Ignored and Forgotten: Challenges, Hopes and Expectations of Victims’ Groups in Northern Uganda

In 2019, FJDI with funding support from Robert Bosch Stiftung conducted an assessment of victims' groups in northern Uganda. The URL below directs you to a policy brief derived from this assessment. We hope this brief will provide information to stakeholders and prompt urgent positive actions towards the general situation of victims of conflicts in Uganda.
FJDI Policy Brief No. 2019-001

Thomas Kwoyelo Trial Continues Amidst Challenges of a Public trial

By Nobert Dacan

The trial of former LRA commander Thomas Kwoyelo resumed Monday 30^th September, 2019, after a break of more than two months and on 10^th October it was postponed indefinitely due to issues of disclosure. Kwoyelo has been in detention since 2008 and is facing 93 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity before the International Crimes Division (ICD) of the High Court of Uganda for his alleged role in the conflict spanning more than two decades in Northern Uganda. Ten prosecution witnesses have so far testified in the trial and since the trial resumed, three prosecution witnesses have testified. The 7^th and 8^th witnesses appeared between the 30^th of September and 7^th of October, and two additional witnesses testified from the afternoon of the 7^th to the 10^th of October.

However, the prosecution relied on Article 28 and 126 of the constitution of Uganda and rule 36 of the ICD rules of procedures to apply for witness protective measures. These included concealing the identities of the witnesses by using camouflage, pseudo codes and closing court sessions to the public. The trial judges granted these protective measures because the prosecution team argued that the witnesses’ wellbeing could be at risk if not fully anonymised. The closing of the court sessions has prevented the public from following proceedings since the trial resumed, resulting in complaints from those wishing to attend the hearings. On Monday 7^th October several people who had come to attend proceedings expressed disappointment when they were told to walk out of the court room because the day’s session would be held in-camera. The prosecution has framed these protective measures as a desperate attempt to protect the witnesses while ensuring that the court obtains information and the trial goes on. They said on October 1, that this attempt is in the interest of the accused as well. In their ruling, the trial panel said under Art 28 (2) and ICD rule 36, court had to balance between the safety of the witness and a public trial, “…for that reason, the use of pseudonym, camouflage, exclusion of the public from certain parts of his testimony is granted”, said one of the trial judges.

It is, however, obvious that the public is not contented with this. The 10-15 members of the public who sat in a nearby room waiting for a full day, and who seemed to have travelled long distances to attend could be heard murmuring in dissatisfaction on October 7^th, when they were asked to walk out of the courtroom because the prosecution wanted to tackle a sensitive matter that needed protection. Details of all testimonies delivered in-camera have not been availed to the public.

On the 7^th of October, a woman aged around 50 years told the FJDI that it was not realistic to hold proceedings in-camera. “If you are telling the truth, why should you hide from the public?”, she questioned. To her, “it shows that the witness is not telling the truth.” Earlier on a defense counsel had also raised a similar concern during the proceedings of October 1, stating that the exclusion of the public offended the essence of Art 28 of Uganda’s constitution though the prosecution has been relying on it to seek protective measures. The defense lawyer said that, excluding the public breaches this Article and moreover, if other measures like camouflage and use of codes were in place, there was no need to exclude the public from the courtroom. The defense lawyer emphasized that holding the trial in-camera would affect the whole outcome of the trial because, “the public shall not trust it…the public would say…they closed themselves, conducted the trial and made their ruling.” He went as far as referring to the ICC’s trial of Dominic Ongwen, “People in Gulu have been following a trial in The Hague yet they cannot follow this trial which is being conducted in Gulu,” he said.

On 10^th October, the trial was adjourned indefinitely due to issues of disclosure. This is not the first time proceedings is being interrupted because of the same thing.

The ICD of Uganda’s High Court being a ‘young’ institution established in 2008 to try international crimes has greatly suffered from difficulties of bridging the gap between the court and the public. It seems that the public who are interested in following this international trial are disconnected and unable to follow despite the court being brought closer to the case location.

______________

Foundation for Justice and Development (FJDI) works with children, youth, women and communities to promote justice, development and economic recovery in northern Uganda. FJDI has been working on providing redress for conflict affected persons and communities and promoting transitional justice measures since 2015.

FJDI Monthly Pictorial- September, 2019

Kwoyelo Trial Continues as prosecution calls 7th and 8th witness

Kwoyelo in the dock as his trial goes on in Gulu

By Nobert Dacan

Kwoyelo has been in detention since the Ugandan army captured him in 2008. He is facing 93 charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity before the International Crimes Division (ICD) of the High Court of Uganda as a result of his role as a LRA commander during the war in northern Uganda. His trial has however progressed at a slow pace.

The trial resumed on Monday, the 30^th of September 2019, after a break of more than two months with the testimony of the 7^th prosecution witness, referred to as C4.

C4 testified about his experiences and interactions with the accused, including details on how the witness was abducted by Kwoyelo’s men during an attack on Abera village in Pabbo subcounty. During examination C4 explained that he knew Kwoyelo very well since their childhood, but that C4 had not seen him since C4 was abducted from Abera in 1994. 

The witness explained how the village was attacked by armed men led by Kwoyelo, whom he later learnt were LRA rebels, and was abducted along with approximately 50 others. The abductees were forced to carry the goats that were looted as they moved throughout the night across a stream called Aceri. At least 4 people unable to carry the goats were punished and left to die on the road, though C4 later found out that these people were found and rescued by the community who tracked their path the following morning. Only one later died from the hospital.

The witness recounted that after crossing the stream, Kwoyelo addressed the abductees and told them that they would be divided into two groups; one that would be released and another that would remain. C4 was in the group that was released and was directed by Kwoyelo to follow a different path back as the LRA soldiers had planted landmines on the one they came from. C4 also explained that most of the remaining abductees never returned home since, and that he is convinced that they have passed away by now. After returning and recovering from his injuries, C4 moved to Gulu town where he has lived since.The defense counsel was critical of the witness’ account, stating that C4 had gone beyond the scope of his testimony.

Proceedings were adjourned to the following day, Tuesday the 1^st of October 2019 where C4 completed his testimony with a cross-examination by the defense team. In the afternoon, the prosecution called another witness – PW8, referred to as C7. C7 entered the courtroom in camouflage wearing loose, black clothing and headscarf, and dark sunglasses. Prosecution attorney, William Byansi commenced by applying for protective measures for the witness and requested that the session should exclude the public and be held in camera due to sensitivity of the witness’ testimony. Byansi went on to assert that the prosecution team had done a risk assessment and that the findings indicated danger to the life of the witness if his identity is not sufficiently protected. He further stated that the witness was a direct victim of the accused person and lives in the same community as sympathizers of the accused. The prosecution finally requested that if a fully closed session was impossible, at least the particularly sensitive parts of C7’s testimony should be held in-camera.

Defense counsel Alaka did not object to the use of camouflage and pseudonym but opposed closing the session for the public. He claimed that closing the session would go against Kwoyelo’s rights as an accused, and that the prosecutions referral to a risk assessment unknown to the court, and to the witness as “a direct victim” was prejudicial. Furthermore, he argued, closing the session would decrease the publics’ trust in the trial and the ICD.

The trial panel based their ruling on Art. 28 (2) and ICD rule 36, and stated that the court had to balance between the safety of the witness and a public trial: “for that reason, the use of pseudonym, camouflage, exclusion of the public from certain parts of his testimony is granted.”

Shortly after the prosecution had started leading C7 through his testimony about his abduction from Abera village in Pabbo, they requested the public to be excluded due to a sensitive part in the testimony. The remainder of the session until 5pm was held in-camera, and the session on the following morning of the 2^nd of October continued as a closed session

Victims Groups and their challenges in Northern Uganda

Parabongo Victims group 

Although, Northern Uganda is on the path to recovery after  decades of conflict that led to serious destruction, victims have often and consistently expressed several challenges they face on a daily basis that to-date are yet to be addressed. An ongoing survey we are conducting reveals many but ofcourse not all of such challenges. 

In 2019, Foundation for Justice and Development Initiatives (FJDI) initiated a mapping exercise and analysis of the victims’ advocacy groups currently active in Northern Uganda in order to assess their most critical challenges and needs. Even though a decade has passed since the end of the violent conflict in Northern Uganda, the needs of victims and survivors remain largely unaddressed. While some may hope that the ongoing trials at Uganda’s International Crimes Division (ICD) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) will be an answer to their calls, most victims cannot expect such an outcome. If they are to have their needs met, the help will need to be obtained elsewhere.

A preliminary analysis of the needs and challenges of victims’ groups in Northern Uganda shows that while many of the groups are successful in coming together as victims and survivors and thus supporting each other, their advocacy efforts and calls for help are often met with unfulfilled promises or even silence from stakeholders. The conflict deprived victims of not only family members, personal health and more, but also of many valuable years of their lives and thus opportunities for undertaking education, building careers as well as prosperous homes and families.The assistance that most groups point to as essential for them as victims are therefore most often reparations, particularly in the form of community facilities such as health clinics, educational institutions and memorial initiatives, but also individual and financial help such as money, farming equipment and animals are called for. 

Facing the challenges of empty promises and silence from those with the power to assist victims and survivors in fulfilling their needs, puts considerable demands to the groups’ advocacy skills for them to speak up and be heard. Therefore, engaging in advocacy training can be a way forward for the empowerment and capability of the victims to obtain their wants and needs. Furthermore, coming together as victims’ groups across Northern Uganda in joint advocacy can be a way for the groups to not only speak with a louder voice, but also to share support, knowledge and experiences. 

The National Transitional Justice Policy has however been passed by the cabinet and could help address these challenges if put in place. It is an overreaching framework of the Government of Uganda designed to address justice, accountability and reconciliation needs of post-conflict Uganda. It proposes a combination of traditional and formal justice mechanisms of justice, the approval of the policy by cabinet is a huge step towards redress for victims, however, it could potentially last several more years before implementation considering the fact that it stayed in a draft form for about ten years.

Foundation for Justice and Development (FJDI) works with children, youth, women and communities to promote justice, development and economic recovery in northern Uganda. FJDI has been working on providing redress for conflict affected persons and communities and promoting transitional justice measures since 2015.

FJDI Monthly Pictorial - July 2019

FJDI Monthly Pictorial - June, 2019

MEMORIALIZATION - A PILLAR OF UNITY AND HOPE TO VICTIMS OF THE LRA INCURSION IN OBALANGA

On 15 June 2003, the once peaceful community of Obalanga in the newly created district of Kapelebyong in the greater Northern Uganda came under the attack of rebels of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA).  This began months long of rebel activity in the area of Obalanga and the environs of Teso in which the people were held under siege as the rebels, killed, looted and abducted people at will. Within a short period of time, hundreds of people were killed, and relatives and community members had little choice but to bury their loved ones numbering up to 365 in a mass grave.

Each year, on 15 June the anniversary of the first attack, residents of Teso converge at Obalanga Sub-County at the site of the mass grave to commemorate the day in the form of prayers. FJDI over the past years has not only supported the community in aspects of advocacy and documentation of their war narratives, but has also joined them in the memorialization of the day. This year’s event was attended by community elders, relatives of victims, survivors, local government officials, representatives of NGOs and CSOs.

The ceremony included a prayer service animated by the Church of Uganda, speeches by the local organising committee, testimonies from the survivors and also remarks from representatives of the local government and supporting NGOs. The general message was one of forgiveness, unity and hope. Furthermore, students from schools within Kapelebyong district performed songs and poems on themes that centred on keeping alive the memories of the sad events, love, hope and a better future.

Speaking to Achila Simon a member of the local organising committee, he said that the commemoration of this day was very important in that it does not only allow them to remember and pray for their loved ones but also helps foster unity within the community. He furthered that the sermons and speeches delivered also help to pacify and give hope to the survivors and relatives of the departed.

Amoding Betty a survivor and widow whose husband lost his life in the hands of the LRA lamented on the pain, sorrow and trauma she has been suffering over the years. She indicated the memorial service not only enables her to pray for her husband but also enables her to recognise that she is not alone in her sorrow, which gives her strength and hope.

The FJDI team also took the opportunity to interact with survivors to seek their opinion on holding a unilateral memorial service throughout the greater northern Uganda as opposed to different communities holding it at different places at different times. FJDI continues to be committed in its objectives of advocating for appropriate policies on democracy, governance, justice and development, the promotion of social economic empowerment for vulnerable individuals, groups and communities and to conduct research on relevant justice and development issues crucial to national debates and policies.

Witness Gives Account of Pajule Attacks and Brief Ongwen Interactions

On June 6, 2019, a former LRA captive came before the ICC and gave a chilling account of his experience being abducted, his time in the IDP camps, and a brief account of his time with the LRA, including interactions with Dominic Ongwen. The hearing was interrupted due to technical difficulties and health concerns of the witness forcing the trial panel to postpone proceedings to the following day.

Ongwen is facing 70 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly committed between 2002-2005 in the camps of Odek, Pajule, Abok and Lukodi in Northern Uganda. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

The witness was referred to as “Mr. Witness,” instead of his original name-one of the witness protection measures being used by the court. The former captive described how his primary school education was interrupted by the death of his father. Then, in 2002 when conflict in Acholiland was heightening, the government mandated that his community move to IDP camps in fear of the LRA. From the start, there was clear fear and threat experienced by Mr. Witness. The government even threatened at-risk people, saying they’d be considered rebels themselves if they didn’t move into the IDP camps within two to three weeks after initial warning. Along with fear of government and rebels, Mr. Witness also had to leave his crops at home, which were gone once he returned from captivity.

Mr. Witness described a difficult life in the IDP camp. The government did not provide medical facilities/services, and although they were eventually provided by NGO’s, the support was not sufficient; some people were helped, but health issues persisted nonetheless. Additionally, IDP residents were not allowed to roam about at night, with their curfew beginning at 8:00 PM, and lasting until around 7:00-8:00 AM. Mr. Witness made it clear that life in the IDP camp was of low quality, because if one was hungry or sick, there was usually nothing that could be done.

Mr. Witness said that, although UPDF and LDU soldiers were difficult to distinguish from each other because they were working to protect the people, it was not difficult to decipher who the LRA was once he saw them. The attack on the Pajule camp was warned about in 2003, on the evening of October 9th (Ugandan Independence Day). In the evening, Mr. Witness remembered the leaders of the camp warning residents to be vigilant that night, and to not drink recklessly, due to unclear security reasons. Mr. Witness was sleeping when, at dawn of October 10th, 2003, his door was kicked in by LRA rebels. He, along with many others, were abducted and forced to carry firearms for the rebels en route to their next location. All the while, many innocent IDP residents were caught in crossfire, and were injured and killed. Mr. Witness’ wife and child were also abducted, and he later found out that his child had to get his right arm amputated due to a bomb incident during the war.

  The LRA led Mr. Witness and other victims through the bush throughout the day, and they were being followed by a helicopter. Mr. Witness and the other victims were eventually sat down by Vincent Otti, who was well known and feared by many people in Acholiland. Otti made sure to tell the abductees that it was not their intention to kill civilians.

The witness also shared that Ongwen, referred to as “Odomi” during the trial, was the head of a group that requested Mr. Witness’s services for four to five days. This is when Mr. Witness interacted with Ongwen. Mr. Witness took note that Odomi seemed to have an injury in one of his legs or thighs. Mr. Witness also shared that he was not allowed to speak to Odomi unless Odomi requested to speak with him. Although Odomi was limping during this time, Mr. Witness says he did not use a cane or anything else to assist his walking.

The ICC has been livestreaming proceedings at http://player.cdn.tv1.eu/statics/66005/icc.html?loc=CR3 where people can follow live proceedings.

Commissioner Apologizes to Lukodi Massacre Survivors; Promises to Talk to the President

By Nobert Dacan

On May 19, the Lukodi Community in Gulu District carried out the 15^th annual Commemoration of the Lukodi Massacre in 2004. It was attended by more than 1000 people from around the world. During the commemoration, visitors toured the memorial Monument and the Community Memory Center constructed in 2018 by Foundation for Justice and Development Initiatives (FJDI) with support from Robert Bosch Stiftung.

The major talk of the event was forgiveness. The preacher- Rev Peter Ojok argued that, “the sufferings Lukodi went through should shape them in the direction of God,” in his words, “There is a reason for everything that happens. Those who don’t forgive others live in poor health. Forgiveness is the key to personal development,” he said. “You should forgive all those who hurt you if you are to move forward as a community,” he added while referring to the perpetrators of the massacre.

