Uganda

Cluster Munition Ban Policy

Last updated: 03 August 2016

Summary: Signatory Uganda has expressed its desire to ratify the convention since 2010, but it has not taken any steps to introduce ratification legislation for parliamentary approval. Uganda has participated in all of the convention’s meetings, including the First Review Conference in September 2015. However, it abstained from voting on a key UN resolution on the convention in December 2015.

Uganda states that it has not used, produced, or stockpiled cluster munitions, but there is evidence that cluster munitions were used in Uganda in the past. Uganda has denied responsibility for cluster bomb attacks outside the town of Bor in South Sudan in early 2014, when it provided air support to the government of South Sudan as it fought opposition forces.

Policy

The Republic of Uganda signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions on 3 December 2008.

At the convention’s First Review Conference in September 2015, Uganda expressed its commitment to ratify the convention during its address to the high-level segment of the meeting. It stated that “currently, consultations are at the highest level, in keeping with the procedural requirement under the Uganda Constitution.”[1]

Uganda has expressed its desire to ratify the convention on several occasions.[2] Draft ratification legislation was tabled for Cabinet consideration in May 2016, according to the convention’s universalization coordinators.[3] The proposed ratification had not been introduced to parliament for consideration and approval as of 1 July 2016. Since 2014, Ugandan officials have indicated that draft ratification legislation requires Cabinet approval.[4]

Uganda has indicated that national implementation legislation will be prepared for the convention after it has ratified.[5]

On 7 December 2015, Uganda abstained voting on a UN General Assembly (UNGA) resolution on the convention, which calls on states outside the convention to “join as soon as possible.” Uganda did not explain why it abstained on the non-binding resolution that 139 states voted to adopt, including all signatories except Cyprus.[6]

Uganda participated extensively in the Oslo Process that produced the Convention on Cluster Munitions and hosted a regional meeting on cluster munitions in Kampala in September 2008.

Uganda has participated in all of the convention’s annual Meeting of States Parties; the First Review Conference in Dubrovnik, Croatia in September 2015; and intersessional meetings in Geneva in 2011–2013 and 2015. It has attended regional workshops on the convention, most recently in Lusaka, Zambia in June 2015.[7] In September 2015, Uganda told the First Review Conference that cluster munitions cause “horrifying” and “devastating” harm and said it “joins the rest of the world in condemning the use of cluster munitions.”[8]

Ugandan legal experts and campaigners work to encourage swift ratification of the convention.[9]

Uganda is a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty. It is also party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons.

Use, production, transfer, and stockpiling

Uganda has stated on several occasions that it does not stockpile cluster munitions and has never used, produced, or transferred the weapons.[10] At the First Review Conference in September 2015, Uganda said it “does not use, produce, stockpile or transfer cluster munitions and does not intend to do so.”[11]

Until Uganda becomes a State Party and provides an Article 7 transparency report formally declaring the status of its stockpile, the Monitor will continue to list Uganda as a stockpiler of cluster munitions. This is due to use allegations from South Sudan in 2013–2014 (see below) and past statements by government officials and mine action operators confirming the clearance of cluster munition remnants inside Uganda.[12]

Information and photographs, provided to Human Rights Watch (HRW) by the UN Development Programme (UNDP), of remnants cleared by mine action teams in northern Uganda near the then-Sudan border indicate that RBK-250-275 AO-1SCh cluster bombs were apparently used in the past during the years-long fighting between the rebel Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and the Ugandan military. It is not clear who used the cluster munitions or precisely when or how many munitions were used. On several occasions, Uganda has denied that its armed forces ever used cluster munitions and said the LRA was responsible.[13] The Uganda Mine Action Centre (UMAC) has informed the Monitor that no unexploded submunitions remain.[14]

Use in South Sudan

In February 2014, evidence emerged showing that cluster munitions had been used since mid-December 2013 outside of Bor, the capital of Jonglei State, during the conflict between the opposition forces loyal to South Sudan’s former Vice President Riek Machar and Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) government forces, with air support for the SPLA provided by Uganda.[15]

During the week of 7 February 2014, UN mine action personnel found the remnants of at least eight RBK-250-275 cluster bombs and an unknown quantity of intact unexploded AO-1SCh fragmentation submunitions by a major road 16 kilometers south of Bor, in an area not known to be contaminated by remnants prior to mid-December 2013.[16] UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon announced the discovery of cluster munition remnants near Bor and condemned the use of cluster bombs, without indicating if an investigation would be undertaken or who the UN believed was responsible.[17]

South Sudan denied using cluster munitions in the conflict and also denied Ugandan use of the weapons.[18] At the Fifth Meeting of States Parties in September 2014, South Sudan said an investigation conducted jointly with UN officials had not been able to determine who had used the cluster munitions found in Bor.[19]

At the Fifth Meeting of States Parties in September 2014, Uganda denied that its armed forces possess cluster bombs and stated Uganda had not used the weapons in South Sudan.[20] Previously, in May 2014, the Chief of the Ugandan Defense Forces, General Edward Katumba Wamala, denied that Uganda used cluster munitions in South Sudan and informed media that as a signatory to the Convention on Cluster Munitions, Uganda has banned any use of cluster munitions by its army, the Uganda People’s Defense Forces (UPDF).[21] The commander of the Ugandan forces in South Sudan, Brig. Muhanga Kayanja, said in February 2014 that his forces used helicopters to provide close air support to the government’s ground troops, but denied using cluster bombs, or any bombs, in the fighting.[22]

The use of cluster munitions in South Sudan has received strong media coverage as well as public outcry and condemnations.[23] Approximately 30 countries have expressed concern at or condemned cluster munition use in South Sudan.[24] On 27 May 2014, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 2155, which noted “with serious concern reports of the indiscriminate use of cluster munitions” in Jonglei State in February 2014 and urged “all parties to refrain from similar such use in the future.”[25]



[1] Statement of Uganda, Convention on Cluster Munitions First Review Conference, Dubrovnik, 9 September 2015.

[2] See for example, statement of Uganda, Convention on Cluster Munitions First Review Conference, Dubrovnik, 9 September 2015; statement of Uganda, Accra Regional Conference on the Universalization of the Convention on Cluster Munitions, Accra, 28 May 2012; statement of Uganda, Convention on Cluster Munitions Second Meeting of States Parties, Beirut, 13 September 2011; and statement of Uganda, Convention on Cluster Munitions First Meeting of States Parties, Vientiane, 9 November 2010.

[3] Convention on Cluster Munitions Coordination Committee Meeting, Geneva, 28 April 2016. Notes by the CMC.

[4] Statements of Uganda, Convention on Cluster Munitions Fifth Meeting of States Parties San Jose, 3 September 2014. In February 2014, a Ugandan diplomat told the CMC that the ratification process was underway but requires Cabinet approval before it can be referred to parliament for adoption. Interview with Matata Twaha, Second Secretary, Permanent Mission of Uganda to the UN in Geneva, Geneva, 20 February 2014.

