Reconciliation »

The Challenges facing Uganda’s Reconciliation Process

Ambrose J. Bwangatto

Introduction

Uganda is a country which is deeply divided along ethnic and religious lines. This fact makes the reconciliation process a very complex concern given the dynamics entrenched within the public consciousness for over half a century. These divisions have been tactfully utilized by the politicians for their own ends of achieving political power. In principle, it is not easy to talk about Uganda as a nation since the national character is barely present and people pride more in their religious affiliation or ethnic background. However, since the jubilee year 2000, there has been various voices calling for the change of trend in the way the situation is addressed and more people are calling for reconciliation and building Uganda as one nation despite the multiplicity at all levels and the gravity of the wrongs committed in the past and present. Although some work in this direction is already gathering speed, the task is still enormous given the historical prejudices and animosity which is still fresh in many people’s minds. This means that reconciliation in Uganda must go hand in hand with the healing of memories. In this paper, I will attempt to scale back into history and bring to the fore the background which necessitates reconciliation and also the complexity of the same process. But the most central point to advocate for reconciliation is going to be the guerrilla war in the north of the country where thousands of civilians are caught between two fighting forces and hence abused and denigrated. But before we shall give a general picture of the whole country and the need for reconciliation at the national level, although this is a project with long term plans. The main focus will be reconciliation in Acholi sub-region of northern Uganda.

The colonial period

Uganda’s modern history has been characterized by conflicts and one of the most common conflict has arisen out of the role of religion in politics. To understand Uganda’s situation well, we need to scale back into history briefly, so as to understand the current situation. Although there has never been anything like a State Church in Uganda, throughout the colonial period the Anglican Church was generally regarded as an unofficial establishment. The Bishop of Uganda was regarded as third in order of precedence after his Excellency the Governor and His Highness the Kabaka[1] of Buganda. The Anglican Church had important ceremonial responsibilities – the Anglican Cathedral at Namirembe[2] in Kampala was the site of the coronation of the Kabaka, of royal marriages, baptisms and funerals[3]. In 1892 during one of the religious wars, the colonial administrators in Uganda in the person of Captain Frederick Lugard sided with the Protestants and they became victors. They reinstated Kabaka Mwanga – who was firmly committed to their party and divided the great offices of state between themselves at the exclusion of the Catholics and Muslims. By doing this they hoped that these would leave Buganda altogether, thus making Buganda an exclusively Protestant state. But they were prevented from implementing such a drastic solution by the new British colonial power because of the guaranteed religious freedom for Catholic and Protestant missionary activity at the Congress of Berlin in 1884, the basis for the scramble for Africa, and did not want to invoke international protest by discrimination against French Catholics[4]. According to Prof. Dr. John Mary Waliggo Uganda’s politics since the 1880’s has been built on religious sectarianism. He highlights the following developments: Multi-religious denominations and religions resulted in multi-political ideologies: Protestant, Catholic, Islamic and traditionalist. There came into being a clear hierarchy of political power where Protestants came first, Catholics second, Muslims third and traditionalists last. This historical pattern since the arrival of the Protestant missionaries has tended to be the norm in Uganda’s politics where the Protestant Church has tended to establish a symbiotic union with the state in ambivalent relationship. This marginalization in politics by the Protestants prompted the Catholics to react against this unjust marginalization of other religious groups by the Protestant establishment that the Democratic Party was formed in 1954 to promote and protect Catholic interests and champion democracy. Other reasons for its formation included the fear of communism which church leaders feared greatly. Added to this was the birth of Lay Apostolate or Catholic Action which emphasized, among others, the duty of lay Christians to actively participate in politics and economy in order to imbue them with Christian values. The creation of DP forced the protestant establishment to seek new ways of defending its privileged political status. This explains the political alliances of the late 1950s and early 1960s[5]. This kind of religious bigotry has been a key player in dividing Uganda and causing grievous harm to the social harmony up to the present date.

Ethnicity is another factor which has torn apart Uganda’s social fabric and if at all Uganda is to exist as a nation, we need reconciliation in that direction. It is better to situate this factor in its historical perspective in order to see the validity but also the complexity of the reconciliation process.   Buganda, the most powerful and influential region in the modern state of Uganda was never conquered by colonial armies; rather the powerful king, Mutesa[6], agreed to have a protectorate status. At the time, Mutesa claimed territory as far west as Lake Albert and he considered the agreement with Britain to be an alliance between equals. Baganda armies went on to help establish colonial rule in other areas, and Baganda agents served as tax collectors throughout the protectorate. Trading centres in Buganda became important towns in the protectorate, and the Baganda took advantage of the opportunities provided by European commerce and education. At independence in 1962 Buganda had achieved the highest standard of living and the highest literacy rate in the country.

