Author

Historian

Browsing

Corruption In South Africa: South Africa To Make Reforms To Combat Corruption

corruption in south africa

Corruption in South Africa. In order to address the recommendations made by the State Capture Commission of Enquiry, President Cyril Ramaphosa has announced the processes and changes that are currently underway to address these recommendations. These include changes to the country’s laws as well as the establishment of new agencies that will focus on fighting corruption.

In his address to the nation on the evening of Sunday, October 23, the President provided an overview of the lengthy process that the State Capture Commission underwent in order to produce its final report. This process happened six years after it was found that there was a lot of corruption in state structures.

According to Ramaphosa, the consequences of stage capture are still visible in South African society today. These effects can be seen in the way that financial and administrative problems continue to hold back state institutions and in the way that local and national government departments can’t provide services to the public in an efficient way.

He said that after studying and looking into state capture for years, South Africans are finally ready for something to be done.

corruption in south africa

He stated that more than one thousand businesses and entities are likely connected to state capture and corruption. He also stated that, via the commission, a host of adjustments have been made to guarantee that the country does not fall into the same trap in the future.

According to the statements made by the President, the Commission to Investigate Allegations of State Capture Ultimately Produced 95 Recommendations, Which Include A Number Of Broad-Scale Changes Involving Policy And Even Constitutional Reforms. The government has responded to these, and President Cyril Ramaphosa has suggested many changes and processes that will be put into place soon or are already happening.

corruption in south africa

The following are some of the upcoming alterations that Ramaphosa emphasized in his speech:

  • An independent anti-corruption agency for procurement and an anti-corruption unit will form part of a fundamental redesign of the country’s anti-corruption architecture. A comprehensive proposal will be produced for public consultation, finalisation, and execution.
  • Legislative amendments will make appointing the National Director of Public Prosecutions more transparent.
  • Procurement will come under focus. The Public Procurement Bill will be finalised and submitted by early 2023. This will include a code of conduct around procurement and making procurement more transparent.
  • Lifestyle audits for the cabinet are being handled within the presidency and conducted by an independent third party.
  • New processes for the appointment of boards of SOEs will be put in place, so it is not open to tampering. This includes independent reviews and panels for appointments. No board members will be allowed to be involved with procurement processes. Ministers will be prohibited from playing any role in procurement at SOEs.
  • A deep probe into the collapse of Prasa is ongoing. The government is considering setting up a commission to delve deeper into the problems.
  • Private sector players had a role in state capture – such as management consultants, local and foreign; advisors, consultants; lawyers; bankers; providers of goods and services. Amendments will be made to laws under review, criminalising donations to political parties in return for contracts; disbarring dishonest and corrupt organisations; and making failure to prevent bribery an offence.
  • New intelligence laws will implement many recommendations, including improving oversight of both local and international activities.
  • Protecting whistleblowers and encouraging those to come forward with information. This will ensure whistleblowers will be protected from prosecution.
  • Proposals to change election laws through electoral reform are under consideration. This requires constitutional changes, so the process needs to be thorough and take views from all stakeholders. Consultations with political parties and the population need to take place.
  • For recommendations around parliament, deputy president David Mabuza will interface with parliament to address the commission’s recommendations. The separation of powers allows parliament to forge its own path.
  • National Treasury will engage with Parliament to ensure Parliament is resourced to do its work.

Progress on all the commission’s recommendations will be communicated to the nation in regular updates, the president said.

“The people of South Africa are tired of corruption and want it to end. People who are involved in corruption must know that all the instruments of the state will be used to bring them to book. There will be nowhere to hide,” he said.

Now that the response to state capture has been submitted to parliament, the president said that lawmakers would now deliberate and debate a way forward.

Also Read: Ukraine Russia War Update: Ukraine urges African nations to abandon neutrality in its conflict with Russia.

What was the reason for the Bambatha Rebellion?

