Historians
record and analyze what they know through reading and/or oral inquiry.
Therefore history is an account of events, in sequence of time and why they
happened. Besides, history must always be checked for mistakes.
When
I wrote the story about “How Rujumbura’s Bairu got impoverished” in Weekly
Observer of December, 2008, I used evidence of what I had experienced, read and
collected through oral accounts. I wrote the story as truthfully as I know it
covering the period of Bashambu rule from 1800 to the start of colonial
administration; from colonial administration to independence (when Bashambu continued
their role under British indirect rule but responsibility for commission or
omission shifted to the British) and from independence to the present (when Bashambu
did not have a direct role).
Earlier,
I had contacted some leaders from Rujumbura and others at local and central
government levels suggesting urgent intervention to address the deteriorating economic,
environmental and social challenges. I had also raised these issues in a larger
context at the Banyakigezi Convention in
of Parliament from the area, and in other forums.
The
issues of poverty, school drop out, quality education, alcoholism, violence,
corruption, traffic accidents, population growth, health care and food
insecurity, land shortage and environmental degradation featured prominently at
the Convention in formal and informal debates. I conveyed my views frankly,
truthfully and clearly. Nobody accused me of “hatred and sectarian bias”.
In
the article, I singled out Bairu because in my view this group has continued to
face serious challenges that require urgent attention.
By
way of illustration, I used peasants’ revolt in
trouble and this should be prevented in Rujumbura.
Instead
of correcting errors of fact or sequence of events in my article, Dr.
Kamuhangire, a historian, began by accusing me of “hatred and sectarian bias”
and twisted the illustration of peasants’ revolts in
that was not going to happen because of intermarriages.
The
issue of land in Rujumbura has caused and will continue to cause problems if it
is not addressed. I told the story as I know it – not to foment trouble – but to
find a solution. Earlier, I had written a paper on the subject and distributed copies
to Bakiga and others. My views and recommendations are known. For the record
some of my best friends – at school and now – are Bakiga and they know who they
are.
Because
of Dr. Kamuhangire’s views about Mpororo succession, intermarriages and other
issues, I was obliged to clarify – through the Weekly Observer of January, 2009
and www.kashambuzi.com – using a
larger geographic context.
Because
of these exchanges, the discussions have shifted from finding a solution to Rujumbura
problems to issues of hatred and sectarianism.
Dr.
Kamuhangire – a historian and neutral person – should have used his knowledge
of Rujumbura to bring all parties together to discuss the outstanding issues and
find a lasting solution. Instead, he drove a wedge between the parties.
It
is not too late to put the subject back on track. However, for this to happen,
the accusations of hatred, sectarian bias and Bairu revolt need to be buried
through an apology.
Additionally,
I suggest to those who consider me a sectarian to read chapter 12 of my book
titled “Uganda’s Development Agenda in the 21st Century and Related
Regional Issues, 2008” available at www.jonesharvest.com.
There you will read – the names of people I have publicly thanked for helping
me while I was growing up – and see that I do not harbor hatred against
Bashambu and Bahororo.
Finally,
before concluding my key note address at the Convention referred to above, I related
a story of how my family at Kashenyi in Ruhinda helped Bakiga as they settled
in then north Kigezi. I appealed that we forget past differences and collectively
focus on our common future.