Uganda starts oil production this year

UGANDA will start producing crude oil this year, Tullow Oil, the Irish firm exploring for oil and gas in Uganda, disclosed.

Speaking to journalists in Kampala yesterday, Paul McDade, the chief operations officer, announced that initial oil production will be 500-1,000 barrels per day, which will progressively rise to 10,000 barrels next year and to 150,000 barrels in 2015.

“We will start producing about 500 to 1,000 barrels a day in the middle of this year,” he said.

“This is not economically significant but it is a great step forward for Ugandans to know that their oil is being used for industrial use.”

McDade said the oil will be produced from the Kasamene field in Buliisa and will be used for the local industry and power generation.

Kasamene is located in block 2, which is fully owned by Tullow Oil. The other two oil fields, blocks 1 and 3A, are jointly owned with Heritage, which is in the process of selling off its 50% stake.

“We would like to produce oil on a test basis to see how the oil wells behave and how the crude can be transported by truck since it is waxy. We will have to heat the oil to keep it flowing,” McDade explained.

Tullow plans to invest between $300m and 400m in this initial phase but raise the amount to $5b to produce 150,000 barrels per day.

McDade disclosed that the two companies which Tullow preferred to work with were the Chinese state-owned CNOOC and French Total.

“The Chinese are best in building refineries and they move fast. CNOOC has just built a big refinery in China which can refine the same quality of oil as in Uganda. They built it in a period of two years.”

He added that they are also looking forward to work with the Ugandan national oil company that is in the process of being formed.

Reacting to criticism that they have not delivered on the early production scheme, the Tullow boss said they preferred drilling more wells to assess the total oil reserves rather than spending all their money on one small oil field.

“A refinery is a very expensive project for both the private and public sector. You cannot put in place a refinery unless you are sure that you have enough oil supply for 20 or more years.”
He said Tullow together with its partner, Heritage, has invested so far about $700m in Uganda.

The London-listed company yesterday also announced that they placed 80 million new shares on the London stock exchange to fundraise for its operations in Uganda and Ghana.

I THINK UGANDA NEEDS CHANGE

Well, allow me to start by emphasizing the fact that i hold nothing against the current regime led by president Museveni. He is a visionary and a role model for most of the would be leaders accross the African continent.
However, there is something that we as UGANDANS should put into consideration.

The fact that any change of whatever form usuaally triggers positive energies.


Take an example of how the Americans are fast driving past the Economic down turn. Do you think that would be the case if they had voted for a republican.
The spark in this matter was hope. Change triggers hope. In my days as an employee i remember hitting my monthly targets every time we had a new employee on board. It was usually a good looking girl but please dont get that twisted. In all i was able to do what i could do because whenever someone new came in office we could all look at our duties with a fresh new perspective.
You have no idea what positive impact that new naive secretary had on the rest of us. Even the bosses. She was the spark.
Then if a 20 year old girl with typing skills could have such an impact on us, then what more will a KIIZA BESIGYE,NOBERT MAO...or whoever impact on us?
I bet you, more than enormous benefits. In all we need change. And we need it real bad. I am telling you its not easy sticking to a 24 year old VISION. Its not easy. We need constatnt changes all the time to maintain adequate balances.

Let me ask you a question. Take your time, Dont answer it now. Find some quiet time and think it over. DO YOU THINK SOMEONE WOULD STEAL ROAD CONSTRUCTION CASH WELL KNOWING THAT THEY ARE WORKING ON A SHORT FIVE YEAR PLAN? ESPECIALLY WITH FRESH BLOOD WHOSE CORE VALUE IS TO FIGHT CORRUPTION? AND WITH A DESIRE TO SHOW SOME POSITIVE IMPACT IN A VERY SHORT TIMESPAN?

THINK IT OVER
.
.
.
Consider this article below



Is it time for Museveni to go?

