The constant question of Banyarwanda citizenship

For instance, when the Uganda-Rwanda border was first drawn in 1910, many Banyarwanda on the border were divided, falling on to either side (of the border).

As a result, the 1962 Independence Constitution provided that Banyarwanda born in Uganda after 8th October, 1962 became citizens of Uganda only if their parents were citizens.

Decades later, thousands of Banyarwanda find themselves at crossroads even after their community being recognised and listed among the indigenous tribes in the Third Schedule of the 1995 Constitution. 

Questions abound on whether one being called a “Munyarwanda” translates into being a citizen of Rwanda, a sovereign country next door, or belonging to ethnic Kinyarwanda-language speaking group scattered in several districts particularly Mubende, Mityana, Ssembabule, Masaka, Kalungu, and Kiboga. 

Several nationals of the Banyarwanda community have over the years accused authorities, particularly the National Identification and Registration Authority (NIRA) and the Directorate of Immigration in the Ministry of Internal Affairs of persecution by among others denying them identification documents on flimsy grounds.

At the height of said concerns, another grouping of Kinyarwanda speaking Ugandans led by social critic Frank Gashumba petitioned the Speaker of Parliament Anita Among to intervene to, among others, propose to amend the Constitution to change name of the group from Banyarwanda to Abavandimwe.

Their argument is that persons of Rwandan origin, even though Ugandans suffer both social and structural discrimination because many confuse them as Rwandans. A change in name, they had argued, would cure this.

The Uganda Banyarwanda Culture Development Association legal advisor, Mr Fred Mukasa Mbidde, poked holes in the decision by the Constituent Assembly (CA) in 1994 to determine citizenship based on ethnicity or tribes.

Mr Mbidde argued that the cure lies in a Constitutional Amendment to, among others, apply Jus soli, the principle that provides that citizenship is acquired by birth within the territory of the state, regardless of parental citizenship.

“We need a law that protects both the state and the rights of Banyarwanda because it is foolhardy for anyone to think that the government of Uganda can just amend and make everyone a citizen, that cannot work, but there must be a way. We should provide for proper identification mechanisms of all those in bordering communities. The Law seeks to assist those at borderline communities and roving ethnic groups,” Mr Mbidde averred.

Constitutional law expert Wandera Ogalo, who was the Bukholi South delegate to the CA, however, argued against the amendment proposals and the Constitution already offers a number of remedies of the grievances raised by the community.

 “Uganda began in 1890, but there were adjustments made. The real Uganda was settled on in 1926, and the constitution says if your community existed in 1926, you qualify. Why was 1926 chosen: it is the last time Uganda’s borders were last adjusted,” he said. ‘

In response to why ethnicity was a basis to determine  citizenship, he said: “You make your constitution according to your circumstances. If you are a country of only one tribe, the question of trying to use tribes as a definition wouldn’t arise. We did not use tribes as a standard. If you look at the schedule, if you look at Schedule 3, they are communities.”

Colonial mistakes

Mr Ogalo argued that the grievances raised by the community seem to be a result of a misunderstanding of the law by settlers who assumed long stay translated into citizenship.

 “I think it is a misunderstanding and fear of owning up…under the Constitution and the laws of Uganda, people of Rwandan origin have the right to be here in two ways. One, because it is an indigenous community as of 1926. Number two, by virtue of the times I’ve stayed here, I have the right to apply and be registered as a citizen,” he said.

The laws in place require that anyone who came to Uganda in the 1930s, after the boundaries had already been drawn and do not belong to the indigenous communities, to apply for citizenship by naturalization.

To get an ID or passport, one must first apply for citizenship, and be issued with a certificate that they will use to get the documents. Other requirements for naturalisation require one to have lived in Uganda for at least 20 years, and continuously lived in Uganda for two years without travelling anywhere outside Uganda. They must demonstrate knowledge of a Ugandan language or English, have no criminal record, and must be of sound mental state.

There are reports that some, for fear of identifying as Rwandan and being asked to verify, present false information, and when they are eventually discovered, their documents are denied or cancelled. Under the Registrations Act, NRA is empowered to cancel any documents obtained through false information.  

Additionally, the government has the responsibility to streamline its citizenship, particularly differentiating the Banyarwanda recognised in the Constitution and those simply coming in and a requirement by the officers charged with duty should not be interpreted as persecution.

“This idea is trying to confuse the two things; an immigrant trying to come in and a Munyarwanda who is a Ugandan citizen. We should not confuse the two. As I said earlier, Banyarwanda are an indigenous community in Uganda. We recognise them in the consulate assembly. Rwandans who want to come in must follow our law. They must follow our Constitution but they are trying to sneak in on the backs of Ugandan Rwandans,” Mr Ogalo said.

On July 10, the Ministry of Internal Affairs displayed hundreds of Ugandan IDs found in the hands of Rwandans who also possessed Rwandan IDs.

