Commitment to the Convention on Cluster Munitions

Policy

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

In May 2012, Uganda said that political changes following national elections held in 2011 had delayed ratification of the convention, but reiterated its hope to ratify by the convention’s Third Meeting of States Parties in September 2012.[1] In September 2011, Uganda informed States Parties that a Cabinet memorandum had been prepared which recommended ratification of the convention.[2]

In September 2011, Uganda stated that national implementation legislation for the Convention on Cluster Munitions is being prepared for consideration after ratification.[3]

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 that helped encourage African states to sign the convention. Uganda continued to actively engage in the work of the convention in 2011 and the first half of 2012. It attended the convention’s Second Meeting of States Parties in Beirut, Lebanon in September 2011, where it provided an update on ratification. Uganda participated in intersessional meetings of the convention in Geneva in June 2011 and April 2012.

Uganda attended the Accra Regional Conference on the Universalization of the Convention on Cluster Munitions in May 2012, where it gave statements on universalization and victim assistance. At the conference, Uganda endorsed the Accra Universalization Action Plan, which among other actions, encourages states not party to the convention to “take all necessary steps” to ratify by the convention’s Third Meeting of States Parties in September 2012.

Uganda is a party to the Mine Ban Treaty.

Convention on Conventional Weapons

Uganda is a party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW).

At the CCW’s Fourth Review Conference in November 2011, Uganda did not make any comments on the chair’s draft text of the proposed CCW protocol on cluster munitions. However, on the final day of the conference, Uganda was one of 50 countries that issued a joint statement declaring that there was no consensus on the draft protocol and that it did not address fundamental humanitarian concerns.[4]

The Review Conference ended without reaching agreement on the draft protocol, thus concluding the CCW’s work on cluster munitions.

Use, production, transfer, and stockpiling

In April 2012, Uganda made an intervention during an intersessional meeting on stockpile destruction to assert that “Uganda has never manufactured, acquired, stockpiled, transferred or used cluster munitions.”[5] In September 2011, Uganda stated that it has never used, produced, transferred, or acquired cluster munitions.[6] Previously, in June 2009, a senior official said that Uganda does not have any stockpiled cluster munitions.[7]

Human Rights Watch and the CMC have listed Uganda as a stockpiler of cluster munitions, based on statements by government officials and on the clearance of cluster munition remnants and explosive submunitions.[8] In addition, Uganda possesses Grad 122mm surface-to-surface rocket launchers, which have the capability to deliver rockets with submunitions.[9]

Cluster munitions were apparently used in the fighting in northern Uganda between the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and the Uganda People’s Defence Forces, but it is not clear who used the cluster munitions or precisely when or how many were used. On several occasions, Uganda has denied that its armed forces used cluster munitions and said the LRA was responsible.[10] The Ugandan Mine Action Centre (UMAC) has informed the Monitor that no unexploded submunitions remain.[11]

 

 

Contamination and Impact

Mine and explosive remnants of war (ERW) contamination in Uganda is 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 (NSAG).

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.[1] In 2008–2010, Uganda confirmed 12 minefields in Agoro and Ngomoromo in Lamwo and Kitgum districts in northern Uganda, bordering South Sudan. In 2011 during non-technical survey (NTS), 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.[2] As of June 2012, with only two more months before its Article 5 clearance deadline, it was unclear how Uganda would meet its goal.

Although the government of Uganda stated at the Eleventh Meeting of States Parties in December 2011 that it would meet its extended 1 August 2012 deadline, in May 2012 Uganda stated they would finish only 80% of the remaining work by the end of July.[3] Uganda said that heavy rains in June and July could be the biggest challenge Uganda faced in meeting its deadline because rains can limit access by blocking roads and destroying bridges.[4]

However, Danish Demining Group (DDG), the technical advisors to National Mine Action Program (NMAP) since 2008, did not report rain as an impediment to clearance. In fact, they reported clearance rates among the Uganda People’s Defence Force (UPDF) and the Uganda Police Force (UPF) in 2012 to be satisfactory and that they were manually clearing areas to the international average rate of productivity.[5]