The twentieth-century influence of the Baganda in Uganda has reflected the impact of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century developments. A series of Kabakas amassed military and political power by killing rivals to the throne, abolishing hereditary positions of authority, and exacting higher taxes from their subjects. Baganda armies also seized territory held by Bunyoro the neighboring kingdom to the west. One of the most powerful appointed advisers of the Kabaka was the Katikiro, who was in charge of the kingdom's administrative and judicial systems - effectively serving as both prime minister and chief justice. The Katikiro and other powerful ministers formed an inner circle of advisers who could summon lower-level chiefs and other appointed advisers to confer on policy matters. By the end of the nineteenth century, the Kabaka had replaced many clan heads with appointed officials and claimed the title "head of all the clans[7]."

The power of the Kabaka impressed British officials, but political leaders in neighboring Bunyoro kingdom were not receptive to British officials who arrived with Baganda escorts. Buganda became the centrepiece of the new protectorate, with a degree of control over the other kingdoms: Toro, Nkore, Busoga and Bunyoro. Many Baganda were able to take advantage of opportunities provided by schools and businesses in their area. Baganda civil servants also helped administer other ethnic groups, and Uganda's early history was written from the perspective of the Baganda and the colonial officials who became accustomed to dealing with them[8]. This kind of imperialism exercised by the Baganda created them enemies from the wider Ugandan society and the Baganda have experienced animosity and hatred because of their enviable position in Uganda’s general social structure. Towards Uganda’s independence the British colonial administrators instigated the Southern / Northern divide, this is proposed by two strands, first, that the British favoured the northern tribes especially the Acholi at the expense of the more educated and economically more developed southerners who were a potential threat to colonialism. The second strand is the colonial – induced unequal development. The British deliberately excluded the Baganda and other southerners from the army as a matter of policy and it is correct to say that the British did not introduce “commercial agriculture” in Northern Uganda[9]. The British initial contact with the Baganda helped them establish a beachhead and spread their influence throughout present-day Uganda. The relationship was mutually beneficial and the Baganda prospered generating a sense of superiority on their part and envy and hatred from other tribes that still simmer to this day. So conflicts in Uganda are historically rooted, colonially linked and ethnically related.

Conflicts in Uganda

The history of Uganda began with the coming of the British who coined the name Uganda from a Swahili expression meaning the land of the Ganda. This created a problem because many people from other regions of Uganda other than Buganda feel that they are foreigners in the land of the Baganda. There was a proposal by one of the fanatics against the Baganda that the name of the country be changed and called “The Nile Republic”[10]. I think the conflicts in Uganda have a complex background. Some of the conflicts which are experienced today in Uganda, have deep historical roots. Discussing reconciliation, presupposes discussing, first, the issue of conflict, because it is the conflict, which people want to resolve in the reconciliation process and restore harmony. But using the words of Archbishop Desmond Tutu who refer to reconciliation as restorative justice, we contend that the central concern is not   retribution or punishment. In the spirit of Ubuntu, the central concern is the healing of breaches, the redressing of imbalances, the restoration of broken relationships, a seeking to rehabilitate both the victim and the perpetrator, who should be given the opportunity to be reintegrated into the community that he has injured by his offence[11]. So, being conscious of the conflict is central to arriving at reconciliation as a goal as we shall see later.

According to the Caritas Internationalis Handbook on Reconciliation, among the numerous categories of conflict most analysts agree on, there are three types of major armed conflict.

Inter-state conflict is conflict between two independent states.

Revolutionary conflict involves insurgency groups within the boundaries of the state and aims to change the government. This type of conflict may also include repressive violence by the state, be it state terror or genocide.

Identity conflict involves culturally defined groups whose identity is based on shared racial, ethnic, linguistic, religious, or kinship characteristics. This conflict may be about control of territory or inter-group violence.

To the list of civil conflicts or intranational conflicts we can add factional conflict which covers coups d’état, power struggles by elite groups, warlordism and criminality where the aim is to seize power and retain it to further particular interests. We must also bear in mind that conflicts can change in nature over a period of time. What starts out as a revolution or an identity conflict could, in time, become a factional conflict[12].

Uganda has experienced a number of conflicts most of which fall in the category of identity conflict and to a bigger extent revolutionary conflicts. However, in the past twenty years, there is a conflict in the north of the country which has gone on unabated and has lead to the suffering and displacement of countless peoples and keeping thousands in Internally Displaced Peoples camps (IDP). According to Mr. M.Kibuuka, the following is a summary of mistakes which have created conflicts that need to be addressed in a reconciliation dialogue:

• The 1964 Mutiny

• The 1966 Lubiri Crisis and abolition of all cultural institutions

• The 1967 Pigeon Constitution

• The 1969 One Party declaration

• The 1971 Coup d'etat

• The 1979 Liberation War

• The 1979 Lule issues, accompanied with Muwanga, Binaisa etc.

• The 1980 Controversial General Elections

• The 1980 West Nile Armed Incursion

• The 1985 Okello-Okello case

• The 1986 Museveni Takeover

• The 1990 Broad base government prolongation

• The 1995 NRM Constitution

• The 1996 Presidential Elections

• The 2001 Disputed Presidential Elections

• The Lugogo Assassination Attempt

• The Acholi Tragedy

• Obote wanted dead on sight

• Besigye, wife, son and family pursued

• Harassment of Reform Agenda Activists[13].  

Although these mistakes have been pointed out as very fundamental in a reconciliation dialogue in Uganda, for me I consider, the Acholi[14] tragedy as the most important and urgent issue to be addressed first. This is because the people of Acholi have been pressed hard between two fighting armies all of which have committed atrocities against the civilian population. The suffering of the Acholi people has been covered massively by the international media and candlelight vigils have been held in many cities around the world. The people have been abused by both government soldiers, The Uganda Peoples Defence Forces (UPDF) and a rebel militia group called the Lords Resistance Army (LRA). The main concern here is the victim and how to help the victim maintain their humanity in such a situation of terror.

Abuses by the LRA and the UPDF against the civilians

In this section, we are going to look at the Acholi tragedy and the abuses which have stripped the people of their dignity. Northern Uganda is one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world today because of the extensive and prolonged displacement of a very high proportion of its population into large camps where the conditions are poor or  too appalling and there is little prospect of work, health care, education, or return home. The displacement has been caused by widespread human rights abuses by both sides[15].

Under international humanitarian law (the laws of war), the armed conflict in northern Uganda is considered a non-international (internal) armed conflict. Applicable law includes article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, the Second Additional Protocol of 1977 to the Geneva Conventions, and customary international humanitarian law.  International humanitarian law, which applies to both government forces and rebel groups, prohibits direct or indiscriminate attacks against civilians and civilian property, and requires the humane treatment of all persons in custody[16].

Although engaging in a few attacks on UPDF detaches (military detachments or posts), the LRA continues to make the people of northern Uganda its main targets. The LRA is responsible for years of wilful killings, beatings, large-scale abductions, forced recruitment of adults and children, sexual violence against girls whom it assigns as “wives” or sex slaves to commanders, large-scale looting and destruction of civilian property, forcing the displacement of hundreds of thousands and being a prime factor in the destruction of the economy of northern Uganda and the resultant impoverishment of its inhabitants. Many northern Ugandans have abandoned hope of justice—although not of personal revenge—and long for peace at any price.

The Ugandan army is stationed in or near every camp in the districts of Gulu, Kitgum and Pader in northern Uganda, ostensibly to protect the civilians residing in the camps. It frequently fails to live up to this responsibility, rarely patrolling aggressively and sometimes running away if faced by a large LRA force. In every camp for displaced persons there is found cases of abuse by the LRA and also by UPDF soldiers. UPDF-administered beatings of civilians are extremely commonplace, but the killing of civilians, sometimes inside the camps, is also documented. In some camps, civilians faced UPDF abuse on a daily basis. The scale of UPDF abuse continues at an unacceptable level and the protection and accountability structures that would put a stop to such abuse are not in place[17].  

The internationally recognised human rights organisation, Human Rights Watch, has compiled a catalogue of the following abuses committed against the people by both government soldiers the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces UPDF) and a rebel insurgent group called the Lords Resistance Army (LRA).

Wilful killing of civilians

The LRA continues to commit mass killing of civilians in northern Uganda, keeping the population—and its own combatants, mostly forcibly recruited during childhood—in a constant state of terror. The rebels attack camps and settlements and are keeping the vulnerable population in fear. The LRA does not hesitate to execute those who do not obey the rebels’ orders to perform certain tasks, even if the person is physically incapable of carrying out the task. Local officials are commonly targeted by the LRA. Several LRA deliberate killings have been committed under duress by abductees, often children. They mainly hack their victims with machetes, beating with sticks, shooting at close range or even burning their victims with tyres and dry grass

The UPDF has unlawfully killed a number of civilians in northern Uganda in recent years. People found outside the camps are commonly assumed by the army to be rebels or “rebel collaborators” and frequently find themselves being shot at by the army. But several victims have been shot inside the camps. Many shootings occur at night at close range, and are deliberate and not merely cases of mistaken identity as the army often asserts in its defence. Other deaths are the result of beatings so severe that the victim dies. The killings sometimes seem to be for no discernible reason—other than because the soldiers can do as they wish and later claim the civilians injured or killed were “rebel collaborators,” whatever the circumstances[18].

Torture and Other Mistreatment

Civilians in northern Uganda continue to suffer gross abuse at the hands of the LRA. The LRA beats and otherwise mistreats civilians as a part of a campaign intended to instil terror in the population.  It severely punishes anyone who does not do what it demands, even if that person lacks the physical capacity to comply.

