO) objected that genes have always been transferred between animals and plants, and that the only difference is that now, humans can deliberately control the process to engineer crops that are disease/pest resistant, produce higher crop yields, or possess higher nutritional value. They claim that NARO only wants to research GMOs to address agricultural problems that traditional solutions have failed to address.

“Even if it is just one farmer out there who needs drought-resistant maize, let him have it,” said a NARO representative. Other participants quickly called out the organization insisting that it has a bias towards transnational corporations who have for long funded the work of NARO. Among these was Monsanto, a leading agrochemical company in developing GMOs.

Hon. Ken Lukyamuzi, a Member of the 9th Parliament stated that the Bill would impose on the rights of Ugandan farmers and discussed the perceived underlying motivations:

“This bill is to ensure that the African continent relies on Monsanto, the corporate seed giant that has earned a negative reputation in many countries for its greed and pervasive influence”.

“There are better ways of feeding the world than GMOs,” argued one farmer and teacher. She expressed concern that very few farmers know about GMOs, the bill, and whether it would allow farmers to choose for themselves whether they want to grow GM crops. Another farmer pointed out the growing demand for organic food in North America and Europe, and the opportunity for Uganda to supply it.

A number of other participants raised concerns about the effects on genetically modified animal husbandry, and the ethics behind using and introducing GMOs. The Food Rights Alliance is concerned that GMOs will bring high costs and dependency to farmers because of Monsanto’s patents on seeds. Other dangers include unknown health risks, loss of traditional knowledge, accidental cross-pollination with indigenous crops and ensuing lawsuits, loss of export markets to countries that have rejected GM foods, potential for sterile seeds, and the loss of small farmers’ agency misappropriated by corporations.

FRA also believes that many elements of the 2012 National Biosafety and Biotechnology Bill are unclear, and that the proposed penalties for breaking the law are neglectful considering the damage GMOs can wreak on the environment and overall livelihoods.

As a member of the People’s Parliament quoted, with audience members murmuring along: “Whoever controls the seed, controls food and whoever controls food, controls life.”

By Emily Sousa and Victoria Coo
FRA Interns

Wednesday 11 May, Kampala – Civil Society Organisations have held a press conference to commended President Yoweri Museveni for heeding a petition by the citizens of Uganda, to reject the proposed amendment in the Income Tax Bill.

Speaking at the press conference, FRA Executive Director Ms. Agnes Kirabo called upon the Members of Parliament to not fight but rather consider the President’s decision.

“If the law is unfair, we call on MPs to steer efforts around reforming the income tax rather than them choosing to exempt themselves from taxing their allowances while other Ugandans are paying” she said.

In his address to the press, CSBAG Coordinator Julius Mukunda said that CSOs were ready to work with Parliament to close the existing gaps in the revenue collection and expenditure. He called upon the government especially the parliament to revise the whole income tax law and fix loopholes therein.

The decision by the President to return the Income Tax (Amendment) Bill to parliament for review came after a two week campaign spearheaded by Civil Society Organizations that aimed to collect Five Million signatures, petitioning the President to reject the proposed amendment. By the end of the two weeks, 4,201,098 signatures had been collected from over 80 districts and these were submitted to the Office of the Prime Minister on Friday 6^th May 2016.

In a letter to the Speaker of Parliament Rebecca Kadaga, the President mentioned that MPs lack the “moral right” to exempt any of their emoluments from taxes and that doing so “would send a dangerous message” with other Ugandans joining the bandwagon to demand a freeze on their emoluments.

“This decision is not only injurious to our revenue efforts, but also it isn’t politically and morally correct,” he said.

The President cited several other reasons for his decision to return the Bill to Parliament for reconsideration such as the need to enhance revenue collection if Uganda is to meet her ambition of transforming into a middle income country by 2020.

The recent move by Parliament to amend the Income Tax Act came after the High Court of Uganda, Parliamentary Commission and Uganda Revenue Authority resolved that all emoluments paid to the Members of Parliament are subject to tax under the provisions of the Income Tax Act Cap 34. (HCCS No 745 of 201.3) By passing the amendment, the Members of Parliament chose to render court powerless and the judgment useless by passing a law exempting them from paying tax, says Uganda Law Society.

Following the recently concluded Joint Agriculture Sector Annual Review, Food Rights Alliance on 28^th September held an inception meeting on maintaining momentum for an inclusive agricultural extension and advisory system for smallholder farmers in Uganda. The meeting held in Kampala brought together CSOs and the media to strategize on how to up efforts to foster an efficient and effective AEAS delivery system in the country.

Admittedly, the ministry of Agriculture has made key strides in fostering this system. Among these include the approval of the Single Spine by Cabinet, the establishment of the Directorate of AEAS, and the recent recruitments at Lower Local Governments. However, it has been repeatedly noted that failure of many Government programmes lies in implementation. Whereas the Single spine model was approved, there is neither a guiding policy nor an Implementation Strategy in place for it. This implies that it is likely not going to be put to effective use especially seeing as the Single spine remained a non-funded priority in the last two consecutive financial years.

