Casualties

Casualties Overview

In 2010, the Monitor identified three mine/explosive remnants of war (ERW) casualties in two separate incidents, both of which occurred in northern Uganda.[1] All casualties were adults who were injured; one was a woman.[2] This represented a decrease from the nine casualties reported in 2009 and was consistent with the trend of declining annual casualty figures since a peak during 1996–1997.[3] However, given the lack of a central data collection mechanism, it is likely that some casualties were not identified.[4]

While the total number of casualties in Uganda is not known, at least 2,744 casualties (524 killed; 2,220 injured) had been identified by August 2010.[5] Of the people injured, 1,800 were based in northern Uganda and the remaining 420 were in the west. Incidents resulting in death have only been identified in the north, most likely because data collection in the west 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.[6] The Information Management System for Mine Action (IMSMA) database, managed by the Uganda Mine Action Centre (UMAC) in cooperation with the Danish Demining Group (DDG), recorded 784 casualties between 1971 and April 2011.[7]  

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 unexploded submunition casualties were reported in 2006.[8] At the end of 2010, no additional casualties caused by cluster munition remnants had been identified since 2006.

Victim Assistance

There are at least 2,200 mine/ERW survivors in Uganda.[9]

Survivor needs

In 2010, a second pilot of the national casualty surveillance system was carried out, following an initial pilot in 2008.[10] This system, under development since 2008, was designed by the Ministry of Health (MoH) and is intended to collect indicators on mine survivors and other persons with disabilities.[11] In addition, the government-established Community Information System (CIS) was operational in 28 of Uganda’s 80 districts. The CIS collects basic information from communities to monitor the welfare of households and includes parameters relating to disability. Data collected was made available to local authorities as well as national-level policymakers.[12] In addition to these efforts, Uganda’s Comprehensive Plan on Mine Victim Assistance 2010–2014 identified the “need to create a harmonized database on persons with disabilities which include information on the cause of disability, including landmine and other ERW accidents.”[13]

Handicap International (HI) and the Uganda Landmine Survivor’s Association (ULSA) both carried out assessments of survivors’ needs in Kasese district in western Uganda in 2010. HI provided the data collected to UMAC and used the information to design their program and to facilitate survivors’ access to medical and physical rehabilitation services as needed.[14] ULSA used the information to identify participants for their economic empowerment project and to develop evidence-based policy recommendations to the Kasese District government.[15] The International Service Volunteers Association (Associazione Volontari per il Servizio Internazionale, AVSI) carried out needs assessments of survivors and other victims of war in northern Uganda to determine needed follow-up care for physical rehabilitation, plastic surgery, and individual and family counseling.[16]

Victim assistance coordination[17]

In 2010, the MGLSD coordination of victim assistance consisted of revising the Comprehensive Plan of Action on Victim Assistance 2008–2012, in consultation with victim assistance stakeholders, and the implementation of an economic empowerment project for survivors in northern Uganda.[18] While no regular meetings of the Forum on Victim Assistance were held, one national planning meeting on victim assistance was carried out to seek input on revising the national victim assistance plan. Additional bilateral coordination meetings were arranged as needed between the MGLSD and NGO victim assistance implementers.[19] District government officials in Kasese regularly coordinated with service providers and survivors’ associations.[20]

In 2010 the government reviewed the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan of Action on Victim Assistance 2008–2012. The review found that “[d]espite the definite efforts by government to protect and promote the rights of landmine/ERW survivors and other persons with disabilities . . . the Comprehensive Plan [2008–2012] has not been fully implemented.” This was attributed to a lack of funding and limited capacity and awareness among service providers.[21] NGO representatives also found that although some progress was seen through the implementation of the MGLSD’s victim assistance project in northern Uganda, very little progress overall had been made in implementing the previous victim assistance plan.[22]

In August 2010, the MGLSD published a new Comprehensive Plan of Action on Victim Assistance 2010–2014. Objectives from the previous 2008–2012 plan were reviewed and aligned to relevant national policies such as the National Development Plan and the National Disability Policy as well as to international legal mechanisms such as the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), the Cartagena Action Plan, and the Convention on Cluster Munitions.[23]

Survivor inclusion

Representatives of some survivors’ associations and disabled persons organizations were included in the workshop that reviewed the national victim assistance plan;[24] however, survivor associations from some mine-affected districts were not invited to provide input.[25] At least one representative of a survivor association stated that the association’s members were not included in the monitoring of the previous plan.[26]

NGO service providers included survivors in the design and implementation of projects, including in the collection of data, referral of services, peer-to-peer support and awareness raising activities, and in the monitoring of project implementation.[27]

Service accessibility and effectiveness

Victim assistance activities in 2010[28]

While some victim assistance services were available in mine-affected districts in 2010, survivors were often unable to access them due to the distances needed to travel, poverty, and a lack of awareness about these services.[29] A decline in the number of international service providers in northern Uganda in 2009 was seen to have decreased availability of services in that region significantly by 2010.[30] At the same time, the launch of an HI victim assistance program in western Uganda in early 2010 increased access to rehabilitation services, peer-to-peer support, and advocacy activities.[31]

There were ongoing government efforts in 2010 to improve roads and provide major health units with ambulances to improve emergency response in the rural areas. However, most health units lacked capacity to effectively handle trauma when it occurred and most first aid practitioners were unable to address immediate and life-threatening situations.[32] Continuing medical attention was inadequate and health centers in rural areas, where 87 percent of survivors lived, were “grossly understaffed.”[33] Uganda’s third five-year Health Sector Strategic Plan (2010–2015) was launched in 2010 to address health care needs.[34]

The distribution of a service directory for health and rehabilitation services, the provision of transportation and accommodation for some survivors in western Uganda, and the increased physical accessibility of the two ICRC-supported rehabilitation centers increased access to these services.[35] A lack of materials and staff, however, prevented service providers from meeting demand: a rehabilitation center in Gulu estimated the need for twice the number of staff and had a waiting list of 650 people[36] and a continued lack of capacity among prosthetic technicians affected the quality of mobility devices.[37]

In 2010 psychosocial support was provided by AVSI in northern Uganda through home-based counseling, and several survivor associations in northern and western Uganda reported providing some form of peer-to-peer support.[38] However, the government recognized a lack of psychological support services and qualified staff. To begin to address the deficit, in 2010 the MGLSD supported the training of 64 community development workers and rehabilitation officers in psychosocial support in mine-affected districts in northern Uganda.[39]

In 2010, the government provided economic incentives to employers hiring persons with disabilities, including mine survivors.[40] Most survivors did not participate in employment training programs available to persons with disabilities and there is a need to establish training centers in communities where survivors are based.[41] The withdrawal of two international organizations from northern Uganda in 2009 resulted in a decrease in economic inclusion activities by 2010. This was somewhat offset by the government-implemented victim assistance program in the region.[42] AVSI and the Gulu/Amuru Landmine Survivors Group continued to support income-generating projects for survivors.[43] In western Uganda, ULSA launched a new economic empowerment project with the participation of 120 survivors.[44]

The law prohibited discrimination against persons with disabilities, but it was not enforced and discrimination was common. There was no law requiring buildings to be accessible for persons with disabilities.[45]

Uganda ratified the CRPD on 25 September 2008. In 2010, the Disability Act 2006 was under review to ensure harmonization with the requirements of the CRPD.[46] A National Disability Plan 2010–2014 was also launched in 2010.[47]