On 15 August 2012, records of the Information Management System for Mine Action (IMSMA) showed Uganda had cleared or discredited 40 of 46 minefields covering 1,666,160m² and that it had six minefields in Agoro under manual clearance, covering 103,655m², and only 300m² in Bibia to complete.[6]

Landmine problem in Uganda and progress through 15 August 2012[7]

On 9 August 2012, the Daily Monitor, a Kampala newspaper, reported Uganda had not cleared all remaining mined areas by 1 August and therefore, by implication, had missed its deadline. At a weapons destruction exercise in Acholi sub-region, the 4th Division Public Relations Officer, Lt. Isaac Oware, said, “Although we are now done with the first phase of the programme, we shall continue to demine and ensure that all guns that are in illegal hands are collected and destroyed to enable peace return to the region.”[8] Two days earlier, Al Jazeera had reported that mine clearance was expected to be completed later in 2012.[9]

On 13 August 2012, the Uganda Mine Action Centre (UMAC) informed the Monitor that the government of Uganda had written to the president of the Twelfth Meeting of States Parties and informed him that Uganda had not met its extended Article 5 deadline because of difficult weather and that more time was needed to verify cleared areas, but in any case by December 2012 all work will have been completed.[10]

DDG cites additional reasons for Uganda missing the deadline: UMAC was unable to achieve an acceptable rate of clearance productivity until early 2012; two previously cleared mined areas were re-cleared after a demining accident involving a UPDF deminer in November 2011; and there were delays in releasing personnel from the UPDF and the police force to attend manual demining training courses.[11]

According to DDG, 103,655m² remained to be manually cleared as of August 2012. There are unconfirmed reports of an additional 350,000–400,000m² of suspected mined area adjacent to the minefields being cleared. Surveys orchestrated by the UMAC office in Gulu were underway in August to verify the status of the remaining area.[12]

Cluster munition remnants

All known cluster munition remnants are reported to have been cleared in Uganda.[13] A residual risk may exist, however.

Other explosive remnants of war

In February 2011, five people died and seven others were injured in an unexploded ordnance (UXO) accident in Obongi, Moyo District, which is outside the area of operations for the explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) teams.[14]

In July 2011, media reported that the Ikobero Church of Uganda primary school in Kasese region had been using an item of UXO as a school bell. According to Wilson Bwambale, coordinator of the Anti-Mine Network Rwenzori (AMNET-R), the bomb was discovered during a mine/ERW risk education (RE) session at the school. This was the second bomb found in a school since the beginning of the year. Previously teachers at Muhindi primary school had found students playing with an unexploded bomb. AMNET-R claimed that Bugoye, Ihandiro, Kisinga, Kyalhumba, Kyondo, Munkunyu, Nyakiyumbu, and Rukoki sub-counties all required surveys to identify other ERW.[15]

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 (ADF), a rebel group, had constructed a base camp in the late 1990s.[16]

Since 2008, 55,828 items of UXO have been destroyed in 2,237 villages.[17] 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 sub-region (Kasese and Bundibugyo districts) in western Uganda near the border with the DR Congo.[18] During NTS in 2011, EOD teams from UMAC destroyed 27 ERW in 15 locations. The survey confirmed that prior records of ERW locations in Kasese were highly inaccurate, and days were wasted looking for explosive items that did not exist.[19]

In 2012, the four EOD teams were assigned to mine clearance operations until all mined areas were cleared. Uganda anticipates that EOD capacity is needed for at least three more years and planned to seek international funding to support the EOD teams.[20]

Mine Action Program

 Key institutions and operators

Uganda’s national mine action authority is its National Mine Action Steering Committee (NMASC), which is located at the Office of the Prime Minister in Kampala.[21] 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.[22]

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, which was 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.[23] The UPDF and the UPF provide all demining personnel to UMAC.