Bambatha Rebellion

In 1906, Zulu-speaking Africans in the British province of Natal rose up against the colonial administration in what became known as the Bhambatha Rebellion, also known as the Poll Tax Rebellion. So what was the What was the reason for the Bambatha Rebellion? This event was crucial for the history of South Africa in two primary respects: It was the last major uprising organized within the remnants of precolonial African political structures, and it played a role in convincing white people in Natal and in Great Britain’s three other southern African colonies to form the Union of South Africa.

The uprising was led by the Zulu people, but it was also participated in by people from other southern African nations. For the Zulu people themselves, the revolt served as evidence that Zulu ethnic identification was becoming more widespread. This was demonstrated by the fact that many individuals who had previously rejected the Zulu monarch suddenly gathered behind him. The decision made in 1905 by the administration of Natal, which was dominated by European settlers, to impose a poll tax of £1 on all adult males, with the exception of those who paid “hut tax” or were under terms of indenture, was the primary immediate cause of the Bhambatha Rebellion.

In actuality, this meant that the levy had to be paid by every adult male resident in Natal, with the exception of married non-Christian Africans and indentured workers from India. Due to the fact that the tax was not adjusted according to income, it was highly regressive and had the greatest impact on low-income households. However, it was not merely the implementation of the tax that led to rebellion on the part of Africans; rather, it was the fact that the tax was adopted at a time when most Africans were experiencing an economic crisis. This was caused by a number of different things.

Bambatha Rebellion

To begin with, a growing number of European landowners were evicting their African tenants and opting to farm the land on their own rather than continue to rent it to those individuals. Second, as a direct result of these evictions, the few portions of land that were set aside for Natal’s African majority were severely crowded. Third, Natal was struck by a string of ecological catastrophes in the 1880s and 1890s, including droughts, locust plagues, and, worst of all, an epidemic of the cattle disease rinderpest in 1896–1897 that wiped out more than 90 percent of the colony’s cattle herds.

These events occurred during the time period. Fourth, the South African War, also known as the Anglo-Boer War, took place between 1899 and 1902, and it was the cause of an economic boom in Natal. However, this boom was soon followed by a catastrophic economic downturn. In 1904, the government of Natal made the final decision to allow white settlement on more than 2.5 million acres of land that was previously held by Africans.

This decision made the situation on the African reserves much worse. The capacity of Africans to pay the newly imposed tax on top of the existing taxes was severely hindered as a result of all of these reasons. While it’s possible that these economic pressures had a role in setting the stage for the uprising, it’s more accurate to say that they were the direct cause of it.

In point of fact, up until the very last day before the uprising, the same causes had only been successful in turning Africans against one another, which resulted in constant squabbling in rural areas of Natal. In addition, the uprising required a driving force and a uniting ideology, which emerged in the shape of allegiance to the ousted Zulu monarch, Dinuzulu.

Bambatha Rebellion

As soon as Dinuzulu was freed from government prison in the year 1898 by the British, millenarian stories about him began to spread among Africans living across the entirety of Natal. According to rumors, Dinuzulu was planning a rebellion to overthrow the colonial authorities and drive the white settlers out of the country. The rumors not only called on the Africans of Natal to band together and be ready to take part in the uprising, but they also spread information about the supernatural forces that Dinuzulu intended to deploy in order to achieve these goals.

It was somewhat ironic that many of the same communities that revolted in Dinuzulu’s name in 1906 had fought for the British against the Zulu king in 1879, contributing to the British conquest and dismemberment of the Zulu kingdom as a result of their service to the British. In 1906, Dinuzulu led a rebellion in the name of his son, Dinuzulu.

The introduction of the poll tax served as a great focal point for the growing ideology of unification via devotion to a rebellious Zulu monarch, and it gave this ideology an ideal center. Immediately after the tax was promulgated and especially once tax collection had begun, young men all around the colony spontaneously engaged in protests filled with aural and visual references to the Zulu monarch. These demonstrations occurred almost immediately.