Taking you back to the fateful incident; On May 19, 2004, a group of the Lord’s Resistance Army rebels descended on the Lukodi displaced people's camp after overpowering a nearby military unit and murdered more than sixty people what has since been called the Lukodi Massacre. Dominic Ongwen is being tried for this particularly incident and three other attacks in Odek, Pajule and Abok IDP camps between 2002 and 2004. He has pleaded not guilty to all. In Lukodi the rebels also destroyed property, abducted scores of the IDPs, while others managed to escape with bullet wounds. However, fifteen years after the attack, the victims complain that government has done nothing to help them recover from the traumatic incident.

The representative of victims- Wilfred Lalobo while addressing the congregation said, “We are working hard to improve our livelihoods but still need support from the government because we have not received any support since the incident took place.” He highlighted several challenges the victims are facing and strongly insisted that they need government support. He further mentioned that the victims need help in developing and relocating the memory center to a separate place, establishing a community counseling center to help meet their (victims) psycho-social needs; and in advocating for reparations. In his words he said, “as victims, we want to relocate this community center somewhere else and make it bigger and more informative…we also need a counseling center constructed in the village to help in providing psycho-social support because the level of trauma is still high in this area,” He said.

While responding to these cries, the Resident District Commissioner (RDC) of Gulu district who represented the president of Uganda in the event started by apologizing to the community on behalf of the government. His apology was received by notable hand claps signaling approval by the community. “There has been too much talking, but I want to start by apologizing on behalf of the government for your suffering,” he made this remark before emphasizing forgiveness. He also said, “Prayers is for those alive and for forging the future of the next generation. Avoid conflicting memory and retraumatization. Stop lamenting and having self pity but instead utilize existing resources properly,” he said. The RDC promised to talk to the president saying, “I will talk to the president and give you feedback in the next annual prayer,” he said

In attendance also included the leader of opposition in Uganda’s parliament who doubles as the Gulu district female parliamentarian- Hon. Betty Aol Ochan; and the long time Aswa county parliamentarian Hon. Reagan Okumu. Both senators asked the community to forgive their tormentors and focus on economic development.

Hon. Reagan remarked that, “peace is not only the silence of the gun; you should utilize the existing peace for economic development. It is important to focus towards education and poverty eradication, Let us focus on uplifting the poor of the poorest,” He went on saying, “at this point you should focus on lobbying for war reparations from government.” 

Prosecution makes their opening statement; calls first witness in the trial of Kwoyelo

On Tuesday March 12, the prosecution team in the trial of former LRA colonel Thomas Kwoyelo made their opening statement and called their first witness at the International Crimes Division of Uganda’s High Court [ICD] sitting in Gulu. The same day court swore in four court assessors one of whom will be an alternate because the rules allow only three court assessors at a time. The duty of court assessors is to advice court and to give their opinions on matters arising. 

In their opening statement, the prosecution indicated that the main interest of the prosecution is for the victims to get fair justice and that the accused and his group will be remembered for many brutal killings some of which were carried out using machetes, axes, beating, mutilation etc. The prosecution also alleged that the group [LRA] forced people into IDP camps where their security was not good and lived vulnerably.

Kwoyelo is facing 93 charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly committed while in the LRA. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges

“The prosecution has about 130 witnesses who will be lined, 360 exhibits, pictures, medical notes, videos, newspaper extracts and other evidences to prove the charged crimes…we shall bring evidence to prove that the accused had intentions by way of common plan beyond reasonable doubt ” prosecution lawyer Florence Akello said.

The defense on the other hand said they would make their opening statements later but had some brief statements to make, 

“Before you is a victim who was not protected; was abducted on his way to school while in Primary Three, indoctrinated, and the government failed to protect him. A kid not liable for crimes alleged,” said Alaka one of the defense lawyers. “We shall demonstrate to this court that the accused did not hold a command position … the prosecution wants to put all the crimes of the LRA on his small shoulders,” he added.

After these submissions, the prosecution called their first witness- an expert witness to support their opening statement. The witness labeled PW1said he is a lawyer and researcher by profession and a senior lecturer at the Institute of International Criminal Justice at Nkumba University in Uganda; with training in Peace and Conflict studies. He also said he served in the Ugandan military force for 24 years before voluntarily retiring in 1999. 