UNDP ended its support of mine action on 1 July 2011, because Australia, Denmark, and Norway preferred direct funding modality to DDG for technical and logistical support of national demining operations.[24] DDG has provided technical assistance to UMAC since 2008 with an exit strategy to phase out its activities in accordance with Uganda’s extended deadline under Article 5. As the deadline passed in August 2012, DDG extended its support role to October 2012; this was done with funding from Australia channeled through a UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS) completion initiative.[25]

Land Release

Since 2010, of the 46 confirmed mined areas countrywide, 29 have been cleared and handed over to the communities. Another nine have been cleared but had not been handed over as of 31 July 2012 and two were discredited after technical surveys, leaving six mined areas to be cleared.[26]

In 2011, UMAC released 144,258m² through clearance and canceled 21,200m² (two Suspected Hazardous Areas, SHAs) through NTS.[27]

Survey in 2011

In May–September 2011, DDG conducted NTS in northern and western areas of the country with UMAC and in coordination with the Office of the Prime Minister. Previous surveys in 2006–2007, which focused on ERW rather than mines, proved to be inadequate in addressing any mine contamination. DDG with financial support from Norway surveyed the areas where there had been armed conflicts during the past two decades.[28]

The purpose of the survey was to confirm mined areas, confirm or discredit SHAs and conduct UXO spot clearance tasks where necessary. Using International Mine Action Standards (IMAS) as a guide, survey teams interviewed over 3,000 people comprising local officials, hunters, UPDF, local NGOs, and others while collecting information. Hunters and local defense units seemed the best informed.[29]

Survey Findings[30]

The survey identified 34 mined areas covering 836,185m². Eight of the mined areas had been previously known. Three had been cleared, two discredited, and three were being cleared at the time of the survey.

Mine clearance in 2011–2012

In August 2012, DDG reported that 40 of the 46 mined areas, including the 34 that DDG identified in the NTS, had been either discredited or cleared, covering a total of 1,666,160m², leaving 103,955m² to clear. During clearance operations, a total of 3,678 antipersonnel mines were found.[31]

Approximately 70% of all clearance has been by mechanical clearance with two MineWolf machines used by two teams from Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA) South Sudan. The teams were contracted to the demining operation by DDG from 16 January to 7 August, when mechanical clearance was completed. Mechanical breakdowns delayed completion, even though the average daily output of the MineWolf machines exceeded the planned output by 1,000m² per day.[32] According to DDG, NPA mechanical teams achieved the objective of clearing all the mined areas that were possible to be mechanically processed in the country. The team conducted the clearance to international mine action standards while quality assurance (QA) was conducted together with a demining team from UMAC. The mechanically cleared areas are now awaiting land release.[33]

Mine clearance in 2010 through 15 August 2012[34]

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,[35] 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.

In July 2009, Uganda declared that it had underestimated the complexity of clearing its operations and the time required to clear them, and so it would not meet its 1 August 2009 Article 5 deadline. In the middle of August, it applied for a three-year extension, which was approved at the Second Review Conference, four months after its Article 5 deadline had already expired. An essential element in Uganda’s three-year plan was the planned use of a MineWolf vegetation-cutting machine belonging to NPA Sudan, which began in January 2012.

In May 2012, at the Intersessional Standing Committee Meeting on Mine Clearance, Uganda said it “remained committed” to meeting its 1 August 2012 deadline.[36] However, it ultimately failed to meet the deadline and stated it planned to complete all remaining clearance by the Twelfth Meeting of States Parties in December.[37] Even if this commitment is actually achieved, Uganda is the only State Party to have been in non-compliance with Article 5 on two separate occasions.

Explosive ordnance disposal in 2011–2012

In 2011, there were four UMAC EOD teams trained, equipped, and technically supported by DDG with funding from Norway and Denmark. Two teams were used to assist NTS, while two other teams conducted mobile EOD operations countrywide under UMAC coordination and supervision.