 During that press conference, Mr Simon Mundeyi, the Immigration Department spokesperson, also revealed that majority of these culprits are Rwandans who ride on the Constitutional clause that identifies Banyarwanda as Ugandans.

However, for many Banyarwanda born and bred in Uganda, their treatment by authorities borders on persecution.

For 52-year-old Amos Wamuhunga, who identifies as a Uganda-Munyarwanda, the recognition of this community in the Constitution has been of no significance in as far as guaranteeing his rights.

Mr Wamuhunga’s world was upended in 2019 when he attempted to process a passport only to be told by immigration officials that he was not a Ugandan, and would therefore have to “buy” citizenship. This was the first time he would be tasked to prove he was Ugandan, a trend he says has only emerged recently.

“At the office of Internal Affairs, we were tasked to fill a form, and when our documents showed we were Banyarwanda, we were asked to get letters from the Local Council I up to the district to prove our residence there. We brought the documents and were also asked to hand in our original national IDs with the promise that we would pick both documents together,” he told Daily Monitor.

Not Ugandan. Not Rwandan

 “But when we went back to pick my passport, I was directed to the Citizens’ office, where a lady told me I was not a Ugandan, and I could only register to become a citizen,” he added. 

Attempts to retrieve his ID proved futile and he was eventually asked to process a new one, only to be issued one that could not be read in the system.

“At NIRA, I was questioned by a team of six people, who also recommended I register as a citizen. They argued that despite having been born here, our grandparents settled here way after the cap as indicated in the Constitution.”

To Wamuhunga, Uganda is home, and the idea of naturalisation is unfair.

“I was born in Ssingo, Nanzirugadde, present day Mityana District. I am a son to Andereya Kasirizi, grandson to Eriya Zimulinda from Ggomba, Kabulasoke. That is as far as I go. I was born here, our parents were born here, and our grandparents lived here. We do to know any other home. Even our grandparents knew nothing of Rwanda. No one who can produce documents of their forefathers dating back to 1926,” he said.

 The confiscation of his ID has also meant he can’t access many services or smoothly conduct his business.

“Not having a national ID makes life nearly impossible. I lost an ATM, and to replace it you need an ID. So my money is lying idle. I cannot drive my car because my permit expired. I can be without a passport but not having a national ID in Uganda is like being in prison,”

Mr Waibungus’s grievances mirror the plight of a number of Ugandans of Rwandan descent.

Mr Simon Kayitana, the representative of Banyarwanda Community in the Buganda Lukiiko (parliament) and chairperson of Uganda Banyarwanda Culture Development Association (Umubano) said a number of Ugandan Banyarwanda have suffered violations at the hands of NIRA and Immigration Department and that some students are locked out of bursary opportunities, and others denied employment because they are considered non-Ugandans.  

 “We are at a point where one’s physical appearance has come into play; those who resemble Banyarwanda  are denied passports on the suspicion they are Rwanda. There is that vendetta against the Banyarwanda, that seems to go beyond the troubles birthed by the law,” he said. 

He alleged that some members of her community have died by suicide due to frustrations while stigma is both legal and structural, internalised in societal prejudices.

“Even when our people present documents from the LC1 to the DISO, many times they are not considered. The policy requires proof of being a member as of 1926. You are left at the mercy of the interviewer to determine whether you are Ugandan. You cannot ask me for baptism of my grandfathers, especially when they died before I was born,” he said.

According to Kayitana, interventions by President Museveni, who has interfaced with the group on multiple occasions have not been of much help.

The requirement for all individuals whose settlement in Uganda starts with immigration after February 1926 or those who can’t trace their ancestry to apply for citizenship by naturalisation reopens age old debates and unanswered questions of the Banyarwanda who were scattered across the Great Lakes regions as far back as the 1990s, settling in Uganda, Zaire, and Tanganyika.

Between rock and hard place

In his article titled “The question of Banyarwanda citizenship in the Great Lakes” published in the Daily Monitor in September 2020, Mr Edgar Tabaro reinforced the term “Rwandaphones” in place of Banyarwanda who he said were being treated as second class citizens in territories they are indigenous to. 

Mr Tabaro wrote: “Two foremost writers on Rwandaphones in the Great Lakes Region… give the extent of the Rwanda Kingdom at the height of its power under Umwami Rwabugiri (1867-1897), as reaching Bumpaka in present day Busongora (Lake Kasenyi) in Kasese, Karagwe, Ngara and Buha in present day Tanzania, Bushi and Butembo, covering the present day Nord (North), Sud (South) Kivu and a few in the present day Maniema province of the eastern DR Congo.”

Additionally, many persons of Rwandan origin migrated into Uganda in the 1930s to work on farms in Buganda and Tooro kingdoms, and have since settled here and others assimilated. Away from those who migrated for commercial purposes, many others were exiled in the preceding decades, particularly the late 1950s due to wars in Rwanda.