There is a general pattern of UPDF abuses in northern Uganda. The abuses are not the acts of just a few undisciplined soldiers. People going out to the fields to harvest or fetch firewood and water invariably find themselves confronted by the UPDF, whose soldiers beat or torture people almost every day. There are documents of negligent or wilful killings of civilians by the UPDF and summary execution by the army of those people suspected of being rebels or rebel collaborators and  many of those people who are reported being shot at are badly injured. Government soldiers routinely abuse civilians in the displaced persons camps of northern Uganda. Civilians alleged to be “rebel collaborators” are commonly detained and sometimes tortured or severely beaten with sticks as part of the interrogation process. Some of the detainees reported being held in pits with other prisoners for several days. Very few of those detained ever receive a trial. Many UPDF beatings of civilians occurs where the soldiers believe the victims are breaking the army-imposed local curfew, which restricts the times that civilians are allowed to be outside the camps. They even impose a curfew on how late the displaced can be outside their homes at night—although the homes are small huts in the middle of a displaced persons camp. The situation has become so serious that some civilians seem to view such outright abuse at the hands of the soldiers as normal. Beatings of civilians occur almost daily[19].

Mutilations

Since February 2005 there has been an upsurge in attacks in which the LRA has brutally disfigured civilians. The LRA first started mutilating civilians in the early 1990s as a response to the government’s attempts to form local militias in northern Uganda. Victims’ hands, feet, noses, ears, lips and breasts were cut off, often as punishment, causing widespread panic amongst the population. These brutal tactics have been extremely effective in promoting fear and deterring cooperation with the government: mutilations symbolically cut off the allegedly offending part, i.e., the ears that hear, the lips that kiss, according to what the LRA fighters tell the victims[20].

Rape

Rape and other sexual violence are frequent occurrences in and around the camps. In general, the LRA has not been implicated in acts of rape during attacks on displaced persons camps or even when encountering women in rural areas. There is no document of any case of rape by the LRA in the camps, or when rebels encountered women or girls in the fields. Rape, on many occasions gang rape, has been committed after the young women and adolescent girls were taken back to the LRA camp. The lack of rape in the field and the gang rape after returning to base suggests that these crimes are sanctioned if committed according to orders. Community leaders give the reason LRA fighters do not rape captured women and girls before taking them to the LRA stronghold is Kony’s hold over the LRA combatants: “They are superstitious that Kony[21] knows everything they do. Kony doesn’t want them to ‘contaminate’ women because Kony picks the women and then shares the rest among the others”. The LRA has abducted thousands of women and girls who are still being held by the LRA and have given birth to children in captivity. Others have escaped, with or without their children. . LRA fighters have sometimes accused older married women they have captured and then released of being wives of UPDF soldiers and therefore of being infected with the HIV virus. The LRA abducts younger girls who are more likely to be virgins and therefore not exposed to the HIV virus[22].  

The lack of discipline within the army and the almost complete lack of accountability contribute to an environment and atmosphere in which women are extremely vulnerable to abuse, both from the UPDF and within the community. Women are particularly exposed at night if they are found outside of their huts. The impoverishment of displaced persons, among other factors, has caused a breakdown in social values. Soldiers are often the only ones in the camps with money. They can entice young girls, even married women, into sex. Soldiers are often the “richest” people in area because they receive regular income. Parents sometimes complain that soldiers have “defiled” their children, many younger than sixteen. They complain that soldiers have tried to marry girls without the parents’ consent and sometimes in the face of the parents’ opposition. Overcrowded camp conditions have contributed to the occurrence of sexual violence and rape, which are reported to occur at a higher rate than when people lived in rural outposts[23].

Abductions

UNICEF estimates that some 20,000 children have been abducted in the nineteen years of war. The level of abductions surged after the LRA returned from Sudan following the UPDF Operation Iron Fist inside Sudan starting in mid-2002. Abductions appeared to be declining in the second half of 2004, but reports in February and March 200[24]5 indicated that the LRA was again abducting children to bolster its ranks.

The LRA often engages in large-scale attacks on camps or villages where they will abduct many people all at once. At other times, farmers and others are abducted in small groups or alone when they go to their fields for food to complement the small emergency food rations they receive. After abduction, the LRA brutally indoctrinates children and adults alike and incorporates them into its ranks. The LRA forces the children and adults to commit atrocities as part of the indoctrination process following abduction. Children especially are intimidated and brutalized to such an extent that often they are frightened to return home. Extreme violence is a way for the LRA to psychologically remove the abductees from their previous, normal life at home. The rebels often do not abduct adults permanently but release them after they transport stolen goods to the LRA camps. The short-term porter abductees transport stolen food and other property such as clothing and radios. Commonly the abductees are beaten into submission and then forced to carry heavy loads for hours at a time. Those that tire on the journey are beaten more severely or even killed[25].

Arbitrary arrest and Detention

Fear of the authorities and reluctance to report abuses inflicted by the UPDF on the part of victims often results from fear of retaliation. Victims fear beatings, torture and perhaps death, inflicted in the barracks or elsewhere. UPDF officers have suggested that protests against UPDF abuses may be false propaganda designed to “make the government look bad,” particularly when the complaints are made to international organizations. Military intelligence suspicions may be raised against those complaining on the grounds that they may be “rebel supporters.” The complainant may be detained for military interrogation. UPDF’s practice of detaining suspects for prolonged periods in barracks is not only used against people complaining of army abuses but also against others suspected of rebel activity. It is in the barracks where torture and other forms of ill treatment most often occur[26].

The work of reconciliation in Acholi

Reconciliation in General

Reconciliation is a complex term, and there is little agreement on its definition. This is because reconciliation is both a goal – something to achieve – and  a process – a means to achieve that goal[27]. A great deal of controversy arises from confusing these two ideas. The goal of reconciliation is a future aspiration, something important to aim towards, perhaps even an ideal state to hope for. But the process is very much a present-tense way of dealing with how things are – building a reconciliation process is the means to work, effectively and practically, towards that final goal- and is invaluable in itself. I would consider this understanding as the most applicable in the case of the Acholi situation because reconciliation as an over-aching process which includes the search for truth, justice, forgiveness, and healing, means finding a way to live alongside former enemies, not necessarily to love them, or forgive them, or forget the past in any way, but to coexist with them, to develop the degree of cooperation necessary to share our society with them, so that we all have better lives together that we have had separately[28]. Reconciliation is a parallel process that redesigns the relationship between two once former enemies. This means that effective reconciliation is the best guarantee that the violence of the past will not return. If a new relationship can be built on respect and a real understanding of each other’s needs, fears and aspirations, the habits and patterns of cooperation that develop are then the best safeguard against a return to violent division. This then provides the basic definition of reconciliation as the process through which a society moves from a divided past to a shared future[29].

There are three simple, but very profound, observations about this process: First, it is not only a process, unfortunately it is a long-term process. There is no quick- fix to reconciliation. It takes time. And it takes its own time, its pace cannot be dictated. Second, it is also a deep process, it involves a coming to terms with an imperfect reality which demands changes in our attitudes, aspirations, our emotions and feelings, perhaps even our beliefs. Such profound change is a vast and often painful challenge, and cannot be rushed or imposed. Third, reconciliation is also a very broad process. It applies to everyone. It is not just a process for those who suffered  directly and those who inflicted  the suffering, central though are those people. So, while there is a crucial individual element to reconciliation, there is  also  a community-wide element that demands a questioning of the attitudes, prejudices and negative stereotypes that we all develop about the enemy during the violent conflict[30]. In our understanding of reconciliation, the victim is always taken to be the main focus since the victim is the only vulnerable person who is most affected negatively and directly by the conflict. Effective reconciliation, as we saw earlier on, guarantees that the violence of the past is not to happen again. So, here, reconciliation addresses the concerns of  all parties involved in a conflict, victim and aggressor alike. But since the Acholi tragedy has mainly the victims pressed between two powers of violence, it is better to look at the victims.

Victims

Violent conflict creates all sorts of victims: those killed and tortured, those bereaved and maimed, those assaulted and raped, those injured in battle and by mines, those abducted and detained, the banned and the homeless, those intimidated and humiliated. Victims are at the heart of all dimensions of the reconciliation process in societies emerging from years of violent conflict. Victims can be classified on the basis of three broad distinctions. One, Individual and Collective Victims. All brutal conflicts inflict severe harm on individual men and women, but most, in particular genocide and civil war, also cause collective victims. Collective victims are created when violent actions are directed at specific population, for example, an ethnic, ideological or religious group. In such case, individuals are targeted because of their connection to an identifiable collectivity. Overall, the effect is always to victimise the society at large[31]. Two, Direct and Indirect Victims. Direct victims are those who have suffered the direct effects of violence. They have been killed, or physically and psychologically abused, detained, discriminated against and many other evils. Indirect victims are those who are linked to direct victims in such a way  that too suffer because of that link. Three, are the First-Generational and Second-Generational Victims. First generation victims are those who have been victimised during their life time. But children and sometimes even their grandchildren have to bear the consequences of what happened and may feel and behave like victims, displaying bitterness and deep hurt. Trauma can be handed down. The second-generation, particularly, tends to absorb and retain pain and grief, consciously and unconsciously. They carry traces of the experiences into adulthood, and this is a problematic heritage that can threaten the future of a society[32].

