Connect with us

NGO WORK

Mps Are Likely To Defy Electorates On Age-Limit Constitutional Amendment – Survey

Published

on

By witnessradio.orgTeam

A new survey conducted by civil society organizations shows that many Members of Parliamentare likely to defy their constituents and back constitutional amendments to article 102[b] of the constitution that provides a seal of 75 years for anyone vying for the position of presidency.

The study shows that out of the 436 Members of Parliament, 276 MPs support the bill, 116 detest it while 38 MPs are undecided.

This is contrary to what the electorates hold with 85% of them against the same bill supported by their representatives.

Releasing the findings from the survey, the executive Director, Great Lakes Institute for electoral Democracy said that many MPs are not representing what their voters believe in and have gone on to lie that their voters are pro- the amendments.

For Instance in the Buganda region in Nakifuma County, Bukuya County, Busiro Country North, Nansana Municipality, Budyebo County, Mukono county North, Mityana county North, Mawokota County North and Bukoto South, the constituents are clearly opposed to the bill but the representative MPs are in full support of the same bill.

In other constituencies, the voters openly opposed the bill but the respective MPs are not decided. This is seen in Nakaseke North County, Buwekula and Bukomansimbi North.

In the survey released last week by Uganda Governance Monitoring Platform and Citizens coalition on Electoral Democracy showed that 66% of Ugandans in the Buganda are opposed to the bill. This is far higher than the 44% MPs from the same region that are expected to vote against the bill in the latest findings on the voting patterns of MPs on the constitutional amendments.

Reacting to the number of undecided MPs, Program director HURINET Uganda, Patrick Tumwine said that this could be a trick by the MPs to eat big from the amendments. “We need to interrogate more the undecided MPs, they could be waiting for the pay cheque to go up and hence rising their price”.

The contradicting figures are not only seen in the Buganda region, in other regions like the Ankole region, only two MPs from Buhweju and Kajara counties are voting in line with what their constituents believe in. Some of the MPs who are expected to vote against what their constituents say include those from Bukanga North, Ibanda North, Ibanda South, Igara West where the mover of the private members bill on the amendments hails from, and Isingiro North and South constituencies.

In Acholi Sub-region, Former stalwart and Woman MP Beatrice Anywar is in support of the amendments that will see president Museveni , she has always opposed seeking another term.

Anywar contradicts her constituents together with the MPs from Agago County, Chua East, Lamwo and Omoro counties who are also in support of the bill.

In Busigu region where voters strongly opposed the amendments, some MP are voting otherwise with five MPs from Bubuulo East and West, Budadiri East, Bungokho and Bulambuli supporting the bill.

In Busoga where almost 95% opposition to the bill was recorded, only two MPs are opposed to the bill, while in Karamoja only one MP is opposed to the amendments.

Reacting to the results from the survey, the executive Director, Center for constitutional governance, Sarah Bireete said that even if the bill passes, it will not stop Ugandans from changing power.

“If the bill passes, it will be the beginning of a longer battle to change presidency, we are likely to go the usual way or the Senegal way …” Bireete said. She adds that “Ugandans are not short of options, they have changed presidents 11 times, none of them has ever left following the constitution”.

Political analyst, Imam Kasozi said it was unfortunate that more people are supporting the bill. “More poor people surprisingly supporting the bill, have they been promised money?”. Imam Kasozi asked.

The report comes as Parliament is expected to receive a report from the parliamentary and legal affairs committee after consultations from the different stakeholders.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

NGO WORK

UN Experts Put Tanzanian Government on Notice – “Ensure Transparency and Respect for Indigenous Peoples’ Rights in Ngorongoro”

Published

on

April 17, 2026 press release from the offices of eight UN Special Rapporteurs1 calls for the Tanzanian government to immediately publish the findings of two presidential commissions amid growing concerns over its eviction plans.
The communication echoes the Oakland Institute’s warning that these sham Presidential Commissions are being used to rubber-stamp eviction plans without the consent of the Indigenous community.
The strongly-worded communication from the UN Special Rapporteurs states that “these reports are of profound public interest and must be made available to the public without delay…Decisions affecting tens of thousands of Indigenous Peoples cannot be taken behind closed doors.” The experts furthermore urge “the Government to halt any actions that could lead to forced displacement, and engage in meaningful dialogue with affected communities,” while issuing a clear reminder that “Indigenous Peoples have a right to remain on their traditional lands if they so choose…Conservation efforts must not come at the expense of human rights.”
Impacted Maasai communities welcome this intervention from the UN Special Rapporteurs and reaffirm their commitment to defend their rights to remain on their ancestral lands.
To learn more about the struggle against Fortress Conservation, watch the interview: The Dark Side of “Conservation”
On Fox 5 DC Weekend Live, Julie Donaldson interviews Andy Currier, Oakland Institute’s Policy Analyst. Watch the discussion on fortress conservation and the human cost of climate solutions that displace Indigenous communities who best protect our biodiversity.