Explosive ordnance disposal in 2009–2011[38]

Under the pressure of a fast-approaching Mine Ban Treaty deadline and in order to increase mine clearance productivity, two EOD teams were incorporated into the manual mine-clearance teams. Then when funding from Norway to support EOD teams expired on 30 April 2012, the remaining two EOD teams were integrated to the manual mine clearance teams. Although these four EOD teams are now clearing mines, they are fully trained and equipped to resume EOD after mine clearance is complete. Both DDG and the government of Norway through its embassy in Kampala have stressed to the Office of Prime Minister that the government of Uganda should provide the resources for EOD teams. In June 2012, a small team detached from the demining capacity conducted emergency EOD in Bundibugyo and found 25 ERW items.[39]

Quality management

National Mine Action Standards were passed and approved in December 2008.[40] A five-person QA team within UMAC conducts internal quality control (QC) as well as QA.[41] DDG conducts external QA/QC.[42]

Safety of demining personnel

In November 2011, one UPDF deminer was injured in a previously cleared area in a minefield in the Agoro Mountains bordering South Sudan. The accident resulted in several developments. First, the deminer’s left leg was amputated below the knee; this required both physical and mental rehabilitation. In May 2012, he returned to the mine-clearance unit as a storekeeper. As a result of the accident, all UMAC demining personnel were re-trained in detection, clearance, and marking drills.

A DDG inspection of 107 Minelab F3 detectors found they were fully functional and two minefields were subsequently re-cleared. During the re-clearance, an additional 23 antipersonnel landmines were recovered from the previously cleared area. A DDG investigation, coupled with the finding of mines in the cleared area, led to disciplinary actions within UMAC and the dismissal of the leadership of the clearance teams at the time of the accident. DDG confirmed the clearance was conducted satisfactorily and to quality standards, a process that included the management and supervision of the demining teams.[43]

Risk Education

In 2008–2010, DDG provided risk education (RE) and disseminated awareness materials in mine-affected areas of northern Uganda, educating 111,531 inhabitants in 603 schools and 442 villages. Approximately 80% of the population reached were children aged six through 13. The DDG RE project ended in June 2010.[44]

In February 2010, Handicap International (HI) commenced RE through a local NGO, Anti-Mines Network-Rwenzori (AMNET-R), in the mine-affected regions of western Uganda, and was initially based in Kasese. In July 2010, HI took the lead in RE in the country, and from January 2011 RE teams operated in schools and villages in northern Uganda.

In 2011, 5,454 people were trained in RE, out of which approximately 85% were children. UMAC EOD teams also delivered RE in 2011 through community liaison.[45] In January–July 2012, HI/AMNET-R provided RE to 9,297 people out of which 40% were children.[46]

The RE methodology for both DDG and HI comprised direct awareness sessions, training of trainer workshops, training of community focal points, civil liaison with UMAC, UPDF and police on ERW findings, production of RE handbooks, broadcast of weekly radio programs in the north and west, theatre and drama, and dissemination of IEC materials (including some 18,000 T-shirts, 10,000 posters and thousands of comics books). HI also designed a 15-minute RE film.[47] The HI RE project in the Kasese region ended in July 2012 and in the northern areas it ended in August 2012.[48]

 

Casualties Overview

Details and trends

In 2011, the Uganda Mine Action Center (UMAC) reported 15 explosive remnants of war (ERW) casualties in three incidents; one incident caused 12 of the casualties.[1] All casualties occurred in northern Uganda, as in 2010. All reported casualties were male, at least 10 were boys. All casualties were civilians.

This represented a significant increase from the three casualties reported in 2010 though it was similar to the nine casualties in 2009.[2] The rate of casualties in 2011 remains consistent with the general trend of declining annual casualty figures since a peak of about 150 casualties per year during 1996–1997.[3] However, given the lack of a central data collection mechanism, it is likely that some casualties were not identified.[4]

The total number of casualties in Uganda is not known. At least 2,759 casualties (529 killed and 2,230 injured) had been identified by December 2011.[5] Of the people injured, 1,810 occurred in northern Uganda and the remaining 420 were in the west. 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.[6]

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.[7] As of the end of 2011, no additional casualties caused by cluster munition remnants had been identified since 2006.