Because victimisation is partly gender specific, the issue of gender can be discussed on its own since brutal conflicts cause immense suffering to all people, and it has a different impact on men and women alike. Men are more likely than women  to be involved in fighting and to be killed or wounded. Women suffer the brunt of various forms of sexual assault during times of violence or oppression.  Mass rape of women belonging to an enemy group is practiced as a means of assaulting the role and identity of the men in the group as providers and protectors of the family and group. Young girls are forced to marry men either as a strategy of creating alliances or to satisfy the needs of men isolated from the family sphere during the war. Women have been exposed to increasing risk of rape, abuse and stigmatisation by members of their own community. Growing poverty has induced many women to prostitution for a living with a high risk of becoming infected with HIV/AIDS. A long term consequence of several of these acts of abuse is children who not only lack a father but who are also illegitimate and a continuous reminder of the violation[33]. In northern Uganda, thousands of children, called “night commuters”, leave their homes and go to take shelter on verandas in towns and missions stations. Children have turned out to be the most vulnerable victims of the war.

Traditional Reconciliation in Acholi (Mato Oput)  

I wish to start with this statement below to show how the local people in the Acholi sub-region in northern Uganda have undertaken the task of reconciliation within their own community. They employ the traditional means of reconciliation as provided in their cultural heritage.  “I know that the long-suffering Acholi are part of Uganda.  I know that the insecurity there is a national tragedy.  But I also know that the people who have suffered most under Kony are the people of Acholi. I also know that while the rest of Uganda will have to deal with the consequences of the Acholi tragedy, the immediate people who must confront the dilemma are the local people in Acholi.  It is them who have lost thousands of their family members, and it is them who have to try and reconcile the community.  My point is this: if the Acholi people who have suffered so much from this senseless tragedy are ready and willing to forgive their tormentors for the sake of ethnic harmony in Acholi, do we have the moral ground to tell them how or demand otherwise”?[34]. The working of Acholi traditional system during conflicts is based on constant consultation, negotiating solutions to problems and respect for the authority of the Chiefs (Rwot) build on consensus. The Chiefs critically provide Leadership in times of crisis such as this war, migration or resettlement, famine as well as other natural and man-made calamities, and where the need for reconciliation arises. Capital offences are redressed by the compensation system (“culu kwor”), followed by exercise of forgiveness and reconciliation (“mato-oput”) and finally a commitment not to repeat the offence again (“gomo tong”). The Chiefs consistently maintain inherent cultural values of neutrality / impartiality in political and administration processes in order to enhance their potential in the reconciliation and conflict management; esteem for life because a life lost should not be repaid with another life, but through reconciliation and the healing process begins for another chapter in life. The Acholi cultural institutions remain non-segregative against tribe, religion or any affiliation of an individual, group, or institution. This is the epitome of unity. There is consideration of dialogue (“kilok aloka”) and non-violence is the most appropriate way of solving conflict. All functions are based on truth, sincerity, trust and honesty, which provide a cushion for anybody to fall back for consolation, counselling and guidance and maintain the granary of constructive secrets(“dero mung”). The cultural/traditional institution of leadership is inherited according to the tradition of the people and not competed for or elective. The institution is the custodian of the cultural values of the people. Various tribes in Uganda have various traditional ways of coming to terms with the wrongs of the past other than by violence. The buzzword in Acholi these days is “Mato Oput” in its efforts to reconcile with the LRA fighters who have laid down their arms and the people who have been abused. In this process of “Mato Oput” cultural values are respected and leaders play a larger role for example, cleansing of the returnees. They do carry out more ceremonies, because they are in great need today perform rituals which according to tradition are meant to re-integrate the members of the community who are believed to have strayed from the cultural norms of community co-existence and social harmony. The two common rituals in Mato Oput are, One, Slaughtering of a Sheep: According to the elders this is a ritual for cleansing and is only done if all the children are back from the bush and two, bending of spears: the elders state that the bending of spear is a cleansing ritual and is only done between two or more warring tribes. I would interpret this that since a spear is first, an instrument of terror or violence and hence bending a spear means doing away with violence and build a new community grounded on humanistic values of forgiveness, mercy and love. Secondly, in traditional African society a spear is an instrument of self-defence, so bending it means that an individual is no longer seeking defence and security from a mere piece of metal, but rather from the wellbeing and harmony which exists in a community. I think the practice of this ritual is a re-invention of traditional norms and values which were the basis for the stability of African societies in the centuries past and mutual co-existence of the people despite the variety in worldviews, beliefs, origins and cultures. In the past the Acholi have exercised  mass reconciliations, involving churches and traditional leaders. For example, the Bending of the Spears ceremony that took place between the Acholi and the people of West Nile in 1985/6 was a model. After this ceremony, the main problems were solved between the peoples and only personal differences remained.