[5] Statement of Uganda, Convention on Cluster Munitions Second Meeting of States Parties, Beirut, 13 September 2011; and statement of Uganda, Lomé Regional Seminar on the Universalization of the Convention on Cluster Munitions, Lomé, Togo, 22 May 2013.

[6]Implementation of the Convention on Cluster Munitions,” UNGA Resolution 70/54, 7 December 2015.

[8] Statement of Uganda, Convention on Cluster Munitions First Review Conference, Dubrovnik, 9 September 2015.

[9] Email from Margaret Arach Orech, Director, Uganda Landmine Survivors Association, 4 June 2015.

[10] In April 2012, a government official informed an intersessional meeting of the convention that “Uganda has never manufactured, acquired, stockpiled, transferred or used cluster munitions.” Statement of Uganda, Convention on Cluster Munitions Intersessional Meetings, Geneva, 18 April 2012. In September 2011, Uganda stated that it has never used, produced, transferred, or acquired cluster munitions. Statement of Uganda, Convention on Cluster Munitions Second Meeting of States Parties, Beirut, 13 September 2011. In June 2009, a senior official said that Uganda does not have any stockpiled cluster munitions. Presentation by Maj.-Gen. J. F. Oketta, Office of the Prime Minister, Berlin Conference on the Destruction of Cluster Munitions, 25 June 2009, slides 2 and 22.

[11] Statement of Uganda, Convention on Cluster Munitions First Review Conference, Dubrovnik, 9 September 2015.

[12] See for example, statement by Amb. Cissy Taliwaku, Deputy Head of Mission, Permanent Mission of Uganda to the UN in Geneva, to the Belgrade Conference for States Affected by Cluster Munitions, 4 October 2007. Notes by the CMC.

[13] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form J (for the period 2 April 2008 to 2 April 2009); “UGANDA: Landmine survivors welcome ban on cluster bombs,” IRIN (Gulu), 4 June 2008; Paul Amoru, “Cluster bombs conference on,” Daily Monitor, 29 September 2008; and interview with Maj.-Gen. J. F. Oketta, Office of the Prime Minister, in Berlin, 25 June 2009.

[14] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Vicent Woboya, Director, UMAC, 1 April 2010.

[15] Human Rights Watch Press Release, “South Sudan: Investigate New Cluster Bomb Use,” 15 February 2014.

[16] The UN Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS) report noted “UNMAS found physical evidence of the use of cluster munitions in the Malek area of Bor County, approximately 16 kilometres south of Bor along the Juba-Bor Road.” UNMISS, “Conflict in South Sudan: A Human Rights Report,” 8 May 2014.

[17] Statement of UN Secretary-General on South Sudan, New York, 12 February 2014. In May 2014, the UNMAS director informed the CMC that while cluster munitions had been used in South Sudan, it was not possible to determine who was responsible for the use. Email from UNMAS, 13 May 2014.

[18] See, Jacey Fortin, “The Bad Bomb: Cluster Munitions, Cold Cases And A Case of Blame Game in South Sudan,” International Business Times, 12 March 2014. Both South Sudanese and Ugandan forces are believed to possess fixed wing aircraft and helicopters capable of delivering air-dropped cluster munitions, such as the RBK-250-275 AO-1SCh cluster bomb, while South Sudan’s opposition forces are not believed to possess these means of delivery.

[19] Statement of South Sudan, Convention on Cluster Munitions Fifth Meeting of States Parties, San Jose, 3 September 2014.

[20] Statements of Uganda, Convention on Cluster Munitions Fifth Meeting of States Parties, San Jose, 3 September 2014.

[22] Human Rights Watch Press Release, “South Sudan: Investigate New Cluster Bomb Use,” 15 February 2014.

[23] Statement by Margot Wallström, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Sweden, Conference on Disarmament, Geneva, 2 March 2015; Royal Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement, “Norway condemns use of cluster bombs in South Sudan,” 22 February 2014; and statement by Wylbur C. Simuusa of Zambia, President of the Fourth Meeting of States Parties of the Convention on Cluster Munitions, 14 February 2014.

[24] The following states expressed concern at and/or condemned the use of cluster munitions in South Sudan in national statements and/or resolutions since 2014: Argentina, Australia, Cambodia, Chad, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Ireland, Italy, Jordan, Republic of Korea, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mauritania, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Portugal, Russia, Rwanda, Slovenia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

[25] See, UN Security Council Press Statement, “Security Council, Adopting Resolution 2155 (2014), extends mandate of mission in South Sudan,” 27 May 2014.


Mine Ban Policy

Last updated: 30 October 2011

Commitment to the Mine Ban Treaty

Mine Ban Treaty status

State Party

National implementation measures

Legislation reported under development since 2004

Transparency reporting

Uganda has not submitted its Article 7 report due on 30 April 2011

Policy

The Republic of Uganda signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 3 December 1997 and ratified on 25 February 1999, becoming a State Party on 1 August 1999.

National implementation legislation has reportedly been under development since 2004, but still had not been enacted as of August 2011.[1]

Uganda had not yet submitted its annual Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report, which was due by 30 April 2011. Uganda has provided eight previous reports.[2]

In 2011, Uganda has elected to serve as co-chair of the Mine Ban Treaty’s Standing Committee on Victim Assistance and Socio-Economic Reintegration.

Uganda is party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons and its original Protocol II on landmines, but not Amended Protocol II or Protocol V on explosive remnants of war.

 Production, transfer, use, stockpiling, and retention

Uganda produced antipersonnel mines until 1995 when the state-run facility was decommissioned. It has stated that it has never exported antipersonnel mines.[3] Uganda completed the destruction of its stockpile of 6,383 antipersonnel mines in July 2003.[4]  Uganda last reported the discovery or seizure of additional antipersonnel mines in 2007.[5]

In every Article 7 report since 2004, Uganda has reported retaining 1,764 Type 72 antipersonnel mines for training purposes.[6] Uganda has never reported in any detail on the intended purposes and actual uses of its retained mines, a measure agreed by States Parties at the review conferences held in 2004 and 2009.

In 2000 and 2001, there were serious and credible allegations indicating the strong possibility of Ugandan forces used antipersonnel mines in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), particularly in the June 2000 battle for Kisangani. The government denied any use, but pledged to investigate; the results were never made known.[7] The government consistently accused Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) rebels of using antipersonnel mines in Uganda until 2004, and regularly reported the seizure or recovery of stockpiled antipersonnel mines from the LRA until 2005.

 



[1] The draft law is titled “1997 Mine Ban Implementation Bill 2002.” In May 2002, Uganda reported the act was before parliament. In May 2004, officials told the Monitor that a revised draft was due to be presented to the cabinet for approval before going to parliament. In May 2005, Uganda reported, “An implementation act is ready to be presented before Parliament.” In December 2005, Uganda reported that national implementation legislation was “ready for parliamentary debate.” In May 2007, an official told the Monitor that the bill still had to be approved by the cabinet before being sent to parliament. No further update has been provided.

[2] Uganda submitted undated reports covering the periods from April 2009 to April 2010, 2 April 2008 to 2 April 2009, 2 April 2007 to 1 April 2008, and from 1 May 2006 to 1 April 2007. Previous reports were submitted on 5 December 2005, 11 May 2005, 24 July 2003, and 24 May 2002. The initial report was due in January 2000. Uganda did not submit annual reports in 2004 or 2006.

[3] In January 2005, a UN report said that landmines had been supplied from a Uganda People’s Defence Force camp to a rebel group in the DRC in violation of a UN embargo. The report did not specify if the mines were antipersonnel or antivehicle. Uganda strongly denied the allegation as “patently false and inflammatory.” See Landmine Monitor Report 2005, p. 596.

[4] This figure was considerably higher than Uganda initially indicated would be destroyed, apparently because of additional mines captured from rebel forces and a decrease in the number of mines kept for training purposes.  Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form G, 5 December 2005. See also Landmine Monitor Report 2006, p. 746.

[5] See Landmine Monitor Report 2008, p. 711, for details on destruction in 2007. In 2009, Uganda reported destroying 120 Type 72 mines, but it did not note where the mines came from or who had possession of them before their destruction. Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report (for the period 2 April 2008 to 2 April 2009), Form G.

[6] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report (for the period April 2009 to April 2010), Form D. At the Seventh Meeting of States Parties in September 2006, Uganda said it was retaining 1,798 mines of seven types for training purposes, but reported the destruction of 202 mines in training during the previous year. Statement of Uganda, Seventh Meeting of States Parties, Mine Ban Treaty, Geneva, 19 September 2006. See also Landmine Monitor Report 2007, p. 700.

[7] See Landmine Monitor Report 2004, pp. 834–835.


Mine Action

Last updated: 08 October 2013

Contamination and Impact

Mine and explosive remnants of war (ERW) contamination in the Republic of Uganda, located in the north, northeast, West Nile, and the Rwenzori subregions in western Uganda, was the result of armed conflict and civil strife, especially over the past two decades with regards to the Lord’s Resistance Army, a non-state armed group.[1]

Mines

Mined areas were identified in the border areas with South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the Luwero Triangle in the center of the country, the West Nile region, and the Rwenzori Mountains.[2] In 2008–2010, Uganda confirmed 12 minefields in Agoro and Ngomoromo (in the Kitgum and Lamwo districts, respectively) in northern Uganda bordering South Sudan. During non-technical survey in 2011, an additional 34 mined areas were identified in the districts of Kasese, Bundibugyo, and Maracha (in western Uganda) and the Lamwo and Amuru districts (in the north of the country) for a total of 46 mined areas covering 1.6km2.[3] Uganda completed mine clearance operations in November 2012 and, at the Twelfth Meeting of States Parties in December 2012, declared it had met its Article 5 Mine Ban Treaty obligations.[4]

Cluster munition remnants

All known cluster munition remnants are reported to have been cleared in Uganda.[5]

Other explosive remnants of war

Uganda has ERW and unexploded ordnance (UXO) contamination. Uganda anticipated that explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) capacity is needed at least until the end of 2015 and planned to seek international funding to support the EOD teams.[6]

The remaining ERW problem in Uganda is said to exist in areas where internal conflicts were fought over the past 20 years, including the West Nile region in the north of the country and the Rwenzori subregion (the Kasese and Bundibugyo districts) in western Uganda near the border with DRC.[7]

In January 2012, two men were injured by a grenade while digging a pit latrine at a family health clinic next to the Uganda Red Cross office in Bundibugyo district in Kasese. The grenade was found three feet underground. According to the district police commander, the accident occurred in the same area where the Allied Democratic Forces, a rebel group, had constructed a base camp in the late 1990s.[8]

Since 2006, EOD teams have destroyed over 50,000 items of UXO and ERW.[9]

Mine Action Program

Key institutions and operators

Body

Situation on 1 January 2013

National Mine Action Authority

NMASC (Office of the Prime Minister)

Uganda Mine Action Centre (UMAC)

UMAC (Office of the Prime Minister)

National demining operators

Ugandan Army and police seconded to UMAC

National risk education operators

Anti-Mines Network-Rwenzori (AMNET-R)

Uganda’s mine action program has been nationally owned from its inception in 2006. The national authority is its National Mine Action Steering Committee (NMASC), located within the Office of the Prime Minister in Kampala.[10] Mine action is integrated in the government of Uganda’s Peace, Recovery, and Development Plan, one of the aims of which is to facilitate the return and resettlement of internally displaced persons.[11]

The Office of the Prime Minister, through UMAC, is responsible for the management and coordination of mine action in the country, with the exception of victim assistance, which falls under the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development and the Ministry of Health. UMAC, established in Kampala in 2006, is responsible for quality management of demining operations, risk education, and accreditation of mine action operators. A regional mine action office was established in Gulu in 2008.[12] The Uganda People’s Defense Force (UPDF) and the Uganda Police Force (UPF) provided all demining personnel to UMAC.

Danish Demining Group (DDG) provided technical assistance to UMAC from 2008 until November 2012, when Uganda completed clearance operations in all 46 known mined areas.[13]

Land Release

Mine clearance in 2012

Although Uganda took seven years to clear 46 mined areas, 70% of the work was accomplished over 11 months in 2012. Non-technical and technical surveys completed in late 2011 added 34 mined areas and 834,000m2 to be cleared, increasing the number of mined areas from 12 to 46. By 1 August 2012, Uganda’s Article 5 deadline, Uganda had cleared or discredited 40 of 46 minefields covering 1,666,160m2 and still had 103,655m2 in six mined areas in Agoro to clear.[14] Left with no other choice than to request an extension to the end of November, Uganda cited the additional mined areas identified in the surveys as the primary reason they were unable to finish on time and required an extension of the deadline. The four-fold increase in the workload so late in the program presented a major challenge for UMAC; however, DDG, which acts as the technical advisor to UMAC, cited UMAC’s low rate of clearance productivity until early 2012 (in addition to a demining accident involving a UPDF deminer in November 2011 that required re-clearance of two previously-cleared mined areas) as a major reason why Uganda was unable to complete clearance by August. Clearance operations were also slowed by delays in releasing personnel from the UPDF and from the UPF to attend manual demining training courses.[15]

With higher productivity of the demining teams, UMAC moved the two EOD teams to clear mines to ensure another request after November would not be needed. By the end of November, Uganda had completed clearing all 46 mined areas.[16]

Mine clearance in 2006–2012

Overall, Uganda released 46 mined areas covering 1.6km2 through technical and non-technical survey and clearance. During clearance operations 4,314 antipersonnel mines, 42 air bombs and 15 UXO were found and destroyed. EOD teams in separate operations found and destroyed 9,273 UXO and 20 antivehicle mines.[17]

Two teams from Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA) South Sudan with two MineWolf machines seconded to DDG mechanically cleared approximately 70% of all contaminated area at a cost of US$400,000. Mechanical breakdowns delayed completion, even though the average daily output of the MineWolf machines exceeded the planned output by 1,000m2 per day.[18]

Mine clearance in 2006–2012[19]

Year

No. of CHA cleared

Area cleared (m²)

Antipersonnel mines destroyed

Antivehicle mines destroyed

UXO destroyed

2012

37

1,160,131

3,314

0

15

2011

5

219,126

587

0

0

2010

4

206,971

179

0

0

2009

0

30,928

198

0

0

2008

0

0

14

0

0

2007

0

0

14

0

0

2006

0

0

8

0

0

Total

46

1,617,156

4,314

0

15

Kasese district proved challenging to UMAC. Much time was wasted looking for UXO sites that had been identified in a non-technical survey in 2008 but did not exist.[20] Similarly, in Kasese district, operators found 19 of the 22 confirmed hazardous areas (CHA) did not contain either landmines or UXO and cleared only 8,571m2 containing five antipersonnel landmines.[21]

Final statistics by district on mine clearance 2006-2012[22]

District

Region

No. of CHAs cleared

Area cleared (m2)

Antipersonnel mines destroyed

Antivehicle mines destroyed

UXO destroyed

Kasese

Western

22

8,571

5

0

0

Lamwo

Northern

20

1,102,735

1,594

0

10

Bundibugyo

Western

2

2,611

3

0

0

Amuru

Northern

1

499,473

2,705

0

0

Maracha

West Nile

1

3,766

7

0

5

 Total

 

46

1,617,156

4,314

0

15

Compliance with Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty

Under Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty, and in accordance with the three-year extension to its deadline granted by the Second Review Conference in 2009,[23] Uganda was required to destroy all antipersonnel mines in mined areas under its jurisdiction or control as soon as possible, but not later than 1 August 2012.

Uganda became a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty in 1999, but it was not until 2008, with UNDP support, that mine clearance and survey commenced (although little was accomplished). In the middle of August 2009, Uganda applied for a three-year extension of its deadline noting it had vastly underestimated the time needed to clear the known mined areas. The extension request was approved at the Second Review Conference, four months after Uganda’s Article 5 deadline had already expired.

From 2009, under the technical supervision of DDG, Uganda began to make progress in clearing mines while facing numerous challenges over the next three years. One challenge was inadequate survey information on the locations of mined areas, necessitating a new survey. Thick vegetation and difficult terrain in mined areas, especially in the Agoro Mountains, as well as lengthy and bureaucratic procurement procedures also delayed clearance operations. The lack of national mechanical capacity delayed operations until funding could be obtained to secure the equipment, which ultimately came from NPA’s mine action program in South Sudan. In May 2012, clearance was not finished; at the Intersessional Standing Committee Meeting on Mine Clearance, Uganda said it “remained committed” to meeting its 1 August 2012 deadline.[24] However, as described above, it missed the August deadline and did not complete its commitment until November 2012.[25] At the Twelfth Meeting of States Parties in December, Uganda declared it had met its Article 5 Mine Ban Treaty obligations.[26]

At a weapons contamination conference sponsored by the ICRC and the African Union in Addis Ababa in March 2013, Uganda reflected on its experience clearing landmines and shared a number of lessons learned with other African mine-affected states.[27] They include:

·         National surveys are essential to determining the extent of mine contamination;

·         Assess the need for mechanical assets;

·         If engaged with partners, ensure roles are clearly understood through written agreements;

·         Community liaison and the handover of cleared land are critical to earning community confidence; and

·         A solid mine action structure that includes national management, training, and access to international technical assistance should be developed.

Explosive ordnance disposal

Since 2006, EOD teams have found almost 50,000 UXO and ERW. UMAC also reported that 97 antipersonnel mines and 20 antivehicle mines were found during EOD operations, indicating that not all landmines were found in defined minefields.[28] Uganda acknowledges that even though EOD teams have cleared thousands of UXO since 2006, UXO will continue to be found in the north, northeastern, northwestern and Rwenzori subregions of the country. UMAC plans to employ four EOD teams with 60 personnel from 2013 to 2015 to conduct EOD operations as needed.[29]

Quality management

National Mine Action Standards were passed and approved in December 2008.[30] A five-person quality assessment (QA) team within UMAC conducts internal quality control (QC) as well as QA.[31] DDG conducted external QA/QC.[32]

 



[1] Declaration of completion of implementation of Article 5 by Uganda, Mine Ban Treaty Twelfth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 5 December 2012.

[3] Uganda Mine Action Centre (UMAC), Information Management System for Mine Action (IMSMA) July Monthly Report, 2 August 2012.

[4] Declaration of completion of implementation of Article 5 by Uganda, Mine Ban Treaty Twelfth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 5 December 2012.

[5] Email from Vicent Woboya, Director, UMAC, 8 April 2010.

[6] Statement of Uganda, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on Mine Clearance, Geneva, 22 May 2012.

[7] Email from Samuel Paunila, former country director, Danish Demining Group (DDG), Uganda, 9 June 2011; and response to Monitor questionnaire by Vicent Woboya, UMAC, 10 June 2011.

[8] Machrine Birungi, “Grenade Blast Injures Two in Bundibugyo,” Uganda Radio Network, 17 January 2012; and Catherine Ntabadde Makumbi, “Grenade injures two in Bundibugyo, Red Cross provides evacuation services,” Uganda Red Cross Society, 17 January 2012.

[9] UMAC, IMSMA Database, updated 15 August 2012.

[11] Government of Uganda, “Report Presented by the Office of the Prime Minister, Republic of Uganda to the Second Review Conference of the AP Mine Ban Convention,” May 2009, p. 1.

[12] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Vicent Woboya, UMAC, 29 March 2009.

[13] DDG, “Monthly Operations Report July 2012.”

[14] UMAC, IMSMA July Monthly Report, 2 August 2012; and email from Samuel Paunila, DDG, Uganda, 16 August 2012.

[15] DDG, “Monthly Operations Report July 2012.”

[16] Declaration of completion of implementation of Article 5 by Uganda, Mine Ban Treaty Twelfth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 5 December 2012; and DDG, “Monthly Operations Report July 2012.”

[17] Ibid.

[18] DDG, “Monthly Operations Report July 2012.”

[19] Declaration of completion of implementation of Article 5 by Uganda, Mine Ban Treaty Twelfth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 5 December 2012.

[20] DDG, “Monthly Operations Report February 2011.”

[21] Declaration of completion of implementation of Article 5 by Uganda, Mine Ban Treaty Twelfth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 5 December 2012.

[22] Ibid.

[23] Email from Vicent Woboya, UMAC, 9 July 2009; and letter from Pius Bigirimana, Permanent Secretary, Office of the Prime Minister to Jürg Streuli, President of the Mine Ban Treaty Ninth Meeting of States Parties, 2 July 2009.

[24] Statement of Uganda, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on Mine Clearance, Geneva, 22 May 2012.

[25] Email from Vicent Woboya, UMAC, 11 August 2012.

[26] Declaration of completion of implementation of Article 5 by Uganda, Mine Ban Treaty Twelfth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 5 December 2012.

[27] Presentation of Uganda, Key Challenges to Mine Clearance, Uganda’s Experience, African Union/ICRC Weapon Contamination Workshop, Addis Ababa, 5 March 2013.

[28] UMAC Statistics 2006–2012, provided to the Monitor, August 2012.

[29] Declaration of completion of implementation of Article 5 by Uganda, Mine Ban Treaty Twelfth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 5 December 2012.

[30] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Elina Dibirova, Risk Education/Victim Assistance Specialist, DDG, 27 February 2009.

[31] Email from Vicent Woboya, UMAC, 8 April 2010.

[32] Memorandum of Understanding for 2010–2012 between DDG and the Office of the Prime Minister.


Support for Mine Action

Last updated: 22 November 2013

The Republic of Uganda completed mine clearance operations in November 2012. At the Twelfth Meeting of States Parties in December 2012, Uganda declared that it had met its Article 5 Mine Ban Treaty obligations.[1] Contributions made in 2011 were used to complete clearance operations.

In 2012, Germany and Norway contributed a combined US$144,492 for victim assistance.[2]

International contributions: 2012[3]

Donor

Sector

Amount

(national currency)

Amount ($)

Germany

Victim assistance

€99,000

127,304

Norway

Victim assistance

NOK100,000

17,188

Total

 

 

144,492

Summary of contributions: 2008–2012[4]

Year

National contributions ($)

International contributions

($)

Total contributions

2012

500,000

144,492

644,492

2011

500,000

4,886,184

5,386,184

2010

400,000

1,741,145

2,141,145

2009

125,000

578,646

703,646

2008

250,000

783,506

1,033,506

Total

1,775,000

8,133,973

9,908,973

 

 



[1] Declaration of completion of implementation of Article 5 by Uganda, Twelfth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 5 December 2012.

[2] Germany, Convention on Conventional Weapons, Amended Protocol II, Form B, 23 March 2013; and response to Monitor questionnaire by Ingunn Vatne, Senior Advisor, Department for Human Rights, Democracy and Humanitarian Assistance, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 11 April 2013.

[3] Average exchange rate for 2012: €1=US$1.2859; NOK5.8181=US$1. US Federal Reserve, “List of Exchange Rates (Annual),” 3 January 2013.

[4] See Landmine Monitor reports 2008–2011; and ICBL-CMC, “Country Profile: Australia: Support for Mine Action,” 10 September 2012. Interview with Vicent Woboya, Director, Uganda Mine Action Centre (UMAC), in Phnom Penh, 1 December 2011.


Casualties and Victim Assistance

Last updated: 06 October 2016

Action points based on findings

  • Support the capacity of survivor organizations that have been shown to have a critical role in assisting survivors to access mainstream services and programs.
  • Commit the necessary resources for the implementation of the Uganda Building Control Law to eliminate barriers to access for survivors and other persons with disabilities.
  • Improve the quality and availability of prosthesis and rehabilitation services.
  • Sustain existing physical rehabilitation centers by dedicating sufficient national resources or by mobilizing international assistance to continue activities previously supported by international organizations.

Victim assistance commitments

The Republic of Uganda is responsible for a significant number of landmine survivors, cluster munitions victims, and survivors of other explosive remnants of war (ERW) who are in need. Uganda has made commitments to provide victim assistance through the Mine Ban Treaty and as a signatory to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

Uganda ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) on 25 September 2008.

Casualties Overview

All known casualties by end 2015

2,778 (531 killed; 2,247 injured)

Casualties in 2015

6 (2014: 2)

2015 casualties by outcome

6 injured (2014: 2 injured)

2015 casualties by item type

6 ERW

 

In 2015, the Monitor identified six casualties in Uganda from two incidents. Both incidents involved explosions triggered by fire. Four members of a family (a woman, a boy, and two girls) were injured when an item of ERW was thrown into a fire.[1] Two men at Gulu Central Prison were also injured by an unknown explosive device that was accidentally detonated while burning garbage.[2] All casualties reported in 2015 were civilians from northern Uganda, one incident was in Amuru District while the other was in Gulu District.

Six casualties in 2015 is an increase from the two casualties, a boy and a girl, reported injured in 2014.[3] There were reports of two additional incidents with ERW in the Lango sub-region of northern Uganda in 2014; however these reports were not verified as of June 2016.

The total of six casualties identified in 2015 is similar to the seven casualties reported in 2013.[4]

Casualties of ERW continued to be reported in 2016. In February, one child was killed and eight others wounded by a grenade found near old military barracks.[5] In June, one person was killed and four injured by ERW in a scrap metal factory incident.[6]

Following a peak of about 150 casualties recorded per year during 1996–1997, the number of annual casualties has decreased.[7] The most recently reported antipersonnel mine casualty occurred in November 2012; Uganda declared itself mine-free in December 2012.[8]

The total number of mine/ERW casualties in Uganda is not known. At least 2,778 casualties (531 killed; 2,247 injured) had been identified by December 2015.[9] Of the people injured, 1,818 occurred in northern Uganda, with the remaining 422 occurring in the west.[10] All casualties in the west were recorded as injured; if any were killed, they were not recorded. This was due to the fact that data collection has been mainly carried out by local survivors’ organizations whose primary interest is identifying survivors. As such, it is certain that people have been killed by mines/ERW in western Uganda who have not been recorded.[11]

Cluster munition casualties

A 2006 survey of mine and unexploded ordnance (UXO) casualties in Gulu district determined that 3% of recorded casualties (1,387 at the time) were caused by cluster munition remnants. Five other suspected submunition casualties were reported in 2006.[12] As of the end of 2015, no additional casualties caused by cluster munition remnants had been identified since 2006.

Victim Assistance

There are at least 2,245 mine/ERW survivors in Uganda.[13]

Victim assistance under the Cartagena Action Plan 2010–2014

In 2009, Uganda collected baseline data to identify the needs of survivors and the gaps in services in four districts in northern Uganda. Through the same survey, all disability-related services and providers in mine-affected districts were mapped.

The Uganda Landmine Survivor Association (ULSA) provided opportunities for peer support and survivor-led advocacy, though ULSA’s activities were limited due to its dependence on scarce external funding.

Several international organizations had closed or reduced their programs by 2010, transferring the responsibility to provide victim assistance services to government ministries. At the same time, mine survivors who were internally displaced persons (IDPs) returned home to other parts of the country, increasing the need for updated surveys and victim assistance services in those areas.

The impact of the departure of international organizations from northern Uganda, including the ICRC’s physical rehabilitation program, continued to be felt and there were gaps in physical rehabilitation, economic inclusion, and psychological support, as well as the means to access all services. The Ministry of Health assumed responsibility from international organizations for supplying materials and components at several rehabilitation centers in 2012. Government-purchased prosthetic materials were of a lower quality, thereby directly affecting the quality of prosthetic devices and the Ministry of Health indicated that it was “struggling to sustain services.”[14]

The withdrawal of international support for victim assistance in Uganda continued with the 2013 closing of the victim assistance program by Handicap International (HI) in western and northern Uganda. The capacity of local and national organizations was also weakened in 2014 as several groups lost funding or other support from international organizations. As a result, there were more survivors in need of services than there had been some 10 years prior.

The government assumed greater responsibility for some services, particularly physical rehabilitation, with many of the rehabilitation centers requesting cost sharing, but was unable to fill the gaps left by program closures.

Victim assistance coordination was very limited. Uganda’s national victim assistance plan of 2008, was revised in 2010 and extended by two years to 2014. In 2011, the National Intersectoral Committee on Disability was formed and included a mandate to coordinate victim assistance.

In 2013, the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development (MGLSD) held meetings with the Intersectoral Committee on Disability to develop a tool to evaluate the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan of Action on Victim Assistance 2010–2014.[15] Representatives of the Ministry of Health, National Council for Disability, National Union of Disabled Persons of Uganda (NUDIPU), ULSA, and several disabled persons’ organizations (DPOs) were involved.[16]

Victim assistance in 2015

In 2015, survivors continued to face significant challenges to access services due to the decreasing availability of services as a result of the departure of international service providers and a lack of donor support.

Assessing victim assistance needs

The Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) included disability-related questions for the 2014 national census. The questions were based on the Washington Group on Disability Statistics and were developed by the MGLSD in consultation with DPOs.[17] The final report of the census, released in 2016, found that the disability prevalence rate was 12.4% for citizens aged two and older. The census recorded 4,096,477 Ugandans with disabilities including 1,476,959 people who reported limited mobility.[18]

No assessments of the needs of survivors were reported in 2015.[19] ULSA registered 76 previously unrecorded survivors across four districts on an ad-hoc basis during field visits in 2015.[20] In 2014, ULSA collected information on survivors and their needs in Yumbe and Amuru and in several counties within the districts of Amuru, Nwoya, Pader, and Agago, all in northern Uganda. All data collected was shared with other stakeholders.[21]

Victim assistance coordination[22]

Government coordinating body/focal point

MGLSD

Coordinating mechanism

Intersectoral Committee on Disability

Plan

Comprehensive Plan of Action on Victim Assistance 2010–2014

 

The Monitor did not receive information about any meetings of the Intersectoral Committee on Disability held in 2015.[23]

As of August 2016, the evaluation of the national victim assistance plan, which expired in 2014, had not begun due to a lack of funding.[24] Little progress had been seen in the plan’s implementation by survivors in western and northern Uganda.

There were no plans to revise or renew the victim assistance plan, but Uganda intended to develop a broader and more inclusive plan of action for the rights of persons with disabilities.[25]

In 2015, meetings of leaders of DPOs, including ULSA, were held both at the MGLSD and at the National Union of Disabled Persons in Uganda in order to share information about ongoing activities, seek opportunities for collaboration, and plan events to mark the International Day of Persons with Disabilities.[26]

The Minister of Gender, Labour and Social Development stated that the government has provided a framework on social security and social service to persons with disabilities.[27] Uganda did not report on victim assistance at meetings of Mine Ban Treaty or the Convention on Cluster Munitions during the reporting period. Uganda did not submit a Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report for 2015; its last Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report (for 2011) did not provide information on victim assistance.[28]

Inclusion and participation in victim assistance

There was a significant reduction in the level of survivor participation overall in 2015. This decline was attributed to the lack of government funding for victim assistance programs in general. However, survivors participated at the International Day of Persons with Disabilities as members of their district union for persons with disabilities. Survivors displayed crafts and had chance to interact with government officials at the function.[29]

In the past, ULSA was included in meetings of the Intersectoral Committee on Disability, however, in 2015, ULSA was not informed of any meetings if they took place.[30] With the decreased frequency of meetings, there were fewer opportunities for survivors to participate in the coordination and planning of victim assistance.[31]

Representatives of ULSA participated in meetings of NUDIPU at the regional level, and representatives of local survivor associations participated in district-level meetings of NUDIPU.[32]

The Persons with Disabilities Manifesto—addressed to candidates in the 2016 election and signed by 14 organizations representing persons with disabilities or working on disability issues—called for rehabilitation support for mine/ERW victims as well as improved accessibility and social welfare support, inclusive education, a social protection disability fund, and other policies to eliminate barriers to full participation in Ugandan life. ULSA contributed to the Manifesto.[33]

Survivors and persons with disabilities were involved in the identification and assessment of survivor needs and in supporting other survivors in accessing medical, rehabilitation, and economic inclusion services.[34]

ULSA’s director participated at the Mine Ban Treaty 14th Meeting of States Parties in December 2015 and spoke on a high-level panel on victim assistance. ULSA’s director was also consulted by Uganda’s delegation in the preparation of statements for the first Review Conference of the Convention on Cluster Munitions in September 2015.[35]

Service accessibility and effectiveness

Victim assistance activities[36]

Name of organization

Type of organization

Type of activity

Changes in quality/coverage of service in 2015

MGLSD

Government

Grants and cash transfers for persons with disabilities; data collection; training on psychosocial support

Ongoing

Ministry of Health

Government

Medical care; community-based rehabilitation (CBR); coordinates, maintains standards for, and provides prostheses for the 12 national physical rehabilitation centers

Ongoing

Lira Regional Rehabilitation Hospital

Public Hospital

Physical rehabilitation in northern region

Decreased production of prostheses

Buhinga Orthopedic Workshop

Public Hospital

Physical rehabilitation in western region

No production of prostheses due to disrepair of equipment

Comprehensive Rehabilitation Services in Uganda (CoRSU)

National NGO

Physical rehabilitation services, CBR; free for children

Ongoing

Ave Maria Vocational Training Centre

National NGO

Vocational training

Ongoing

Watoto Church, Kampala

Local church

Support for physical rehabilitation in northern Uganda through CoRSU

Ongoing

Yumbe United Amputee Association

Local survivor association

Peer support and vocational training

Ongoing

CEASOP

Local vocational school

Vocational training

Increased economic inclusion opportunities for survivors among youth with disabilities

Kasese Landmine Survivors Association (KALSA)

Local survivor association

Advocacy, peer support, and socio-economic projects

Decreased geographic coverage and number of beneficiaries

Gulu/Amuru Landmine Survivors Group

Local survivor association

Advocacy, income-generation activities, and housing support

Ongoing

ULSA

National Survivor association

Socio-economic empowerment project and peer support in northern and western Uganda; support to survivors to access physical rehabilitation; advocacy at local and national levels

Increased geographic coverage and beneficiaries in Agogo, Pader, Yumbe, Kasese, and Koboko

AVSI

International NGO

Physical rehabilitation, income-generating projects, and psychological support including both individual and family counseling

Reduced support to Gulu Rehabilitation Orthopedic Workshop

African Youth Initiative Network (AYINET)

National NGO

Psychosocial support, and medical rehabilitation

New rehabilitation project

 

Medical care

There are several hard-to-reach districts in Uganda with limited amenities such as piped water and electricity. Needs assessment conducted by ULSA in 2014 indicated that survivors in Yumbe District, located in the far northern part of Uganda, had difficulties accessing healthcare due to the poor road network. There was also a lack of interest in the region by Uganda’s development partners. Yumbe Hospital served approximately half a million people but had just two doctors. Most patients had to travel to Arua Regional Referral Hospital in order to access physical rehabilitation.[37]

The African Youth Initiative Network (AYINET) covered the costs for conflict victims seeking treatment, these included food, accommodation, medicines, transportation, post-operative care, and counseling services.[38] In September 2015, AIYNET announced a new and larger program to assist war victims.[39] Additionally, counseling is offered to family members and communities. In 2015, survivors in Pader and Agago districts received support for medical referrals through ULSA.[40]

Physical rehabilitation

Since the Ministry of Health assumed responsibility for some rehabilitation services in 2012, many rehabilitation centers lacked quality affordable devices.

At the national level, Mulago National Referral Hospital had a functioning orthopedic workshop and was fully staffed, but was in need of renovation. Equipment and materials needed to make prosthetics were either in disrepair or non-existent.[41]

The Arua Regional Referral Hospital orthopedic center served the West Nile Region of northwestern Uganda, but was not fully equipped nor did it have necessary materials.[42] In another northern district, Lira, the orthopedic workshop was still functional in 2015, although some materials were no longer in stock, interrupting the production of new prostheses. Minor repairs to prosthesis were still carried out.[43] Also in the north, the Gulu Regional Orthopaedic Workshop (GROW), which is the nearest district most survivors from the conflict with non-state armed groups can access, also lacked materials. GROW could not provide services to survivors seeking replacement prostheses or persons with disabilities seeking new prostheses.[44]

In western Uganda, survivors had to travel to northern or central Uganda for prosthetics since the orthopedic casting oven at the Buhinga Orthopedic Workshop remained broken and there was no production of prosthetics.[45]

Some private services were available in Uganda in 2015 through Comprehensive Rehabilitation Services Uganda (CoRSU). Situated on the outskirts of Kampala, it offered free corrective surgery and orthopedic services to children, while adults had to pay for services and prosthetic devices.[46]

ULSA continued to assist a limited number of survivors in Amuru and Yumbe Districts to access mobility devices in 2015.[47]

Psychological support

Professional mental health care was available in major hospitals for those patients who were seen to be in need of this assistance.[48] In addition, Community Development Officers are able to provide counselling support to survivors.[49] Most survivors who received some psychological support, received it through survivor groups. ULSA and local survivor groups continued to provide this assistance in both northern and western Uganda.[50]

AYINET continued to provide psychosocial support to victims of conflict, including landmine survivors. Their services expanded through 2015.[51]

Social and economic inclusion

To supplement the government’s efforts in addressing the needs of survivors, ULSA implemented livelihood support through a victim assistance project in the districts of Amuru, Pader, Yumbe, Kasese, and Agago. With AAR Japan, ULSA supported 60 landmine survivors to scale up livelihood activities and to improve advocacy skills.[52] A number of survivor groups create and sell regionally specific crafts to generate income.[53] The Kasese Landmine Survivors Association reported that some youth survivors participate in sitting volleyball and wheelchair racing in 2015.[54]

Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene

ULSA began a pilot project with the University of San Diego to design portable toilet seats to allow survivors, persons with disabilities, and the elderly to use the pit latrines that are common in rural areas.[55]

Laws and policies

The law prohibited discrimination against persons with disabilities, but without penalties outlined in law, it was not enforced and discrimination was common.[56] The Uganda Human Rights Center received complaints of discrimination in employment and access to transportation and other public services.[57] The review of the Disability Act 2006 to ensure harmonization with the CRPD was completed by the end of 2013 with the 2006 Act found to be aligned.[58] However, DPOs organized to cite various shortcomings in the current law.[59]

Companies with 5% of employees as persons with disabilities received a 2% tax break.[60] While the government offers incentives for private companies to hire persons with disabilities, it does not have any requirements to provide a certain percentage of government jobs to persons with disabilities.[61]

The government encouraged banks and financial institutions to provide financial services to persons with disabilities who may have difficulties accessing loans due to a lack of collateral. Additionally, the government supported credit cooperatives to provide low interest loans to organized groups of women and persons with disabilities.[62]

On 31 December 2013 the Uganda Building Control Law was passed, making obligatory the accessibility standards that were launched in 2010.[63] Some public places, including schools and toilets, were not physically accessible for persons with disabilities. Commuter vans and buses were not accessible for wheelchair users.[64] A study at that time found that 95% of the buildings in Kampala were inaccessible to persons with disabilities and most lacked ramps or elevators.[65] In September 2015, the Uganda Human Rights Commission wrote, “The Government of Uganda enacted the Building Control Act 2013 however it has not yet developed regulations to operationalize the Act. In addition, PWDs [persons with disabilities] face a challenge of the public transport being largely a domain of the market forces without any legal controls regarding how PWDs should be transported.”[66]

In 2015, landmine survivors in northern Uganda reported that they did not have access to mobility aids or to medical care that would allow them to engage in economic activities. The survivors announced plans to seek redress through the court system for the lack of governmental protection during the conflict and the lack of support since their mine incidents. They saw such assistance as just reparations equivalent to the compensation received by others who had suffered due to conflict. In response, the government said it has allocated the funds to “compensate” landmine survivors.[67]

In May 2014, the national sports policy changed, guaranteeing that all school sports competitions would be inclusive.[68]

During events to mark the International Day of Persons with Disabilities, a government minister announced that efforts were being made to mainstream disability into all strategies designed to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.[69]

Uganda has policies that promote education for all. However, challenges remain, including long distances to reach schools, stigma, and inadequate assistive devices.[70]



[1] A report referred to the device as a “bomb,” but it appears to have been ERW. Julius Ocungi, “Bomb blast injures Amuru family,” Daily Monitor, 5 June 2015.

[2] Police reported that the device could have been a planted bomb or other explosive device. Julius Ocungi, “Suspected bomb blast injures two inmates,” Daily Monitor, 24 March 2015.

[3] Media monitoring from 1 January to 31 December 2014; and response to Monitor questionnaire by Ahab Ndathu, Coordinator, Kasese Landmine Survivors Association, 14 June 2015.

[4] Media monitoring from 1 January to 31 December 2013; and telephone interview with Stephen Okello, Coordinator, Gulu Survivor Network, 23 July 2013.

[5]Child killed in Uganda by suspected old grenade,” 24 News, 18 February 2016.

[6] Yazid Yolisigira, “Factory blast leaves one dead, injures four,” Daily Monitor, 20 June 2016.

[7] Casualty data analysis over time based on previous Monitor data; and “Mines/UXO victim status in IMSMA: Mine and UXO Victims data collected by UMAC/DDG [Danish Demining Group], Handicap International [HI] and AVSI [Association of Volunteers in International Services] in Uganda 1971–2011,” provided by email from Afedra Robert Iga, UMAC, 25 May 2011.

[8] Media monitoring from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2015; and email from Samuel Omara, Information Management Officer, DDG/UMAC, 22 March 2013.