Victim Assistance

There are at least 2,230 mine/ERW survivors in Uganda.[8]

Victim Assistance since 1999[9]

When monitoring of victim assistance began in 1999, most victim assistance services were provided by international organizations responding to the needs of thousands of internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees based in northern Uganda. Services were mainly limited to emergency medical care, trauma response and physical rehabilitation services. Most services were free for mine/ERW survivors. However, long distances and a lack of affordable transportation prevented some 50% of survivors from accessing needed care in that year.

The formation of the Uganda Landmine Survivor Association (ULSA) in 2004 increased opportunities for peer support and survivor-led advocacy, though ULSA’s activities were limited due to its dependence on scarce external funding. However, by the end of 2011 ULSA had supported the development of dozens of local survivor associations in western and northern Uganda.

With the significant reduction in violence in northern Uganda in 2006 and progress towards peace in neighboring countries, several international organizations closed or reduced their programs in Uganda between 2008 and 2010, transferring the responsibility to provide victim assistance services to relevant government ministries. At the same time, mine survivors who were IDPs returned home to other parts of the country, increasing the need for updated surveys and victim assistance services in those areas. Through the end of 2011, the impact of the departure of several international organizations from northern Uganda remained and there were gaps in physical rehabilitation, economic inclusion and psychological support as well as the means to access services. As a result, there were more survivors in need of services than there had been some 10 years before. Handicap International (HI) responded to the existing need by launching a new victim assistance program in western Uganda in 2010 that was designed to facilitate access to existing programs and services, mostly those provided through government ministries.

Throughout the period, victim assistance coordination was very limited. Uganda developed a national victim assistance plan in 2008 which was revised in 2010 and extended by two years to 2014.

Victim Assistance in 2011

In 2011, coordination of victim assistance was improved somewhat through the formation of the National Intersectoral Committee on Disability, though meetings were few and only included actors working at the national level. The availability of affordable physical rehabilitation and psychological support in northern Uganda, the area with the greatest number of mine/ERW survivors, was significantly reduced with the temporary suspension of rehabilitation services by International Service Volunteers Association (Associazione Volontari per il Servizio Internazionale, AVSI) one of the remaining international service providers in the region.[10] While ULSA, local survivor associations, HI and ICRC continued reaching out to survivors to make them aware of services and to assist them in accessing those services, most survivors and persons with disabilities remained unable to access services either because they could not afford transportation and/or the cost of services, or they were unaware of what services might be available to them.

Assessing victim assistance needs

Uganda’s Comprehensive Plan on Mine Victim Assistance 2010–2014 sought to establish a database on disability by 2011; in December 2011, Uganda “continued to prioritize the need for data” on mine/ERW survivors.[11] However, in 2011 no efforts were made by the government to assess the needs of mine/ERW survivors.[12] In 2009, through the Community Information Survey, Uganda collected baseline data to identify the needs of survivors and the gaps in services in four districts in northern Uganda.[13] By May 2012, there was no system in place to unify and update this data so that it could be used to determine if these needs had been met.[14]

Uganda reported that there remained an overall lack of data on the needs of persons with disabilities, including mine/ERW survivors, and on the services available to them; there was also a lack of capacity within relevant ministries to collect and coordinate this data.[15] No progress was made in 2011 to establish a national casualty surveillance system designed by the Ministry of Health (MoH) that had been under development since 2008.[16] In early 2012, staff members of the MoH and Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development (MGLSD) were identified to receive training to lead the implementation of the surveillance system.[17] The surveillance system was intended to include data on mine survivors and other persons with disabilities.[18]

HI collected data on the needs of survivors and other persons with disabilities in western and northern Uganda in collaboration with local partner organizations and also identified relevant service providers in these regions. After assessing the needs of survivors, HI connected them to available services. HI forwarded all data collected on mine/ERW survivors to UMAC for inclusion on the Information Management System for Mine Action database.[19] ULSA regularly collected data on mine/ERW survivors and shared this data with other victim assistance stakeholders during coordination meetings.[20]

Victim assistance coordination[21]