All these, and their descendants, Mr Kaitana argues are expressly locked out of citizenship by the Uganda Citizenship and Immigration Control Act yet they have only ever known one country, an injustice that the group now wants cured by the amendment of the Constitution.

Mr Mbidde faulted the CA for in the process of making the constitution, departing from the independence constitution. 

“Article 8, 9, and 10 of the 1962 Constitution declared everyone in Uganda as of October 8 a citizen of Uganda. The same was maintained in Article 4 of the 1967 Constitution. This was however changed by the Constituent Assembly in the 1995 Constitution, a brain child of the National resistance Movement,” he noted

Mr Mbidde also finds punched holes into the decision by the CA to determine citizenship based on ethnicity or tribes.  

“Citizenship is a subject of sovereign territories, while ethnicity is extra territorial, it is not a subject of municipal law, and it is a subject of international law… Citizenship begins with Uganda, 1962 when Uganda was born. Before that everyone was a protected  person,” he said. 

The routine Kampala and Kigali diplomatic and military spats, according to some analysts, has compounded problems for the Ugandan Banyarwanda and Rwandans across borders.

“I suspect that this has to do with the rather unstable relationship between Rwanda and Uganda. Since 1994, the relationship has alternated between being good and not so good, sometimes leading to negative consequences for ordinary people on both sides. Some of those consequences have included reduced travel by ordinary people between the two countries, as well as reported (or alleged) harassment of each other’s citizens or, in the case of Uganda, people of Rwandan extraction,” said political commentator Frederick Golooba-Mutebi.

Dr Mutebi argues there is a risk of Uganda creating a stateless people, and sees an amendment of the constitution one way of addressing the issues.

Applying rules

For now, however, Mr Mundeyi said they will continue to apply the law as mandated, adding that the stringent requirements are aimed at upholding the integrity of Uganda’s travel documents.

“We are also aware of criminal organisations who train non-Ugandans out here to falsely claim Ugandan citizenship in order to obtain our travel documents. This is often done to engage in crime using our documents but we are working to dismantle such organisations … we have over 300 cases in courts of Uganda of such. People with various nationalities who come here to seek our passport. We shall not allow that. We are not going to be cowed by any social media outbursts. We shall keep verifying,” he said. 

Mr Mundeyi added that those levelling accusations against immigration lack understanding of the law and asked those who may be aggrieved and feel they have not been served well while seeking services to seek redress.

Article 7 of the Citizenship and Immigration Control Act provides avenues for redress in case one is aggrieved by the process. Where the National Citizenship Board refuses to grant a passport, one may appeal to the Minister of Internal Affairs, who is empowered under the same Act, to reverse or confirm the position of the Board. There is another layer where one can appeal to the High Court if not satisfied with the decision of the minister.

Mr Mundeyi said many have proven their citizenship by providing documents like tax tickets, birth certificates for those born in hospitals, some school documents, and residence cards of their forefathers.

On Thursday, MPs on the Committee on Defense and Internal Affairs squared off with Ministry of Internal Affairs officials over concerns of the Banyarwanda. 

The Kiboga District Woman MP, Ms Christine Kaya, said her constituents are deprived of a lot of services, and the verifications required by officials are not even across the board for everyone.

“So, you find for those Banyarwanda who have their relatives in those levels, at least they are heard and granted passports. But now people like from my district, deep down there, who may not have connections, they are denied,” she said. 

The State Minister for Internal Affairs, Gen David Muhoozi, said they have a mandate to maintain internal peace, security and stability in Uganda by, among others, ensuring the preservation and protection of Ugandan citizenship.

“Chapter 3 of the Constitution provides for who qualifies to be a citizen of Uganda as a matter of birthright. And the most contentious category is citizenship by descent or birth… being born in Uganda is in itself not enough for one to qualify under this category of citizenship,” he said

Uganda and Rwanda, which share a border, have had long-intertwined history, socially but also politically. Since 1986 Kampala and Kigali are like two Siamese twins tied to the umbilical cord amid episodic breakdown in diplomatic relations and going to war at least once. However, the question of Banyarwanda still remains both sensitive and polarising.

Concern. This idea is trying to confuse the two things; an immigrant trying to come in and a Munyarwanda who is a Ugandan citizen. We should not confuse the two. As I said earlier, Banyarwanda are an indigenous community in Uganda. We recognise them in the consulate assembly. Rwandans who want to come in must follow our law. They must follow our Constitution but they are trying to sneak in on the backs of Ugandan Rwandans,” Mr Wandera Ogalo, Constitutional law expert. 

History 

The laws in place require that anyone who came to Uganda in the 1930s, after the boundaries had already been drawn and do not belong to the indigenous communities, to apply for citizenship by naturalization.

To get an ID or passport, one must first apply for citizenship, and be issued with a certificate that they will use to get the documents. Other requirements for naturalisation require one to have lived in Uganda for at least 20 years, and continuously lived in Uganda for two years without travelling anywhere outside Uganda.