 This re-invention of tradition in many African countries especially to deal with reconciliation and establish social harmony is in line with the African philosophy of Ubuntu (humanness) which has recently come into focus more especially as a result of the political developments in South Africa and the call by President Thabo Mbeki for an “African Renaissance”. However, it does not follow that all African people propagate or are even consciously aware of the philosophy as such. This philosophy is important because it provides Africans a sense of self – identity, self – respect and achievement and enables African to deal with their problems in a positive manner by drawing on the humanistic values which they have inherited and perpetuated through their history. However, talking about African philosophy does not mean essentialising the African experience as being unique and valid outside actual lived experiences and histories. Metaphysics is part of Ubuntu philosophy and is very much a center of reconciliation in conflict situations as African philosophy holds that the living dead can, when called upon by the living to, intercede and advise them in certain circumstances. Such intercession is crucial in reconciliation in which ancestors, invisible beings, play a significant role. Thus, the insistence by Africans to uphold certain metaphysical relationships to religion enables them to “straddle” worldly situations, including the embracing of different religions and invisible forces, without losing meaning in life. At the same time by adopting these different religious traditions to their own belief systems, they are able to synthesize them into one belief system that is coherent in their own understanding of the world around them[35]. The act of reconciliation is based of African understanding of politics and law as they unfold in real life. Umuntu is the maker of politics, religion and law and in the philosophical domain, Ubuntu is the basis of law and politics. Therefore African law based on Ubuntu is a living law based on their recognition of the continuous oneness and wholeness of the living, the living – dead and the unborn. These laws are combinations of rules of behaviour, which are embodied in the flow of daily life. It is for this reason that African political philosophy responds easily and organically to demands for reconciliation as a means of restoring the equilibrium of the flow of life when disturbed[36].

Acholi Religious Leaders and Reconciliation

The Acholi Religious Leaders Peace Initiative (ARLPI) is an Interfaith or Interreligious group which brings together religious leaders from the main stream Christian churches, that is the Catholic church, the Protestant church and the orthodox church  and the leaders of the Islamic faith from the Acholi sub-region of northern Uganda. They work in close collaboration with the Paramount Chief ( Rwot Madit) of Acholi. Their main task has been to coordinate peace initiatives and comfort the people who are badly victimised by the war. In 1999 the Acholi religious leaders forwarded six points which they think have perpetuated the suffering of the people of northern Uganda and these points required urgent attention: These are enumerated here below: 

First, Return of abducted children. According to UNICEF, over 14,000 have been abducted by the LRA, from northern Uganda in the course of its brutal campaign against the government of Uganda. The abducted children, including primary and secondary school boys and girls, have been forcibly recruited into rebel ranks. Some have been forcibly married, raped and defiled, maimed or killed. This is a serious humanitarian disaster that requires quick international response. These children are traumatised and feel betrayed by society which has not been able to protect them. 

Second, The Amnesty Law. The Acholi and all people of goodwill would like to see an immediate end to the war. This position was stated clearly by a cross-section of Acholi who testified before the Parliamentary Committee on Defence and Internal Affairs in 1997 and during several meetings attended by the Acholi including the “Kacoke Madit” 1997, “the Bedo-Piny” in June 1998, the “Kacoke Madit” 1998 and the International Peace Conference on the “Reconciliation Agenda” in September this year. The same sentiment has been echoed in all sensitisation seminars during the our “Community Peace Education”. The Acholi people are asking for an Amnesty Law that will serve as an instrument of reconciliation. They are looking forward to an early enactment of the Amnesty Bill 1999 by the Parliament of Uganda. The Law must be comprehensive and should have in-built mechanisms for sensitising the people for demobilisation and for monitoring compliance by all major players. 

Third, Uganda—Sudan Relationship. The current strained diplomatic relations between Uganda and the Sudan is perceived by a large section of the population of Northern Uganda as being responsible for their suffering. The Government of the Sudan is supporting the Lord’s Resistance Army. On the other hand, Uganda is also accused of supporting the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army (SPLA). The Acholi and all people of goodwill, particularly those from other parts of northern Uganda who are affected by the war, would like Uganda and the Sudan to resolve their differences through dialogue involving all stakeholders. We would like to see a negotiated solution to the armed conflicts between Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo and a complete demilitarization of the entire African continent. 

Fourth, Resettlement, Reconstruction & Development. The war in northern Uganda has disrupted the social fibre of Acholi society. Families have been separated. Thousands of people, both young and old have been up-rooted from their homes and are scattered all over the globe. In an attempt to protect the local people from the LRA rebel attack, the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) created “protected villages”. The people living in these villages are deprived of their natural means of livelihood and are being assisted by various non-governmental organizations; but this is not adequate. Time will come when these people will have to go back to their villages. It is important early preparation be made for their resettlement. They will require food, shelter and basic re-settlement kits. If the Amnesty Law takes effect as is expected, the returning rebels and abducted children will require a whole range of rehabilitation services including counselling, vocational training and substantial re-settlement packages. Owing to the devastating effect of the 13 year conflict, the Acholi sub-region will require special post-war reconstruction and development programme. These should cover all the key sectors such as roads, water, transport and communication, commercial agriculture, tourism, small scale industries, rural electrification and the manufacturing sector. 