[9] Through August 2010 there were 2,744 casualties (524 killed; 2,220 injured) registered. No further casualties were confirmed between the date of publication (August 2010) and the end of 2010. Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development (MGLSD), “Comprehensive Plan on Victim Assistance 2010–2014,” Kampala, August 2010, p. 4; emails from Samuel Omara, UMAC, 27 June 2012, and 22 March 2013; and media monitoring, 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2015.

[10] One casualty was identified in eastern Uganda in 2013.

[11] MGLSD, “Comprehensive Plan on Victim Assistance 2010–2014,” Kampala, August 2010, p. 4.

[12] AVSI, “Gulu District Landmine/ERW Victims Survey Report,” May 2006, p. 20; and HI, Circle of Impact: The Fatal Footprint of Cluster Munitions on People and Communities (Brussels: HI: May 2007), p. 147.

[13] As of the end of 2013, the MGLSD reported that there were at least 1,774 survivors identified in Uganda. Response to Monitor questionnaire by Douglas Nkonge, Victim Assistance Focal Point, MGLSD, 26 March 2014; media monitoring from 1 January to 31 December 2013; emails from Samuel Omara, UMAC, 27 June 2012, and 22 March 2013; and MGLSD, “Comprehensive Plan on Victim Assistance 2010–2014,” Kampala, August 2010, p. 4.

[14] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Rose Bongole, Ministry of Health, 28 February 2013.

[15] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Douglas Nkonge, MGLSD, 26 March 2014.

[16] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Dorothy Osman, ULSA, 5 February 2014.

[17] Uganda Bureau of Statistics 2016, “The National Population and Housing Census 2014 – Main Report,” Kampala, Uganda, 24 March 2016; and responses to Monitor questionnaire by Beatrice Kaggya, MGLSD, 22 July 2015; and by Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, 21 July 2015.

[18] Uganda Bureau of Statistics 2016, “The National Population and Housing Census 2014 – Main Report,” Kampala, Uganda, 24 March 2016.

[19] Email from Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, 23 June 2016.

[20] Ibid.

[21] Responses to Monitor questionnaire by Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, 21 July 2014; and by Dorothy Osman, Project Officer, ULSA, 5 February 2014.

[22] Statement of Uganda, Mine Ban Treaty Thirteenth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 3 December 2013.

[23] Email from Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, 21 August 2016.

[24] Ibid., 22 August 2016.

[25] Interview with Beatrice Kaggya, Ag Commissioner for Disability and Elderly, MGLSD, 29 January 2015.

[26] Email from Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, 22 August 2016.

[27] Speech by Hon. Muruli Mukasa, Minister of Gender, Labour and Social Development, Kampala, Uganda, 9 December 2015.

[29] Response to Monitor questionnaire from Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, 12 July 2015.

[30] Email from Margaret Arech Orech, ULSA, 19 August 2014; and response to Monitor questionnaire by Douglas Nkonge, MGLSD, 26 March 2014.

[31] Email from Margaret Arech Orech, ULSA, 19 August 2014.

[32] Ibid., 23 June 2016, and 22 August 2016.

[33] Ibid., 23 June 2016.

[34] Interview with Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, in Geneva, 2 December 2015; email from Margaret Arach Orech, 23 June 2016; and response to Monitor questionnaire by Ndatu Ahab, Kasese Survivors Group, 10 February 2014.

[35] Email from Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, 21 August 2016.

[36] Ibid., 23 June 2016; responses to Monitor questionnaire by Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, 21 July 2015; and by Beatrice Kaggya, MGLSD, 22 July 2015; Watoto Church website; interviews with Quilinous Otim, Director, Ave Maria Vocational Training Centre, 8 January 2016; and with James Ogwal, Director, CEASOP, 8 January 2016; and “AYINET Scales up Medical and Psycho-social Rehabilitation for War Victims in Greater Northern Uganda,” undated but 2015.

[37] Interview with Aniku Safi, Deputy Local Councilor of Yumbe District, 28 January 2015.

[38] Telephone interview with Richard Onen, Director, AYINET, 17 October 2015.

[40] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, 12 July 2015.

[41] Interview with Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, in Geneva, 2 December 2015

[42] Interview with Okello Peter Odeke, Principal Hospital Administrator, 28 January 2015; and interview with Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, in Geneva, 2 December 2015.

[43] Interview with Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, in Geneva, 2 December 2015.

[44] Ibid.; and Denis Otim, “Gulu Hospital seeks for 500m budget for orthopedic workshop,” Acholi Times, 8 November 2015.

[45] Interview with Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, Geneva, 2 December 2015; and response to Monitor questionnaire by Ndatu Ahab, Kasese Survivors Group, 10 February 2014.

[46] Telephone interview with administration staff of CoRSU, March 2015.

[47] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Vanacio Ayebazibwe, Project Officer ULSA, June 2016.

[48] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Raphael Amodoi, Lira Regional Rehabilitation Hospital, 7 February 2014.

[49] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Beatrice Kaggya, MGLSD, 22 July 2015.

[50] Interview with Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, in Geneva, 2 December 2015; and responses to Monitor questionnaire by Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, 12 July 2015; and by Ndatu Ahab, Kasese Survivors Group, 10 February 2014.

[51] Phone interview with Richard Onen, AYINET, 17 October 2015; and “AYINET Scales up Medical and Psycho-social Rehabilitation for War Victims in Greater Northern Uganda,” undated but 2015.

[52] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Vanacio Ayebazibwe, ULSA, June 2016.

[53] Interview with Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, in Geneva, 2 December 2015.

[54] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Ndatu Ahab, Kasese Survivors Group, 27 April 2016.

[55] Interview with Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, in Geneva, 2 December 2015.

[56] United States (US) Department of State, “2015 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Uganda,” Washington, DC, 13 April 2016.

[57] ULSA, “Annual Report 2014,” 2015.

[58] Statement of Uganda, Mine Ban Treaty Thirteenth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 4 December 2013.

[59] Email from Margaret Arech Orech, ULSA, 19 August 2014.

[60] Ibid.

[61] Shifa Mwsigye, “No jobs for PWDs at end of school journey,” The Observer, 3 March 2014.

[62] Email from Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, 23 June 2016.

[63]Parliament in 2013; 25 Bills Passed into Law,” Uganda Radio Network, undated; and response to Monitor questionnaire by Beatrice Kaggya, MGLSD, 22 July 2015.

[64] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Margaret Arach Orech, ULSA, 12 July 2015.

[65] US Department of State, “2014 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Uganda,” Washington, DC, 25 June 2015.

[67] John Okot, “Landmine survivors to sue government over negligence,” Daily Monitor, 29 July 2015.

[68] International Paralympic Committee, “#IDSDP2015: Wheelchair basketball emerges in Uganda,” 6 April 2015. 

[69] Speech by Hon. Muruli Mukasa, Minister of Gender, Labour and Social Development, Kampala, Uganda, 9 December 2015.

[70] Response to Monitor questionnaire by by Beatrice Kaggya, MGLSD, 22 July 2015; and US Department of State, “2015 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Uganda,” Washington, DC, 23 March 2016.