The state of Uganda: President Yoweri Museveni has ruled Uganda for almost a quarter of a century. Anne Perkins examines his record in office and debates his chances of retaining power if he runs in the next election in 2011
n his inaugural address 23 years ago, the Ugandan president, Yoweri Museveni, was cheered as he declared: "The problems of Africa, and Uganda in particular, are caused by leaders who overstay in power, which breeds impunity, corruption and promotes patronage."

Museveni is still in power, and it looks very likely that he will fight for a fourth term in 2011. "He'll be another Mugabe" is the gloomy prediction among opposition politicians in Kampala.

Tim Allen, professor of development studies at the London School of Economics, sees the successful resolution of Zimbabwe's crisis as one of the most influencing events in African politics now. "If Mugabe goes, it would change the landscape," he says. "And if he is held to account, it would be very liberating."

There is no shortage of opposition to Museveni: Uganda has a splenetic, free-thinking, popular media. Radio programmes and newspapers uncover corruption, excoriate incompetence, poke fun at pomposity.

Since 2005, Museveni has permitted a multi-party democracy. His own National Resistance Movement (NRM), which for the previous 20 years simply co-opted its rivals, is dominant in parliament as he was in the first multi-party presidential election. His main opponent is the larger-than-life leader of the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC), Dr Kizza Besigye.

In the run-up to the 2006 election, Besigye was accused of both treason and rape. In his turn, he unsuccessfully contested the 2006 results, where Museveni claimed nearly 60% support to 37% for the FDC. Last month, as the country celebrated "liberation day", the FDC returned to the charge.

"The major cause of the liberation war was the injustice of vote rigging, but vice has become entrenched in the system. Corruption has also been institutionalised," the party's acting administrator, Boniface Toterebuka, claimed.

It is not only vote rigging that the opposition parties and the media complain about. Government ministers are mired in a scandal involving land sales at inflated values to other parts of the administration (Museveni looks likely to sack the ministers in an impending cabinet reshuffle), while the international disgrace over the disappearance of millions of Ugandan shillings intended for Aids relief lingers in public memory.

It is a subject Museveni returns to frequently. In his state of the nation address last month, Museveni declared war on public corruption. The declaration only lacked authority because he made the same promises after his re-election two years ago - and because his more outspoken critics, like Andrew Mwenda in his Independent weekly magazine, allege that the entire Museveni family are beneficiaries of corruption.

But if they joke in Kampala bars that PAYE stands for Pay As Yoweri Enjoys, to many others, especially in the south, Museveni's 23 years in power at the head of the NRM have been a welcome period of stability after a generation of dictators who drove the economy to bankruptcy.

He has presided over a prolonged period of growth, which even last year was just under 10%. His administration is, mostly, still admired by the west. His enthusiasm for universal primary and secondary education, his poverty eradication programme and the new plan to target agriculture to boost output, all win international plaudits.

He woos the west in other ways too: he is strongly aligned with the war on terror, and there are nearly 2,000 Ugandan troops peacekeeping in Somalia. He has been a strong supporter of George Bush's abstinence message on HIV/Aids. "Relations with Washington are warm," a Congressional report concluded last year.

But, until recently, the north of Uganda has always been outside the pro-Museveni consensus, tainted by its association first with the country's colonial rulers and then with the disastrous years of Idi Amin and Milton Obote.

Katine is typical of much of the north in experiencing most of Museveni's rule as an era of terrible lawlessness and insurrection that has arrested development and led to the early deaths of hundreds of thousands of Ugandans, and the internment of many more in internally displaced people's camps.

Yet things are changing. Last summer, for the first time, Museveni toured the northern half of the country. He visited Soroti
where he promised millions of Ugandan shillings for agricultural development. He even travelled further north, to the displaced people's camps of the region most devastated by the Lord's Resistance Army insurgency - and the Ugandan Defence Force's own controversial IDP camps.

Iteso voters are not Museveni enthusiasts: in common with many northerners they feel overlooked, left to suffer, by a president whose power base has always been in the south. At the last election they voted for Besigye.

But now another potential leader has emerged: Norbert Mao. Mao, once an MP who retreated to Gulu to head the council there, belongs to the tiny Democratic Party, which has stood apart from attempts to organise an anti-Museveni united front.

Mao is said to want to exploit both his charisma and strong northern credibility for the NRM. He has the unusual advantage, too, of a wife from the influential Buganda kingdom. His candidacy could offer a chance of national leadership.
Kizza Besigye, leader of the Uganda opposition party, Forum for Democratic Change Kizza Besigye, leader of the Forum for Democratic Change. Photograph: AFP

Yet there is an appetite for change, and of growing disillusion in the man once widely regarded as the country's saviour. In a bitter editorial marking the NRM's 23 years in power, Andrew
Mwenda wrote recently: "Where NRM promised an independent, integrated and self-sustaining national economy, it has created a dependant (on foreign aid) disjointed economy. Instead of free and fair elections, we have rigged ones. Respect for human rights died in torture chambers euphemistically called safe houses. Corruption has become a virtue, nepotism a way to run our nation and tribal bigotry the running philosophy of government. The rule of law took a beating when government organised hooded gangs who began attacking the courts and threatening judges."

Even his severest critics, though, admire Museveni's ability to exploit circumstance. During his 23rd anniversary celebrations last month, he even invited investors to report any government official who took a bribe.

But bloggers (and US Congress) fear opportunities for corruption are escalating with major oil discoveries around Lake Albert on the country's border with Congo. The terms of the deals so far signed have been kept secret on "commercial" grounds - the customary way of disguising backhanders to government ministers.

And, as Mwenda wrote, with more than 40% of Uganda's budget coming in the form of aid (a majority from the UK) it is not only Ugandan voters who might influence their country's future.

There are hints that the international community might be trying to engineer a way to ease Museveni out of direct power, to offer him an international position, "perhaps connected to the UN", according to Tim Allen, that would respect his status as an African president who had done much to promote peace and prosperity in his own country, and to aid the global war on terror.

There may be the prospect of a high-profile role that might offer Museveni, and his wider family, the money and status he has become accustomed to as the west's favourite African politician.

But he might also find - like Robert Mugabe - that too many Ugandan politicians and generals depend on him to allow him to leave the scene with honour.




WE NEED CHANGE!

THE UGANDA ANTI-GAY BILL

In Uganda, a bill designed to eradicate homosexuality has strong support in the government and among evangelical Christians. Proponents of the bill link homosexuality to the West. And under the bill, Uganda would withdraw from any international treaties or protocols that recognize the human rights of gay people.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton calls Uganda's anti-homosexuality bill a "very serious potential violation of human rights." But few in Uganda are willing to speak against it because those who do are labeled gay.

In the lobby of Uganda's parliament building is an installation showing the potentially disastrous effects of climate change. The sign says: "The Choices, Actions and Agreements Made Now Will Determine Which Future Becomes Reality." Whoever wrote that might well have been describing the country's political climate.

Ugandans may soon have a choice to make. Homosexuality has been illegal there for more than 100 years, but now lawmakers are considering legislation that would go further. The Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009 would jail consenting adults who engage in gay sex. It would give life sentences to people in same-sex marriages. It would extradite gay Ugandans living abroad and prosecute them.

David Bahati, a first-term lawmaker, wrote the bill.

"This is a defining bill for our country, for our generation. You are either anti-homosexual or you're for homosexuals, because there's no middle point. Anybody who does not believe that homosexuality is a crime is a sympathizer," Bahati says.

It is the first bill Bahati has ever written, and he calls it a "very wonderful piece of legislation." He says he can't imagine a Uganda in which gay people live freely, because the possibility is too horrible to consider. And he says if Western aid to Uganda hinges on gay rights, then the West can keep its money. His bill would impose the death penalty on adults who have gay sex with minors, or who spread HIV through gay sex. And it would jail anyone who fails to report gay activity to police within 24 hours.

And what if his brother were engaging in homosexual activity?

"I'd arrest him myself and take him to the police ... because it's bad for society," Bahati says.

The bill is popular. Even Uganda's president, Yoweri Museveni, has linked gay practices to Western influences.

Sylvia Tamale, a law professor and author, couldn't disagree more.

"Homosexuality or same-sex attractions have been part and parcel of African communities for time immemorial. But the terms 'homosexuality,' 'lesbian,' 'gay' — those are relatively new. And those are terms many Africans attracted to people of the same sex never use or never identify with," she says.

Tamale teaches law at Makerere University, the top school in Uganda's capital, Kampala. She is writing a book on sexual orientations in Africa, and she is one of the few people in Uganda who has publicly criticized the legislation.

"There's no doubt about the fact that the majority of Ugandans are for the bill. Many of them have already blocked their minds. All they hear is 'homosexuality' and they don't want to know, they don't want to understand. All they see is anal sex, period," she says.

If the bill becomes law, a coalition of lawyers and activists will try to kill it in court. Human rights lawyer Ladislaus Rwakafuzi says U.S. evangelicals may be behind the bill.

"It's difficult to tell from looking at this bill to say whether it is homegrown or foreign. The people who are anti-gay are supported by the Christian right from the U.S. It could be possible that there is some external influence," Rwakafuzi says.

U.S. evangelicals have long had a close relationship with top Ugandan leaders. In March, three American evangelicals attended a conference in Kampala on how to turn gay people straight. California minister Scott Lively was a key speaker.

Stephen Langa heads Family Life Network, the group that sponsored the event. He often quotes Lively's teachings, and he claims that rich Westerners are paying children there to have gay sex. Langa says a lot of people need to be in jail.

"Providing literature, writing books about it, standing up and saying it is OK — you should be arrested. Even if you are not in the act, you should be arrested. Anybody who tries to promote it should be arrested. That's why we need a stronger law," Langa says.

Lively has called Uganda's bill "too harsh." And Rick Warren, the popular U.S. pastor whose ministry extends to Uganda, condemns the bill.

But they are not the only Americans active in Uganda. A U.S. evangelical group called The Family reportedly includes U.S. lawmakers who have shown great interest in Ugandan affairs. The bill's proponents are reluctant to talk about whether The Family supports them in any way.

Langa initially denied that he had ever heard of The Family. Then he said wealthy enemies have long associated him with the group. But he refused to talk about how much money his organization has.

In the end, supporters say the bill is by Ugandans and for Ugandans.

But Val Kalende is Ugandan, and the bill is meant to eradicate her from society. Kalende, a lesbian activist, says if there are rich Western promoters of homosexuality in Uganda, she would like to meet them. As a volunteer, she says, she can barely pay her rent.

"They think that our lives are all about having sex, sex, sex, sex. They don't see it as a sexual orientation," she says.

Kalende says the bill will roll back HIV/AIDS treatment in the country and push gay Ugandans deeper underground.

But gay Ugandans won't be the only people down there. Erias Lukwago, a first-term lawmaker, says he doesn't like the bill but can't afford to disagree with it in parliament.

"I'm telling you I cannot. I fear the reaction of society to be associated with gays — highly stigmatized, ostracized. Even for this interview alone it might be perceived that the gay community is paying me," he says.

Until the political climate changes in Uganda, Lukwago says he is keeping his mouth shut.

Prominent Journalist Arrested and Abused

The Ugandan government should immediately allow radio stations and programming that it closed down after protests in Kampala last week to return to the air and should investigate the arrest and abuse of a prominent journalist, Robert Kalundi Sserumaga, Human Rights Watch said today. The government's Broadcasting Council has arbitrarily shut down entire stations as well as some programs, without providing adequate explanations or an opportunity to challenge the decisions.

Members of the media faced serious obstacles while commenting and reporting on the unfolding events. After Sserumaga appeared on the talk show "Kibazo on Friday" on Wavah Broadcasting Station on September 11, 2009, he was detained by men in plain clothes, assaulted repeatedly, and eventually turned over to police and interrogated. On September 15, he was charged with six counts of sedition and released on bail.

"Sserumaga's experience follows a pattern in Uganda of arrests and physical abuse by unidentified men in unmarked cars, and no one has ever been held to account," said Georgette Gagnon, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. "The government needs to conduct a thorough investigation into this episode and find out who is responsible."

Sserumaga was assaulted by men in civilian clothes, who forced him into an unmarked car. The men did not identify themselves or the reason for the arrest. During transport, they beat and choked Sserumaga and at one point gouged his eyes when he tried to defend himself. He said the men took him to an illegal place of detention in Kireka, a neighborhood of Kampala where at least 23 others who had also been arrested during the protests were being held. The manner of his arrest is consistent with a pattern of abuses, documented by Human Rights Watch, most often carried out by ad hoc militias who collaborate with or draw their personnel from regular police and the military.

The following morning, those holding Sserumaga again physically assaulted him. On the afternoon of September 12, they brought Sserumaga to the Central Police Station in Kampala, and police interrogated him about the content of the talk show. A Human Rights Watch researcher visited Sserumaga and observed injuries consistent with his description of the abuse. Sserumaga spent two nights in the hospital receiving treatment for his injuries before being charged and released on September 15.

The protests on September 10 and 11 were started by youth from the Baganda ethnic group after the police prevented a delegation from Uganda's Buganda kingdom from visiting the eastern district of Kayunga. Police and military quickly responded with tear gas and live ammunition; rioters blocked roads, lit fires, and threw rocks.

The Broadcasting Council is mandated by the 2000 Electronic Media Act to "exercise control and supervise broadcasting activities." That law sets out minimum broadcasting standards, which prohibit broadcasters from distorting facts or creating public insecurity or violence. Broadcasters must also present programs that are "balanced to ensure harmony." The laws do not lay out the procedures or describe how council determinations that standards have been violated may be challenged.

After the council shut down four Luganda-language radio stations without warning, the council sent letters to some station managers stating that their broadcasts had incited the public to violence, but the letters did not specify which standards the stations had violated or what part of their broadcast was in violation. Producers interviewed by Human Rights Watch reported that they had actively tried to present all sides of the issues and had invited various government officials to be interviewed, but they had not appeared.

The radio station officials told Human Rights Watch that there was no warning or prior notification of the shutdowns, which were carried out by force. For example, government agents broke into the transmission room of Radio Ssuubi, a youth radio station, and confiscated the studio transmission link. All four stations are still off the air. Recent news reports quote the council chairperson as saying that the stations must wait until the government conducts and concludes an investigation into their conduct before they can appeal their suspensions. It is unclear how long that will take.

The council also forcefully suspended some programming on other stations. Radio Simba was not permitted to broadcast the program "Gasimbagane ne bannamawulire," hosted by Peter Kibazo. Kibazo's other program on WBS was suspended. The council also told National Broadcasting Station directors to stop showing television footage of the police response to the riots.

Freedom of expression and of the media, are guaranteed by article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, and article 29 of the Ugandan Constitution. Restrictions on freedom of expression to prevent direct incitement to violence are permissible under international law, but must be the least-restrictive act possible to prevent such incitement and must not be arbitrary. That means that those affected should be granted a fair hearing to challenge any such restriction.

"The Broadcasting Council should stop muzzling independent reporting," said Gagnon. "It needs to prove that a station was directly inciting violence before it can go to the extreme length of shutting it down. Those stations forced to shut down should immediately be allowed to resume operating."

Background on recent events

The recent violence was set off by a planned visit by the king of the Baganda, known as the kabaka, to National Youth Day on Saturday, September 12 in Kayunga district. In anticipation of that visit, a delegation of Baganda leadership attempted to visit the area two days before the event and was stopped by police. People of Banyala ethnicity in Kayunga reject the kabaka's authority.