Fifth, Education. The education sector has been the main victim of the war.  Many teachers have been killed and schools burnt down. Nearly all secondary schools outside the urban centres have been forced to re-locate to Gulu and Kitgum towns. As mentioned earlier, thousands of children of school going age have been abducted and forced to take up arms. Those who escaped from captivity have received limited help in terms of counselling. Many are unable to continue with their studies.

During the early part of the insurgency the Acholi lost their cattle, which is a source of wealth and of payment of school fees, to the warring parties and cattle rustlers who took advantage of the conflict. Many parents are, therefore, unable to meet the high cost of education. The instability has also led to a drastic decline in the academic standard of schools in the two districts. Consequently, the number of young people in institutions of higher learning, in comparison with other parts of Uganda, is disappointingly low. This state of affairs has very serious implications for the development of the country. The Acholi community are asking for a special scholarship fund to support secondary and higher education in Gulu and Kitgum. 

Sixth, Human Rights and the Rule of Law. The Human Rights situation in Northern Uganda is quite grim. Since the out break of the insurgency in 1986, thousands of people have been killed, abducted or brutalised in one way or the other by various armed elements including the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF). Various non-governmental organisations including Amnesty International have taken up this matter with the concerned authorities and have publicised numerous reports featuring human rights violation in the region. This matter has also been highlighted by The Uganda Human Rights Commission in its 1997 Annual Report. The institutional machinery for addressing human rights violations has been weak. There is need to create awareness of fundamental human rights and how these rights can be protected. The Churches and non-governmental organisations can play a very important role in this respect. The Uganda Human Rights Commission has just opened a regional office for Northern Uganda in Gulu. This is a most welcomed development. We look forward to working closely with this office to address issues relating to human rights protection and promotion and the rule of law in a comprehensive manner[37].  

The Acholi religious leaders have highlighted the gravity of the situation in northern Uganda and have briefed the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague, addressed the U.S senate and the United Nations. They have organized or acted as mediators in peace talks between the government and the rebels although this has not yielded much fruit in terms of securing a peace deal. Unfortunately the religious leaders have become targets of the rebellion. This is attested to because of a radical shift in the LRA's attitude to the church. Previously the LRA had been willing to place its trust in Acholi religious leaders to broker peace negotiations. Most Acholi Religious Leaders' Peace Initiative (ARLPI) representatives are representatives of the Catholic Church. Father Joseph Gerner of the Catholic parish in Kitgum said that Kony made statements which reveal a very worrying shift in the LRA's rhetoric. The religious leaders came to know of this shift because Kony has been using radio equipment stolen from Catholic missions to communicate with his soldiers. As this equipment is set to a specific mission frequency, other Catholic missions have been picking up Kony's transmissions. One time Joseph Kony was heard giving this order to his troops: "Catholic missions must be destroyed, priests and missionaries killed in cold blood and nuns beaten black and blue.[38]" This attitude of the insurgents makes the work of the religious leaders in Acholi sub-region uncertain and difficult. The agents of the process of reconciliation feel threatened and this may slow the work on this process. However, since reconciliation is a process, then, it may take a little while before we realise reconciliation as a goal in Uganda. 

Conclusion

Reconciliation is a broad theme which is ever valid. It can only be understood and exercised from a certain perspective for a specific objective at a time. Uganda’s case is a challenging one given the prejudices and biases which have come to form the relationship among the different peoples. But the main problem today is the war in northern Uganda which has created victims in their countless numbers. These victims, most of whom are traumatised, have been helped mainly by the Acholi religious leaders to rebuild their lives and re-integrate them in the community. But the threats on their lives is most frightening. The traditional reconciliation ceremony, Mato Oput, is limited in itself because it has no provision to help traumatised victims to rebuild their shattered lives. It is a process geared mainly to restore social harmony with little attention to the life of the individual person.

Reconciliation does not come easy. It is a multidimensional reality. It covers the most fundamental aspects of human life. It is social, psychological, personal, and also spiritual. Once realised, it involves a fresh start marking a new generation in the life of the community.

References

1. Bloomfield David, et al, ed., Reconciliation After Violent Conflict: A Handbook  International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, Stockholm, 2003
2. Desmond M. Tutu, No Future Without Forgiveness, London, Rider, 1999.
3. Caritas Internationalis, Working for Peace: Handbook on Reconciliation, Vatican City: Caritas Internationalis, 1999, accessed online at: www.caritas.org
4. M.S.M. Kiwanuka, A History of Buganda from the Foundation of the Kingdom to 1900, London: Longman, 1971 
5. W.B. Kyigyomanyi,  A joint report on reconciliation in northern Uganda, unpublished, KAMPALA, March 3, 2005.
6. http://hrw.org/reports/2005/Uganda0905/5.htm  
7. http://acholipeace.org
8. OCHA, Humanitarian Update Uganda, February 2005, Volume VII, Issue II, http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900SID/DDAD-6AKPMP?OpenDocument&cc=uga
9. http://www.federo.com/pages/#Content

Menu »