Watch the video

Source: oaklandinstitute.org

Continue Reading

NGO WORK

Two dead as Siaya protests against gold mining firm turn tragic

Published

on

Ikolomani residents protesting against eviction plan to pave space for British mining company Shanta Gold on November 12, 2025. Two people died in similar protests in Gem, Siaya County.  Isaac Wale | Nation Media Group

Two people were shot dead on Monday in Gem–Ramula, Siaya County, after villagers staged a protest over an alleged eviction they linked to Shanta Gold Kenya Limited.

Area police boss Charles Wafula confirmed the incident, stating that the victims were among a group alleged to have attacked a police post after the officers moved in to disperse the demonstrators.

According to Mr Wafula, the demonstrators, angered by what they described as an illegal resettlement by the company, stormed the station during the protest, prompting officers to intervene.

“The individuals had organised a demonstration but they did not notify the police. Our officers moved in to contain the situation, but the group began attacking both officers and Ramula Police Post, damaging several items, including vehicles,” Mr Wafula said.

However, a local rights organisation has sharply contested the police account, portraying the killings as unlawful and unprovoked.

In a statement, the Community Initiative Action Group Kenya said the two victims identified as Henry Otieno and Jack Omenda were part of a peaceful protest against what they termed a forced eviction from their ancestral land.

“The community had gathered peacefully to demonstrate against Shanta Gold Limited’s attempt to relocate them without their consent,” said the lobby’s Executive Director Chris Owalla.

The group further alleged that police officers opened fire without warning following a confrontation with residents at Ramula Market.

“Witnesses state there was an exchange between the community and police after which officers opened fire, killing Henry and Jack on the spot,” Mr Owalla said.

The rights group also accused senior police officers including Mr Wafula and Charles Emodo of Directorate of Criminal Investigation, of disregarding a court order that had halted evictions and mining operations in the area.

According to Mr Owalla, the Environment and Land Court in Siaya had, on February 5, 2026, issued conservatory orders barring any involuntary resettlement of residents in Ramula and its environs, pending the hearing of a petition.

The organisation is now calling for investigations by the Independent Policing Oversight Authority and the the Director of Public Prosecutions, alongside an independent autopsy on the victims.

Fear of evictions

The unrest is rooted in long-standing tensions over planned gold mining operations by Shanta Gold in the region. The company is seeking to establish a large-scale extraction project – one that residents fear could uproot communities and erode livelihoods carefully built over generations.

Similar scenes of unrest were reported in November 2025 in Ikolomani, where locals protested against possible relocations linked to the same company.

Shanta Gold has previously signalled its intention to invest in a multi-billion-shilling project in western Kenya, targeting high-grade gold deposits expected to yield significant output over several years.

Source: nation.africa

Continue Reading

NGO WORK

Tanzania: Commissions call for mass eviction of Indigenous Maasai from world-famous tourist destinations.

Published

on

Two presidential commissions have recommended the mass eviction of Maasai people from some of East Africa’s most iconic conservation areas and tourist destinations.

The commissions were established by Tanzania’s President Samia Suluhu Hassan following previous evictions of Maasai pastoralists from parts of the world-famous Serengeti ecosystem, and large-scale protests in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area in 2024.

Now, despite a global outcry at the earlier evictions, the two Commissions have:

  • Backed the previous evictions and called for them to continue, including in the UNESCO World Heritage Sites of Ngorongoro and neighboring Lake Natron.
  • Described the long-standing Maasai presence in the area as an “environmental pressure” that needs to be reduced.
  • Threatened local NGOs that support the Maasai, accusing them of “spreading misinformation or propaganda” because they “conflict with government interests.”
  • Called for the “relocation” of all “non-conservation activities” [in other words, Maasai occupancy of the land] outside the conservation areas.
  • Called for existing recognition of the Maasai people’s right to live in the Ngorongoro area to be removed.

An anonymous Maasai spokesperson said today: “We are blamed for environmental degradation while the unchecked expansion of tourism is ignored. Forced relocation, disguised as policy, has deprived our people of basic rights and dignity. We reject any continuation of these measures and condemn the Commission’s failure to reflect the voices, realities, and rights of our people.”

Still from a video showing the Maasai protesting the violent evictions from their ancestral lands, 2022.

The authorities maintain that these are “voluntary relocations.” However, the Maasai have overwhelmingly rejected being moved.

The Ngorongoro Conservation Area is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. When it was established, the ancestral right of the Maasai to live there with their cattle was explicitly acknowledged. But UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee has backed the so-called “voluntary relocations”, and UNESCO endorses the “fortress conservation” model that underpins Tanzania’s approach.

Survival International Director Caroline Pearce said today, “These commissions were a sham, a gimmick designed to give Tanzania’s violent persecution of the Maasai a veneer of respectability. It was widely predicted that they’d back further evictions: the whole saga just confirms that colonial-style fortress conservation is alive and well in Tanzania today, and enthusiastically endorsed by UNESCO.

“These recommendations give the green light to more evictions, in Ngorongoro and beyond. And while the Maasai are robbed of their lands and livelihood, the government, tour operators and so-called conservationists will enrich themselves from a landscape emptied of its original owners.”

Source: survivalinternational.org

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter