YouSaid · the spoken record

Wapakhabulo

lines on the record: 78
first: 2001-11-08
most recent: 2002-11-05
sittings or episodes: 3
sources: un-security-council

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“I apologize for having taken so long, but this is a very important matter, and I thank the Council for having given me the opportunity to make a contribution to this very important body of the United Nations, the Security Council.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“I can assure the Council that the efforts of my President as head of IGAD and mine as Chairman of the Council of Ministers of that body will be applied towards the realization of peace in Sudan and Somalia. Fourthly, we would like the United Nations to encourage all countries cited in the Panel's report to establish independent judicial commissions of inquiry and to report back to the United Nations on measures to implement the relevant recommendations. Finally, we call again on the Council to find immediate ways to ensure adequate MONUC deployment in Ituri for the maintenance of law and order as the Uganda People's Defence Forces withdraw from Bunia by 15 December 2002.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“In our case, the East African Community will soon agree on a customs union to pave the way for the admission of Rwanda and Burundi. As Chairman-in-Office of the East African Council of Ministers, I must applaud Ambassador Kassem's Panel in respect to this question of regional integration, which is supposed to help resolve some of the issues in our area. Thirdly, we advocate strengthened cooperation among the United Nations as a whole, the Security Council, the African Union and the subregional security mechanisms in the resolution and prevention of conflict at the regional and continental levels in Africa as a solid basis for the implementation of NEPAD. Uganda will soon assume the leadership of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), a very important regional body.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“In our view, the Security Council should, therefore, while protecting the wealth of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, focus on five key elements of the big picture. The first is to strengthen United Nations Security Council support for the implementation of the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement, the related Pretoria and Luanda Agreements and the inter-Congolese dialogue resolutions which were arrived at with a View to establishing an all-inclusive transitional government in Kinshasa. In my capacity as incoming Chairman of the Political Committee of the Lusaka Agreement, I promise to work closely with the Council on this issue. Secondly, we would like to see support for regional and subregional integration in the framework of the African Union and NEPAD.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“The ongoing inter-Congolese dialogue in Pretoria has finalized agreement on a power-sharing arrangement for a transitional government in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The intransigent Burundi rebels are expected to join the transitional government sometime in the near future, as far as we can see from what is going on in Dar es Salaam. And for the first time in history, President Al-Bashir of the Sudan and General Garang of the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) met in Kampala in mid-2002. In our View, the challenge before the Council, therefore, is to seize the moment and focus on the big picture, establishing the necessary conditions for peace, stability, regional integration and development in the Great Lakes region.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“The Secretary-General should cooperate and should share information with Member States who wish to establish such judicial mechanisms. Uganda would be happy to share with other countries the experience of our Porter Commission of Inquiry in this respect. It is in such a context that individual companies and entities mentioned can, in our View, be fairly tried and punished. In conclusion, let me say that we should focus on the big picture. Today, as I said earlier, we stand at the crossroads of a major breakthrough for peace in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Burundi and in the Sudan through the Machakos process. The prospects for peace in the Great Lakes region have never been greater.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“Issues to be discussed at the conference, in our view, should be: post- conflict rehabilitation, reconstruction and development in the Great Lakes region; measures to support the deepening of regional economic integration, especially in the areas of infrastructure and human resources development; capacity-building for peacekeeping and conflict resolution; and strengthening African Union capacity to monitor post-conflict reconstruction in the context of the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD). Uganda calls upon the countries cited in the final report, including the end-user countries, to establish independent judicial commissions of inquiry to investigate and recommend appropriate measures on allegations of illegal exploitation of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“And on D-day plus 100, which is 15 December, Uganda completely withdraws UPDF troops from Bunia. So, under the Agreement, the Council has to tell us what to do, because very soon, by virtue of the agreement, we shall be going out; this is to be completed by 15 December. In our View, the proposed international conference on peace, security and sustainable development should take place under the auspices of the United Nations and the African Union (AU) soon after the establishment of a transitional government in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and a ceasefire in Burundi.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“The way forward for Ituri is through the implementation of Luanda Agreement, which provides for the creation of the Joint Pacification Committee on Ituri. The international community should provide adequate material support to the Committee. At this stage, the Council should assume its responsibility and provide adequate deployment of MONUC for the purpose of maintaining law and order in the area, given that UPDF is committed under the Luanda Agreement to complete withdrawal from Bunia by 15 December 2002. This is a very serious matter. Under the Agreement we signed in Luanda, we said that on D-day - 6 September - plus 50 days Uganda was to submit a detailed plan of how we propose to withdraw from Bunia, and I will check whether we have done so. On D-day plus 70, which is next week, Uganda begins to withdraw troops from Bunia.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“That would lead to the establishment of a new transitional government and a State capacity to guarantee against the illegal exploitation of natural resources and other forms of wealth of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Uganda believes in the speedy implementation of programmes for disarmament, demobilization, reintegration and repatriation or resettlement (DDRRR) which remain key to peace and security in the Great Lakes region. We have sorted out our programmes but, as I said earlier, Interahamwe continues to harass our territory in Kisoro. Therefore, Uganda calls upon the Security Council to strengthen MONUC and to support capacity-building programmes for peacekeeping and peace-building by African countries in order to implement DDRRR programmes.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“The children in question were rescued from a mutiny by Mbusa Nyamwisi and John Tibasima against Professor Wamba dia Wamba in Bunia, and we took them to Kampala or to Entebbe, complete with their weapons, and disarmed them as a way of assuring that there would be no deaths. I was in charge of that school because I was then national political commissar and we took those children to that place for counselling and for care. The children were subsequently handed over to the United Nations, which processed them and sent them back to their parents. No other training of children is known to us. What is the way forward? Uganda remains convinced that the Security Council should put priority emphasis on the speedy implementation of the Lusaka Cease-fire Agreement and the supporting agreements made in Pretoria and Luanda.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“The fact that reference is made to UPDF as running militia groups that operate through intimidation is totally untrue. We operate on a very strict code of conduct, and many of our development partners here have complained to us that we are sometimes too strict in our application of our statute on the code of conduct. In fact they call it harsh, to say the least. The United Nations Panel tries to hit a soft target by making a false allegation that 165 children between the ages of 14 and 16 were recruited and trained at a UPDF military camp at Tchakwanzi, in Uganda. The Council may wish to know the facts regarding this allegation, because it is serious and it involves children. Tchakwanzi is not a UPDF camp. It is a political school where we take our children for education in political matters.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“I should point out that Uganda, through UPDF, has never trained any personal militias. But what we can say is that the Uganda Government has trained armies on behalf of its allies, namely the MLC and the RCD. The trained troops in the hands of the MLC continue to provide effective security and administration in the area under MLC control. Unfortunately the RCD has suffered numerous divisions in its leadership. As a result, some of the troops are under Mbusa Nyamwisi, in North Kivu, in the Beni-Butembo area. Others are under the former Defence Minister, Thomas Lubanga, who has since formed his own political group. The confusion in the report arises from the fact that the Panel did not understand those political situations in the area.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“Right now, Uganda is prospecting for hydrocarbons and other minerals in areas adjacent to Ituri. What we need when we do this is peace in the neighbourhood, not confusion. I will clarify that we are drilling for oil in the area on the floor of the Rift Valley, with very good prospects. We do not want war or conflict in the neighbourhood so that we spend our time managing refugees instead of drilling in our area as we are doing right now. As proof of the creation of conditions for the continued presence of UPDF for commercial operations, the Panel alleges that a Protocol d'Accord was signed on behalf of Uganda; as I said, that Protocol does not exist. The Panel then alleges that UPDF is maintaining local militias in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo to protect elite networks.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“I will return to that after I have addressed a number of other issues. The Hema-Lendu conflict is historical and was triggered by a fight over land. The late Mobutu Sese Seko sided with the Hema and gave land to them, to the annoyance of the Lendu. We found this conflict there when we went into Bunia. We did not create the conflict, as seems to be alleged by the Panel. In fact, the situation is that, where Uganda has withdrawn - as in Gbadolite, Gemena, Buta and Beni, - there is relative peace. Many of those areas have more natural resources and larger populations than Bunia, where there has been persistent Hema-Lendu ethnic conflict over land. In other words, why should we leave Buta and Gemena and come to set up business operations and networks in a conflict-prone area?”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“We could have moved out completely, because we gave notice in July last year that we would do so. It remains there as a stabilizing force. Otherwise the process of the Lusaka Cease-fire Agreement in that area would have collapsed. We were requested by the Secretary-General to Withdraw UPDF from the area in the context of the Kampala disengagement plan. Through a special envoy, Uganda had notified the Secretary-General of its withdrawal from the Lusaka process and, therefore, of the unilateral withdrawal of its forces from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Uganda has signed bilateral agreements with the Democratic Republic of the Congo, such as one signed in Angola; that will provide for the total withdrawal of UPDF and the creation of the Joint Pacification Committee on Ituri.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“Unfortunately, the final report still contains serious factual errors, uncorroborated information, contradictions and clear distortions. The uncorroborated allegations against UPDF and those against the Government of Uganda could have been checked up on if the Panel had cared to do so. Let me comment on some of them to illustrate the point that I am making about serious errors. In paragraphs 12, 14, 101 and 102, the Panel alleges that the UPDF presence is the cause of the instability in the Ituri area and that it is designed to create conditions for the continued illegal exploitation of the resources of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I wish to point out that the UPDF remains in the Democratic Republic of the Congo at the request of the Secretary-General.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“The allegations that the UPDF is involved in commercial operations (para. 122) and that the Chief of Military Intelligence, Colonel Mayombo, signed a Protocol d'Accord on 22 February 2002 in exchange for a monthly stipend of $25,000 and exemption from taxes are, in our view, based on forged documents. The Panel had a chance to meet Colonel Mayombo in Kampala, but it never took advantage of this to clear this sort of material. It should have met authorities of the Uganda Government if they were in doubt. But there is no such Protocol d'Accord, as alleged in the report. And when you look for the evidence, there is no corroborating evidence. The Panel claimed that its findings would be based on the testimony of eyewitnesses and that it would operate under reasonable standards of proof, with fairness and objectivity.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“There is no evidence to suggest that UPDF officers are in the process of undermining Bemba to bring him down. To the contrary, Bemba remains a close ally of Uganda. RCD- ML is allied to the Kinshasa Government and has been receiving military and other support from it in an attempt to open a rear front against Bemba; hence the fight between Mbusa Nyamwisi and Lumbala in the Isiro area. RCD-ML has been arming and training the Lendu against the Hema in the Ituri region. So, Hema elements have consequently deserted to form their own army under former RCD-ML Defence Minister Thomas Lubanga. The Union des Patriotes Congolais (UPC) has been seeking alternative sources of arms because we have refused to give them arms. Importantly, the Hema-Lendu conflict is historical, and not a result of the fact that UPDF went to Ituri.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“In paragraphs 102, 103 and 122, the Panel makes a muddled analysis of the recent power play in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, and wrongly concludes that General Saleh, a retired Uganda People's Defence Forces (UPDF) officer, is training a private militia, that Uganda is intent on breaking up MLC to boost the Rassemblement Congolais pour la Democratie (RCD- Congo), and that there is an attempt to replace Mbusa Nyamwisi with Roger Lumbala of the Rassemblement Congolais pour la Democratie-Nationale (RCD-N). Those who know the Congo can explain that the politics of the area is as follows: RCD-Congo is a splinter group of RCD-Goma; they disagreed with each other following the Sun City agreement, signed in South Africa. Roger Lumbala is actually allied to Jean- Pierre Bemba and the MLC.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“More so, it is contrary to the mandate issued by the Council that the Panel elected in most cases to overlook the requirement for the inclusion of comments and reactions from States and other actors cited in the report. That was a major weakness in the work of the Panel. We can illustrate this by citing a number of examples.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“But in a conflict such as that in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, one has to be careful when listening to or believing any evidence. For instance, the Panel believed the testimony of some Lendu chiefs that the Hema are responsible for protecting mineral-rich areas for purposes of exploitation. What we know is that it is not wise to believe what a Lendu says about a Hema, and vice versa. We also found it professionally dishonest to extrapolate data from one area of the vast Democratic Republic of the Congo to try to prove that, in the area where Uganda is, similar situations, such as deaths, are of the same magnitude. Even in my own country, one part of Uganda cannot be used to extrapolate for another.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“The Panel of Experts does not appear to be cognizant of the history of the Democratic Republic of the Congo since the time of King Leopold II - including the fact that Uganda has been a victim of repeated terrorist attacks from that country's territory - when it says that Uganda really went there to loot. Furthermore, we find no evidence of the creation of an elite network in the so-called Uganda- controlled area. We find the composition of the Panel of Experts and their method of investigation not to demonstrate a capacity to sift through deliberate falsehoods, war propaganda and political intrigue involved in the conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This may be due to the fact that membership of the Panel constantly changed, which also created some weakness.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“Since May 2001, Uganda has withdrawn from the Democratic Republic of the Congo; recently we withdrew from Beni and Gbadolite. We are left with one battalion, which remains in Bunia at the request of the Secretary-General, conveyed in his letter of May 2001, and also in accordance with the provisions of the Luanda Agreement between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda. My country is still committed to complete Withdrawal, even from Bunia itself, and I will comment on this later. But I would like to say that the MLC and the RCD are right now effectively responsible for the administration of the areas under their respective control, and are not just facades; they actually control territory and are recognized under the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement and by the Security Council.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“There is the hypothesis of the elite networks, which are claimed to have curved out separate self-financing areas and to be responsible for the continuation of microconflicts over natural resources and revenues in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This hypothesis, to us, is fundamentally flawed and invalid. A simple analysis will show that the basic assumptions of the hypothesis are wrong: the evidence of the existence of Ugandan elite networks is untenable and the motive of the hypothesis, to us, is ill-intentioned. I will elaborate on this. The hypothesis makes the incorrect assumption that the Rassemblement Congolais pour la Democratie- Mouvement de Liberation (RCD-K/ML) and the Mouvement de liberation Congolais (MLC) are mere facades and militias in the so-called Ugandan- controlled area.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“This included the grisly incidents at Mpondwe in 1996, when more than 1,000 troops invaded Uganda from the Democratic Republic of the Congo at a border point called Mpondwe and at Kichwamba in 1998, where more than 100 college students were locked up in their dormitory and killed. I would also cite the Bwindi terrorist massacres of 1999, in which foreign tourists - from Britain, the United States, Australia and New Zealand - were killed, together with Ugandans. Bwindi forest is one of the last gorillas sanctuaries in the world. There continue to be persistent Interahamwe attacks in the Kisoro district of Uganda on the border with Democratic Republic of the Congo. Another area of concern to us is the application of an invalid hypothesis to find Uganda guilty.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“Unlike the addendum report of November 2001 (S/2001/ 1072), the final report completely ignores Uganda's legitimate security concerns as recognized in the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement, the relevant Security Council resolutions, and the bilateral agreement between Uganda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo signed on 6 September 2002 in Angola. Let me reiterate that Uganda got involved in the Democratic Republic of the Congo as a result of genuine security concerns. These included the operations of the terrorist groups I mentioned earlier and other forces such as the genocidal members of the former Rwandan Armed Forces (ex-FAR) and Interahamwe. Those groups have used the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to launch persistent and indiscriminate terrorist attacks on the people of Uganda. I will cite a few examples.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“They relate also to deepening regional integration; calling for strong international financial support for building State institutions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo; post-conflict reconstruction in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and regional neighbours; deterring international organized crime syndicates from continued illegal activities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. We in Uganda found these to be positive aspects of the Panel of Expert's report. But we also had difficulties, and we have areas we consider to be of concern to us. I will outline these. The first is the downplaying of Uganda's security concerns in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“Indeed, in our view, a deeper historical analysis of companies and criminal organizations based outside Africa would have definitely helped create a proper understanding of the failure to build viable State institutions and structures in the Democratic Republic of the Congo since the era of King Leopold II of the Belgians. Also positively, the report also focuses on recommendations that will create conditions and incentives for encouraging all parties to implement their obligations under the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement, the related Pretoria and Luanda Agreements and the Sun City resolutions.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“As Uganda stated in its response (S/2001/1163) to the addendum to the first report, such a moratorium not only would be difficult to enforce but, in a very large measure, would hurt the Congolese small-scale farmers and artisan miners whose livelihood depends entirely on earnings from the traditional cross-border trade. The report also positively covers more, and a wider range of, participants by covering the end-user countries. By doing so, the final report provided the missing link and, in our view, improved the scope of the investigation to cover all parties involved in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“Indeed, the addendum to the previous report of the United Nations Panel (S/2001/1072) concluded that Uganda's involvement in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was based on, first, a bilateral protocol between Kampala and Kinshasa of 26 April 1998 and, secondly, the legitimate security concerns emanating from the threat posed by the negative forces operating in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo: the Allied Democratic Forces, the West Nile Bank Front, the Ugandan National Rescue Front II and the more recently formed People's Redemption Army. The report also shares Uganda's View that an embargo or moratorium on exports of natural resources from the Democratic Republic of the Congo would not be a "viable means of helping to improve the situation of the country's Government, citizens or natural environment" (S/2002/1146, para. 155).”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“The report recognizes the fact that the Republic of Uganda established the Porter Judicial Commission of Inquiry as an internal mechanism to address the allegations of illegal exploitation of the natural resources of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, in accordance with the Security Council recommendations contained in the presidential statements of 3 May (S/PRST/2001/13) and 19 December 2001 (S/PRST/2001/39). The United Nations Panel also made a positive effort to cooperate and share information with the Porter Commission, in spite of the marked differences between the Panel and the Commission on methods of investigation. The report also confirms the fact that neither the Ugandan Government nor any of its companies are involved in the illegal exploitation of the natural resources of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“Uganda is a country that became involved in the Democratic Republic of the Congo out of genuine security concerns. We believe that, in the interest of promoting peace in the Great Lakes region, there should be transparency in the activities of parties involved directly or indirectly in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I will now comment on the positive aspects of the Panel's final report. As pointed out in my press statement of 23 October 2002, the Government of Uganda has noted that the final report contains a number of positive elements.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“The final report of the Porter Commission is expected by the middle of this month. Its mandate expires on 15 November, so it should be reporting any time now. The Government of Uganda will therefore await the release of the Porter Commission report before making any comments on allegations against specific Ugandan senior military officers and business people that are contained in the final report of the United Nations Panel. The Government of Uganda reiterates its commitment to the implementation of the recommendations of the report. Uganda - and this is important - will without doubt keep the United Nations security Council advised of whatever measures it takes in implementation of the recommendations of the Porter Commission.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“Since 2001, Uganda has extended its maximum cooperation to Panel members, during their visits to Kampala in November 2000, August 2001 and March and September 2002. With the endorsement of the Security Council, Uganda established in May 2001 the Porter Judicial Commission of Inquiry to investigate allegations against Ugandan military officers, individuals and companies in connection with the illegal exploitation of the natural resources of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. As stipulated by our Commission of Inquiry Act, the Porter Commission has the judicial powers of the High Court of Uganda, including the power to subpoena witnesses and documents and to perform audits. I should say here that the Porter Commission has cooperated with the United Nations Panel, including through the exchange of information and materials.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“We have prepared a detailed response to the final report, which has already been circulated in document S/2002/1202. It covers the strengths and critical weaknesses of the report. It responds to the major categories of allegations against the Uganda People's Defence Forces and outlines Uganda's views on the overall picture and on the challenges before the Security Council in the search for peace in the Great Lakes region. With respect to Uganda's position on the principle of investigation, the Council will recall that in 2000 His Excellency President Yoweri Museveni gave his personal and strong support to the proposal to establish a United Nations panel to investigate allegations of illegal exploitation of natural resources of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“Thanks to the support of the Security Council and the Governments of South Africa, Kenya, Gabon and Tanzania, prospects for peace in the Great Lakes region seem greater than ever before. We are most obliged to all members of the Council for the interest and commitment they have collectively shown on issues relating to the maintenance of peace and stability in Africa. Indeed, the annual visits by Council members to the Great Lakes region since 2001 are a clear demonstration of the Council's commitment. The Government of Uganda has welcomed the release of the final report of the Panel of Experts on the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources and Other Forms of Wealth of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I wish to thank the Security Council for giving us the opportunity to respond to the contents of the final report.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“I would also like to thank the Secretary-General for his commitment to conflict resolution and peace- building in Africa and for his dedication to a broad, sustained and global fight against terrorism. His Special Representative for the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ambassador Namanga Ngongi, and his Special Envoy, His Excellency Mr. Moustapha Niasse, have traversed the Great Lakes region and beyond to ensure progress in the implementation of the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement and of the related Pretoria and Luanda Agreements, and the finalization of the inter- Congolese dialogue on the establishment of an all- inclusive transitional government in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“It is a great pleasure for me to address members of the Council on the final report of the Panel of Experts on the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources and Other Forms of Wealth of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (S/2002/1146). I am particularly happy to see you, Sir, presiding over the proceedings of the Council. Africa will always remember the commitment and support extended by the People's Republic of China to our people in the struggle for independence, justice, peace and sustainable development. I can assure you of my delegation's continued cooperation in the search for peace and stability in the Great Lakes region. Allow me also to congratulate your predecessor, Ambassador Belinga-Eboutou of Cameroon, for the excellent manner in which he guided the work of the Council in October.”
2002-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4642 (2002) · source
“Indeed, any specific measures by the Security Council should, in our View, be focused on creating incentives for all parties to implement the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement.”
2001-12-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4437 (2001) · source
“In our view the Security Council should stay focused on playing a leadership role in ensuring accelerated disarmament, demobilization, repatriation, resettlement or reintegration of the negative forces based in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the successful outcome of the inter-Congolese dialogue scheduled to start in South Africa in January next year. In this context, Uganda feels that a summit meeting between the Security Council and the Political Committee should be convened early next year to ensure sustained momentum for the inter-Congolese dialogue and to agree on an enforceable timetable for the establishment of a transitional government in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.”
2001-12-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4437 (2001) · source
“We strongly agree with the Kassem Panel that it is the urgent implementation of the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement and the creation of institutions of a viable State under the new political dispensation that can guarantee against the illegal exploitation of the natural resources of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The successful implementation of the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement will, first, put in place a transitional government to ensure the rebuilding of the collapsed State and its institutions and fill the vacuum created by the absence of authority to regulate the exploitation of the country's wealth. Secondly, it will address the security concerns generated by the presence of armed terrorist groups in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to destabilize her neighbours.”
2001-12-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4437 (2001) · source
“On the question of renegotiation of concessions that is recommended by the Panel, in our View, these should be negotiated under the auspices of the Security Council. However, in our view this would be putting the cart before the horse. We feel that the transitional government that will be established as a result of the inter-Congolese dialogue should have the sovereign responsibility to handle all matters relating to the review of contractual obligations, regulation of revenues from the country's resources and the formulation of a plan of action for rebuilding the country's institutions and structures. We think that there should be a focus on the implementation of the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement.”