Police responded to the demonstrations with live ammunition and severe beatings of protesters and onlookers. After two days of unrest, at least 21 people were killed, mostly hit by stray police fire, and scores more were injured. Protests turned violent in some areas, and protesters burned a police station in Natete on September 11. According to police reports, at least 663 people were arrested during the two days, and most remain in custody.

The role of cultural leaders such as the kabaka in Uganda has been the source of debate historically. President Milton Obote outlawed all cultural leaders in 1966, but President Museveni permitted them to return in 1995. Under the constitution, cultural leaders are barred from politics, but they still wield influence over their communities.

The crime of sedition has been challenged in the Constitutional Court in the case of Eastern Africa Media Institute and Andrew Mwenda vs. the Attorney General in 2005. Sserumaga's case cannot go forward to trial until the court has ruled on that matter. During Museveni's presidency, at least six journalists have been charged with sedition. Only one was convicted, in 1995, and sentenced to one year in prison.

Museveni, Qaddafi and the mysterious protests

Qaddafi

RIOTS rocked Kampala in support of the king of the Baganda, the country’s largest ethnic group. Shops in the capital were looted, cars burned. Uganda’s president, Yoweri Museveni, who hails from the much smaller Ankole group, ordered police and soldiers onto the streets. At least 24 people were killed in and around the city; most were shot. The government says the rioters themselves had guns. In fact, it seems likely that the armed forces fired into the crowds. The main Bagandan radio station was closed. Some journalists were arrested and charged with sedition.

Events would have spun further out of control had the Bagandan king, or kabaka, Ronald Mutebi, not cancelled a planned trip to the north of the city. Mr Museveni’s aides told the kabaka he would be held responsible for further bloodshed. So he was kept in his palace. Many of his people were enraged by this apparent humiliation.

Buganda is the largest of Uganda’s five ancient kingdoms banned under the presidencies of Milton Obote and Idi Amin but revived by Mr Museveni. The Baganda make up 17% of Ugandans. They are not generally averse to Mr Museveni and his political party, the National Resistance Movement (NRM). A majority of them voted for him in the last election, in 2006. The vice-president and numerous ministers and MPs are Baganda, along with many civil servants doing the NRM’s bidding. So why are Mr Museveni and the Baganda now at loggerheads, especially as the president is seeking re-election in 2011?

Mr Museveni thinks the Baganda have been getting uppity. Though their kingdom is the largest and was once the most powerful, it is now a ghostly fiction, with no sovereignty and little wealth. Mr Museveni is especially weary of persistent Bagandan demands for a return of a swathe of claimed ancestral lands that were long ago distributed to pastoralists or pilfered by officials—and are most unlikely ever to be given back. Besides, generosity to Buganda would aggravate the other kingdoms, particularly neighbouring Bunyoro, whose land includes Uganda’s new-found oilfields.

Mr Museveni may calculate that he can treat the Baganda harshly now, but retain their votes by granting them concessions nearer the election. He has been adept at dividing and conquering the electorate, using carrots and sticks. He dishes out jobs to loyalists but harasses businessmen suspected of helping the fractured opposition. He says he will limit the kabaka’s power and chastises “meddlers” harming Uganda’s prospects.

Mr Museveni’s people say they have identified another villain of the piece: Libya’s president, Muammar Qaddafi, whom they accuse of giving cash to the Baganda. For several years Mr Qaddafi has subsidised Uganda’s kings and their cultural institutions as part of an exotic plan to unify Africa in a web of chiefs and kings. But his latest dollops of cash, say Mr Museveni’s friends, were meant to stir up trouble, because Mr Qaddafi has fallen out with Mr Museveni, despite helping him to win a bush war that brought him to power two decades ago.

Mr Museveni has ridiculed Mr Qaddafi’s swaggering “king of kings” approach, preferring to build up Africa with regional trade blocs such as the East African Community. Still, it is odd that Mr Qaddafi should want to poke Mr Museveni in the eye by funding riots, since the recent oil discoveries in Uganda should make its president more attractive as a friend. Libya, for instance, hopes to tender for a big oil refinery that Mr Museveni wants to build.

Have your say