In 2011, the Forum on Victim Assistance remained inactive. During the year, the National Community Based Rehabilitation Steering Committee, chaired by the Minister for the Disabled and Elderly, within MGLSD, met quarterly to discuss disability issues. It was comprised of the National Council for Disability, the National Union for Persons with Disabilities and NGO service providers. As of June 2012, the guidelines for the Steering Committee were being revised to allow new disabled persons’ organizations (DPOs) to join.[22] In 2012, Uganda reported that this committee, under a new name, the Intersectoral Committee on Disability, would replace the Forum on Victim Assistance as the coordinating mechanism for victim assistance.[23]

Committee meetings were seen as an effective way for service providers to share information on their activities, though it was felt that more stakeholders needed to be included in the meetings.[24] There was a lack of victim assistance coordination between national and district-level actors and, as such, the impact of coordination was not felt “on the ground” where victim assistance activities were being implemented. HI and MGLSD held periodic bilateral meetings to coordinate activities.[25]

During 2011, MGLSD and other victim assistance operators worked toward the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan of Action on Victim Assistance 2010–2014, published in August 2010.[26] In 2010, objectives from the previous 2008–2012 plan had been reviewed and aligned to relevant national policies such as the National Development Plan and the National Disability Policy as well as to international mechanisms such as the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), the Cartagena Action Plan, and the Convention on Cluster Munitions.[27]

Throughout 2011, Uganda had no monitoring mechanism in place to monitor progress towards the objectives of the plan. Although a comprehensive monitoring tool for the plan of action was developed in 2009 (with assistance from the Antipersonnel Mine Ban Convention Implementation Support Unit) and baseline data was collected, it was never implemented.[28] Through the end of 2011, Uganda lacked the human, technical and financial resources to use the tool or to establish some other mechanism to monitor activities. Both the decentralization of service provision and the lack of a coordination system to collect information related to victim assistance on a regular basis from the district and sub-county level were both cited by the government as obstacles towards monitoring progress in implementing the victim assistance plan.[29]

The National Disability Plan 2010–2014 included mine/ERW survivors in its implementation. The national focal point for the implementation of the CRPD was the same as the focal point for victim assistance under the Mine Ban Treaty and the Convention on Cluster Munitions.[30] It was not reported if this attempt to integrate victim assistance within broader disability efforts had increased Uganda’s fulfillment of its obligations to survivors across all three complementary conventions.

Uganda provided updates on progress in and challenges to victim assistance at the Eleventh Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty in Phnom Penh on 29 November 2011, at the Convention on Cluster Munitions intersessional meetings in Geneva in April 2012, and at the Mine Ban Treaty intersessional meetings in Geneva in May 2012.[31] Uganda did not provide information on victim assistance through Form J its Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report.[32]

Inclusion and participation in victim assistance

ULSA was included in coordination meetings of the Disability Committee and provided input into the government’s preparation of the Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report for 2011. Uganda did not include a survivor as a member of its delegation to international meetings of the Mine Ban Treaty.[33]

Survivors and persons with disabilities were involved in the identification and assessment of survivor needs and supported them in accessing medical, rehabilitation and economic inclusion services.[34] In some districts in northern Uganda, a limited amount of government support, such as mobility devices and economic assistance, was provided to survivors and persons with disabilities through ULSA and the Disabled Persons’ Union.[35]

Service accessibility and effectiveness

Victim assistance activities[36]

Government efforts continued in 2011 to improve emergency medical response in the rural areas.[37] However, most health units lacked capacity to effectively handle trauma when it occurred and continuing medical attention was inadequate; health centers in rural areas, where 87% of survivors lived, were “grossly understaffed.”[38] Throughout 2011, the cost of specialized treatment and medications prevented many survivors from getting the assistance they needed.[39]