2001-12-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4437 (2001) · source
“Let me make a small correction here on the statement made by Minister Okitundu that Uganda produces hardly any coffee. The biggest crime we have in Uganda is that we produce too much coffee. Uganda is the leading coffee producer on the African continent. We complete only with cote d'Ivoire. Sometimes we beat them, sometimes they beat us. But I can assure you that we are within the range of four or five million bags a year, and we do so every year from our own very fertile soil. Secondly, I know that Uganda has been hit by HIV/AIDS, but we are definitely one country that has, through concerted action, reduced our rate of replication from 30 per cent to 6 per cent, and, as we speak it is still falling. Hence, we should not be condemned for something over which we had no control, but at least we have tried to assert control.”
2001-12-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4437 (2001) · source
“While the desire to undertake such definitive action to address the issue of illegal exploitation of the natural resources of the Democratic Republic of the Congo could be understandable, the Security Council needs to move very cautiously on the issue of a moratorium. A moratorium would definitely have the effect of sanctions against the small farmers and artisan miners in the Democratic Republic of the Congo who earn their living and access to medicines and other essential commodities through traditional cross-border trade. It would also cripple the capacity of missionary groups and other non-governmental organizations, which are the only organized institutions to deliver humanitarian services in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.”
2001-12-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4437 (2001) · source
“Convening an international conference on the Great Lakes region before the conclusion of the inter-Congolese dialogue would definitely divert attention from the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement. We are convinced that it should S/l'V.4437 be the responsibility of the transitional government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to undertake the formulation of a plan of action to rebuild State institutions and to participate in international conferences focused on the reconstruction and development of the Great Lakes region. Mention was made of a moratorium on a number of key commodities. The panel recommends in paragraph 156 that a moratorium should be declared banning the purchase and importing of certain products, including gold, coltan, diamonds, coffee and timber originating in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.”
2001-12-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4437 (2001) · source
“In this connection, Uganda would like to request the Security Council to seriously consider setting up a mechanism that would encourage and enable the United Nations Panel to share information with the Porter Commission of Inquiry. I will conclude with discussing the way forward. There is the question of an international conference on the Great Lakes. Uganda has welcomed the Panel's proposal to convene an international conference on peace and development in the Great Lakes region. We believe, however, that such an international conference should be held after the implementation of both the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement on the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement on Burundi.”
2001-12-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4437 (2001) · source
“You will recall that in May 2001, Uganda strongly objected to the old Panel's unwarranted attack on the person of President Museveni. As corroborated evidence contradicting the DARA case study demonstrates, allegations by the old Panel against President Museveni's family and the Department of Forestry's involvement in illegal exploitation were based on false information. That is why we feel that it was a serious omission for the addendum to ignore the need to acknowledge the fact that a serious mistake had been made and that it was unjustifiably damaging to the integrity of President Museveni and the Forestry Department. Uganda, therefore, supports the extension of the mandate of the United Nations Panel to address outstanding issues relating to corroboration of evidence, gross omissions and obvious technical errors.”
2001-12-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4437 (2001) · source
“At the fourteenth ministerial meeting of this Northern Corridor, in Kampala on 23 November 2001, Uganda reiterated its commitment to ensuring smooth traffic flows through Uganda to strengthen regional initiatives for infrastructure development and to harmonize customs documentation and procedures along that Corridor. In paragraphs 28 and 44, the addendum refers to the continued mining operations by UPDF of gold in the Kilo-moto area and diamonds in the North Kisangani area. The withdrawals of UPDF from North Kisangani and Kilomoto which took place in May/June 2001 have been verified by MONUC. It is, therefore, gross prejudice to allege that UPDF is still involved in gold and diamond mining in areas it vacated six months ago. Mr. President, there is also what we consider a serious omission.”
2001-12-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4437 (2001) · source
“I also wish to point out that there is an agreement establishing what is called the Transit Transport Authority for the Northern Corridor, which was signed in 1985 by Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Kenya. The mandate for this Transit Transport Authority is to ensure efficient flow of traffic between Bujumbura, Kigali, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kampala, Nairobi and the port of Mombasa -in other words, a hinterland Mombasa port. A number of infrastructure projects under this Authority are supported by the World Bank, the European Union and other donor agencies.”
2001-12-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4437 (2001) · source