His report was admitted into evidence as PE1 (a) and a summary of the same as PE1 (b) in accordance with the ICD rules of procedure. He went on with his testimony until the third day of proceedings.

Among other things, witness PW1 told the court that his report made four major findings all relating to Human Rights and Humanitarian violations that took place; i.e. there were widespread atrocities all over northern Uganda, he stated that although the conflict ended 10 years ago, its scar still remain to date. “Impacts of war do not end with the war but lives much longer,” he said.

The others findings according to PW1 were that the conflict was well known and characterized extreme brutality on civilians such as mutilation, killings and abductions; the situation presented a large freedom deficit and absence of freedom and that the former residents of IDP camps still continue to experience difficult times such as lack of essential basic needs; there is a dichotomy between traditional and formal justice system within Acholi which he said surfaced in the Juba peace talks which caused a ‘egg and chicken’ debate about what comes first. He summarized his finding on this particular matter by stating that the Acholi traditional system and the formal justice system should not be treated as competitive because both present solutions. He was cross-examined by the defense lawyers on his report and later re-examined in chief

During proceedings the same day, representative of victims Henry Kilama made an oral application to the court in which they requested court to allow him raise some important matters of interest to the victims. The counsel noted that since witness PW1 was testifying on very crucial matters the victims counsel had some issues for him to clarify as regards the context and history of the conflict in northern Uganda; the aim of the LRA rebels and why they targeted civilians. 

“Although aware that it is not the role of victims to establish innocence or guilt of the accused, we want the views of the victims to guide court because it is the backbone of this trial and the duty of victims to assist court establish the truth in regard to the conflict, impacts and not just killings and abductions…,” he said. 

Henry Kilama also told court that he had a text indicating the participation of victims at the ICC and that those best practices should be borrowed and applied locally.

The trial panel discussed with all sides and ruled that, “… it became apparent that the application be made formally because it will enable parties to respond. The application is considered when presented formally,” said one of the trial judges

The next prosecution witness was a protected witness who testified in camera as one of the ways of witness protection

Ten years later, bail or no bail for Thomas Kwoyelo

The bail application hearing of former Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) Commander Thomas Kwoyelo was on January 18 pushed again to February 4, the same day the prosecution will make their opening statement. Kwoyelo who is facing 93 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly committed during the LRA conflict in Northern Uganda applied for bail in October last year after 10 years in prison but the International Crimes Division (ICD) of Uganda’s High court has not yet given it a hearing. Since his arrest from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) by the UPDF in 2008, Kwoyelo has been in detention. Kwoyelo’s trial has dragged on for years, unlike his counterpart Dominic Ongwen who is being tried at the ICC, an aspect that has raised questions on the justice process in Uganda. 

The first and second postponement of Kwoyelo’s bail was on November 6 and October 15, last year respectively. The postponements were for two reasons. One because the defense had not organized their sureties and two because there was a request by victims’ representatives for more time to be able to consult their clients. The same reasons caused the January 18 adjournment.

Regardless of a statement made by one of the presiding judges Michael Elubu in September last year on an expeditious trial, “based on the facts on ground, it may take up to about two to three years for the case to complete,” The constant adjournments in this case also means that the victims of the alleged atrocities have to wait for justice. For Kwoyelo, it means waiting for many more years to determine his fate. 

Victim participation, a concept that is new in Uganda’s Jurisprudence is facing a big challenge in Kwoyelo’s trial. In fact it has been at the center of the constant adjournments. As justice is sought in it is worth noting that although perpetrators are of primary importance in any criminal justice process, it’s very important that victims are held close in the on-going trial because their involvement is the driving force to the debates that take place in court. Primary in any court proceeding, victims serve as witnesses to provide court with evidence needed for judges to make their judgment thus supporting court in administering justice for the crimes committed against them.

The new date for the bail application hearing is 4^th February, the same day the prosecution is expected to make their opening statement.

Foundation for Justice and Development (FJDI) works with children, youth, women and communities to promote justice, development and economic recovery in northern Uganda. FJDI has been working on providing redress for conflict affected persons and communities and promoting transitional justice measures since 2015.