By Mahir Balunywa
Center for Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis
28 May 2025
The Concept of Apology
In history, very few leaders apologize to their subjects—just as it is rare for a father to apologize to his son. This traces back to the traditional proverb “Omukulu tasobya”, meaning “elders don’t make mistakes.” President Museveni has now transcended this African proverb by tendering an apology to Ugandans—and to the Baganda in particular. He believes they bore the brunt of his actions more than any other region, perhaps because they were his traditional allies during the Bush War that brought him to power.
Still, many have struggled to believe that the mighty Museveni—well-known for his military pride—could stoop so low as to seek forgiveness from ordinary peasants. “What has come over him? The Holy Spirit?” one commentator asked. “Has he been struck down by a Damascus moment, like Saul turning into Paul? Or is this akin to the conversion of Umar ibn Khattab, who once hunted Prophet Muhammad and his followers, only to later become a devout Muslim?”
Before responding to such questions, one must commend Museveni for at least making an effort. His predecessors—Amin and Obote—left without ever apologizing. On the contrary, they defended their actions. Had Amin apologized for the death of Janani Luwum, could public opinion about him have changed? Had he apologized to the Balunywa family for the killing of a prominent figure in Busoga, could relations have softened?
My father, Sheikh Kinyiri, once told me that when the family sought to inquire about the whereabouts of Ali Balunywa, they were advised never to ask—because doing so would ensure they followed him to the grave.
When Obote left power, many Nubians, Alur, and Iteso had lost their lives under his regime. Yet, even in exile, he refused to apologize to the communities devastated by his rule—not even to the Baganda for the desecration of their kingdom, let alone for the death of the Kabaka of Buganda. That failure still haunts many to this day. So, yes—Museveni’s apology is commendable and timely.
The South African Experience
A good apology should mirror what we saw during South Africa’s post-apartheid Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). Initiated by Nelson Mandela and chaired by Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the TRC sought to uncover truths about human rights violations and promote national healing. It created a platform for both victims and perpetrators to share their stories publicly and seek forgiveness. This process played a crucial role in reconciling white oppressors with native Africans.
The Tanzanian Experience
Africa may wait a long time to produce another leader like Julius Kambarage Nyerere. Not even Mandela quite matched him—not because Nyerere was free of faults, but because he courageously admitted his mistakes. Tanzanians accepted his apology, both in his lifetime and posthumously.
Nyerere apologized for the hardships his policies—especially Ujamaa—inflicted. His remorse and accountability were sincere. He even extended apologies to the Zanzibaris and islanders, expressing openness to dialogue and self-reflection. His post-presidential writings often revisited the implications of his decisions. Nyerere was candid, critical of government failures, and used his public addresses to reflect on the nation’s challenges.
He embodied moral leadership, denouncing all forms of corruption—be it institutional, moral, public, or private.
In one notable statement, Nyerere argued that in running a nation, leaders should not be seen as saints or prophets. While in Edinburgh, he came into contact with the Fabian Society, which influenced his Ujamaa philosophy. With pride, he once told world powers—the US, Germany, Britain, and the former USSR—that while they were racing to the moon, Africa was trying to reach the village. He tried to unify Tanzania’s 120 ethnic communities into one nation but still humbly apologized for the Ujamaa policy’s consequences.
When Nyerere died on October 14, 1999, at 77—a young age in comparison to his long-lived relatives—he was deeply mourned and remembered with forgiveness and respect. Today, Tanzanian Catholics, along with others in East Africa, continue to advocate for his canonization—an effort inspired largely by his honest public apology and follow-up actions.
Why Museveni’s Apology Might Fail the Nyerere Test
Like most African leaders, Nyerere was initially reluctant to relinquish power. But he ultimately acknowledged that leadership is not permanent. He realized leaders must eventually step aside and remain part of the nation’s institutional memory.
Museveni, in contrast, has been in power for nearly four decades and faces multiple unresolved “questions”—the northern question, the eastern question, the Buganda (central) question, and even elements of the western region. Added to these are the religious and political questions.
When he came to power, he tackled the political landscape by arresting former UPC members, particularly in Busoga. My father, Sheikh Anas Kinyiri—former Deputy Chief Kadhi and Presidential Advisor in the UPC government—was picked from home at dawn, taken to Gaddafi Barracks in the rain, and later remanded to Kirinya Prison. He wasn’t alone. The late Mwangu, former mayor of Jinja, and others suffered similar fates. Their properties were seized. Children were forced into marriages with NRA soldiers. Some fled into exile, while others found graves as their only refuge.
During the Lakwena rebellion, many Basoga and Bakedi lost lives and property, later being branded FOBA rebels.
In Buganda, the 2009 Kayunga riots led to mass arrests and police brutality. Today, NUP supporters continue to be abducted or detained without trial. Others are missing, presumed dead. Amidst all this, Museveni’s apology is met with skepticism: “Is it real or just rhetoric?”
The Way Forward
After the President’s apology, there ought to be a clear, inclusive framework for reconciling with affected individuals and communities. This includes families of the deceased, those imprisoned, and the broader population impoverished by government policies.
Walking the talk will require a rethinking of fiscal strategies—especially the taxation regime that burdens citizens—and controversial laws, such as the UPDF Bill. Most critically, the President must release political prisoners detained in “safe houses.”
He might also consider demilitarizing Parliament. Soldiers should be withdrawn from the house of “reason” and returned to their rightful domain—the house of “command and control.”
Dialogue with religious and cultural leaders is essential to build a robust, inclusive national framework. Only then might his apology be seen as genuine.
Conclusion
The President’s apology is, without doubt, a milestone. He is the first Ugandan president to publicly acknowledge past wrongs—and to do so alongside his wife. But this act alone is not enough. What remains is for him to walk the talk.