The availability of affordable physical rehabilitation in northern Uganda was drastically reduced in 2011. With the temporary suspension of rehabilitation services by AVSI at the Gulu rehabilitation centers in northern Uganda in 2011, management was handed over to the MoH. As a result, there were no longer any NGO-assisted rehabilitation centers in the region and the cost of prosthetic devices doubled, making them unaffordable for most mine/ERW survivors.[40] In the eastern and western parts of the country, improvements at the two ICRC-supported rehabilitation centers resulted in more than triple the number of mine survivors assisted, though the total (52) was still far short of the population needing assistance.[41] The inconsistent availability of materials for the production of prosthetic devices continued to be a problem throughout 2011.[42] A system to import and store materials developed by the MoH and approved in December 2011 was intended to improve this situation.[43]

The temporary suspension of the ASVI program also impacted the availability of psychological support for survivors in northern Uganda. However, this was at least in part offset by the increased availability of peer support through local survivor associations. As in previous years, the number and size of local associations increased in 2011.[44] HI trained 17 survivor associations in western Uganda in peer support to improve the quality of the support being provided.[45]

Economic inclusion was the area in which the government made its most significant contribution to the implementation of the national victim assistance plan. The government recognized the need to fill the gaps created by the closing of the economic inclusion programs of many international organizations working in northern Uganda, including ASVI. In 2011, MGLSD helped survivors in northern Uganda gain job skills through apprenticeships and provided them with tools to establish their own small businesses. It also provided grants to support the development of small businesses by groups of survivors. The MGLSD launched a new program to provide three-year pensions for persons with disabilities from chronically poor households. Survivors were also entitled to participate, however the Ministry had no information about whether any survivors had benefited from the program.[46]

In 2011, ULSA carried out a survey to identify beneficiaries for a new project on economic inclusion in three districts in northern Uganda, Lira, Alebtong and Otuke, where mine survivors had not previously had access to such support.[47]

Social inclusion activities for mine/ERW survivors, such as sports programs, remained extremely limited in Uganda in 2011.[48] ULSA supported the development of a survivor football team in one mine-affected district and, by 2011, the district had supported the establishment of a disabled football league. The sports program was seen to have a positive impact on the perception of survivors and other persons with disabilities by the local community.[49]

In 2011, HI expanded its awareness-raising and referrals program to include Gulu and Amuru districts in northern Uganda, while sustaining its program in Kasese district in western Uganda. HI raised awareness among survivors and persons with disabilities about available services, including medical care, physical rehabilitation and economic inclusion programs, and helped to connect them with these services, providing financial support to the most vulnerable. As a result, access was improved for many survivors and other persons with disabilities in three districts in western Uganda, where the program started. [50] However, there continued to be many survivors and persons with disabilities in need in these areas.

Gender-appropriate services were not available to all persons with disabilities in health centers. In addition, it was very difficult for children to access services as often as needed.[51]

The law prohibited discrimination against persons with disabilities, but it was not enforced and discrimination was common.[52] Despite the development of Accessibility Standards in 2010 that were designed to increase access for persons with disabilities to public spaces,[53] the standards lacked the force of law and most schools and 80% of hospitals and health centers remained inaccessible in 2011.[54] In 2011, the review of the Disability Act 2006 to ensure harmonization with the requirements of the CRPD, started in 2010, was ongoing. In addition, a bill was introduced to parliament to align the National Council on Disability with the CRPD.[55]

Uganda ratified the CRPD on 25 September 2008.

 

In 2011, five international donors contributed US$4,886,184 to mine clearance operations and victim assistance. Australia, the Kingdom of Norway, and the Kingdom of Sweden contributed $3,220,354 to Danish Demining Group (DDG) for clearance operations and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and the Federal Republic of Germany contributed ($267,797) to Handicap International (HI) for victim assistance. Australia also provided US$1,398,033 to HI for risk education.[1]

The amount of funding the Republic of Uganda received in 2011 represents 50% of all mine action funding it received from 2007–2011. The large increase in funding in 2011 was to support Uganda in meeting its Article 5 deadline by 1 August 2012, which it failed to do. In August 2012, Australia extended its support to DDG for three additional months.[2]

International contributions: 2011[3]

Thematic contributions: 2011

Summary of contributions: 2007–2011[4]