The agricultural extension and advisory system in Uganda had been reduced to a project – NAADS. It has been turned it into a political aspect which is diversionary and therefore there is need to redirect the discussion to the bigger picture. A successful AEAS system is dependent on a functional input distribution system and on research. The meeting was a kick start to the process of engaging stakeholders on improving agricultural extension as a measure of improving rural livelihoods.

This meeting provided an opportunity for Non state actors to constructively engage on how resources can be redirected to the delivery of AEAS and that agriculture sector reforms focus on improving accountability to clients, decentralizing service delivery and promoting increased participation of other players beyond Government.

Participants agreed to take on a number of key actions in this regard; among these was lobbying and advocacy through the parliamentary committee on Agriculture for Inter-sectorial engagement between MAAIF, MWE, UNBS and other relevant government departments and agencies.  Additionally, monitoring of agriculture sector funds utilization, participatory research and dissemination of findings and media engagement, training and sensitization were other commitments participants made.

Matilda Nakawungu
FRA Secretariat

This week, from the 12^th to the 16^th of October, the Food and Agriculture Organization is holding the 42nd session of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) at the FAO Headquarters in Rome, Italy.

We are glad to inform you that Food Rights Alliance together with other key stakeholders are taking part in this session. We will continue to share with you live proceedings from the event on our social media Facebook and Twitter sites.

Background
The CFS was established in 1974 as an intergovernmental body to serve as a forum in the United Nations System for review and follow-up of policies concerning world food security including production; and physical and economic access to food.

The vision of the CFS is to be the most inclusive international and intergovernmental platform for all stakeholders to work together to ensure food security and nutrition for all.  It aims to work in a coordinated manner in support of country led processes that lead to food security.

Using a phased approach, CFS will coordinate a global approach to food security, promote policy convergence, support and advise countries and regions, coordinate at national and regional levels, promote accountability and share best practices and develop a global strategic framework for food security and nutrition.

The CFS Framework broadens participation giving a voice to all stakeholders in the world food system. It is inclusive encouraging an exchange of views and experiences, builds on empirical evidence and scientific analysis and provides for monitoring the effectiveness of actions towards reducing hunger.

The 2015 FAO CMS Annual Forum is also scheduled to take place on the 10th and 11th of October 2015.

Below are the CSM Side events that will take place during the CFS 42 from 12 to 15 October 2015.

MONDAY 12 OCTOBER
CSM Water Working Group (12.30 – 14.00)
The right to water for the progressive realization of the right to adequate food – the role of the CFS

TUESDAY 13 OCTOBER
CSM Working Group on Protracted Crises (8.30-9.30)
Framework for Action for Food Security and Nutrition in Protracted Crises: the way forward

TUESDAY 13 OCTOBER
 USC Canada, ETC Group, MAELA, La Via Campesina, IPC Working Group on Agroecology, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (18.00 – 19.30)
Cultivating Agroecology for Food and Agriculture. A priority to CFS

THURSDAY 15 OCTOBER
IPC Network (including La Via Campesina, ROPPA, WFF, WFFP, MAELA, IITC, WAMIP, IUF, Urgenci) with the support of Terra Nuova, Crocevia and The Quaker United Nations Office  – QUNO (13.30-15.00)
What trade policies to increase food security and food sovereignty, strengthen local food systems and protect and strengthen small food producers

From 24th to 25th Sep 2015, SEATINI Uganda held a Regional Stakeholder Consultative Meeting with Government Officials on promoting Pro-Development Investment Policies and Agreements in the EAC. The meeting brought together key stakeholders in the region from Civil Society Organisations, Government Ministries, Investment Promotion Agencies, Private Sector, Trade Unions, Media, Academia, EAC Secretariat, Members of Parliament and the East African Legislative Assembly.

The meeting shed light on the different EAC country positions on the model treaty and facilitated engagement of EALA in the development of this model treaty. It also provided an opportunity for participants to chart a way forward on how to promote stakeholder engagement in investment related negotiations at both national and regional levels.

During the meeting, it was emphasized that agriculture and food should be explicitly fronted on the negotiation agenda. In addition to this, land based investments need to be part of the stakeholders’ agenda from the trade and investment angle.

From the two day discussions, clear key areas of negotiation between the EAC and partners that have to be claused in the treaty to guide partner states were identified. Among these were the following:

1. The treaty should facilitated technology transfer and enhancement in the partner states. Because development is dependent on the technology present at a time, investment should build a sound technology base for developing countries.

2. Partner state governments need to put in place a facilitating environment for genuine investment to ensure that the country is the major beneficiary from the investment.

3. Investment is meant to supplement domestic savings with no country dependent on foreign investment. As such, EAC member states need to prioritize a domestic resource mobilization strategy.

At the end of the two-day meeting, Dr. Abubakar Muhammed Moki, Commissioner Policy Development and Capacity Building – Cabinet Secretariat Office of the President launched a study report on the Draft EAC Model Investment Treaty. The Study conducted by SEATINI Uganda identified a number of gaps in the EAC Framework and proposed recommendations to address these gaps.