In most locations, chiefs and other elders made an effort to bring their younger males under control. On the other hand, there was no lack of African patriarchs eager to lead the young men into revolt in the Thukela Valley and the Natal Midlands. Both of these regions are located in Natal. The uprising developed through a number of distinct stages.

Between the months of January and March of 1906, there were several disturbances at poll tax collecting meetings. These demonstrations culminated in the murders of two white constables in the Natal Midlands on February 8, 1906, and the imposition of martial law the following day.

Bambatha Rebellion

After what appeared to be the successful conclusion of the uprising, Chief Bhambatha and the people who followed him in the upper Thukela Valley engaged in a limited guerrilla battle with the colonial forces beginning on April 3. The only thing that put a stop to Bhambatha’s insurrection was his death during the Battle of Mhome Gorge on June 10, which also led to the defeat of his supporters. This was followed by another uprising in the lower Thukela Valley that was headed by Chief Meseni and lasted from June 19 to July 11.

Last but not least, colonial forces spent the rest of 1906 eradicating little pockets of what they regarded to be resistance on the principle of “shoot first, ask questions later.” This final stage of the battle was the worst of the whole conflict in terms of the number of African losses, with 3,000 to 4,000 African rebels being killed as opposed to 24 Europeans and 6 Africans fighting on the colonial side.

Ironically, in 1908 a colonial court exonerated King Dinuzulu of any responsibility for instigating, organizing, leading, or fighting in the Zulu uprising. Despite the fact that Natal’s white settlers were successful in putting down the rebellion and inflicting far more damage on themselves than they themselves sustained, the rebellion was still successful in persuading many whites across South Africa that they would need to band together in order to preserve white supremacy.

It was impossible for white settlers in South Africa’s four settler-dominated colonies (Natal, the Cape of Good Hope, the Orange River Colony, and the Transvaal) to have much confidence in their prospects against future African revolutions since each colony was too tiny and too weak.

Also, the majority of white South Africans did not believe that they could count on the British government to save them from their predicament, since they believed that the British government had an excessively tolerant attitude toward black South Africans. Therefore, white lawmakers in South Africa came to the conclusion that the best way to pool their resources was to join the Union of South Africa in 1910.

Also Read: The South African Anglo-Boer War 1899–1902

What Led To The Assassination of Patrice Lumumba?

Assassination of Patrice Lumumba

Lumumba was only a known African leader on the international scene for a little more than two years before he was killed. Despite this, he became an idol for newly independent Africa, which was made even more prominent by the notion that the West had played a part in his killing.
In October of 1958, Lumumba established the Mouvement National Congolais (MNC), which was the first political party in Congo to have a nationwide presence.

Following his participation in the inaugural All-African People’s Conference, which took place in Accra, Ghana, in December 1958, Patrice Lumumba returned to the Congo as a far more radical nationalist. In January of 1959, in the wake of the bloody repression of two days’ worth of riots in Léopoldville, the Belgian government revealed a plan to lead the Congo to independence over the course of the next five years.

Some of the more extreme nationalists criticized this as being too sluggish and advocated a boycott of the upcoming elections for rural councils and municipalities. After this, Belgian authorities began their campaign of repression, which resulted in the murder of thirty people on October 30, 1959, when they used force to break up an MNC gathering in Stanleyville. Lumumba was arrested on charges of inciting a disturbance, and he was subsequently taken into custody. After that, the MNC decided to change its plan. It ran for office and ended up getting 90% of the votes in Stanleyville.

After that, Belgium saw that it had an obligation to speed up the process of independence and, as a result, it called for a meeting of all political parties to be held in Brussels in the month of January 1960. Because the MNC would not participate in the summit unless Lumumba was present, he was granted early release from prison.

Assassination of Patrice Lumumba

In the elections that took place in May of 1960, one month before the Congo’s formal declaration of independence on June 30, 1960, Patrice Lumumba’s political party, the MNC, won the majority of seats. By any measure, the nation could not have been considered ready for independence. In addition, the Belgians had produced a new constitution prior to the handover of government authority that assigned the same competencies as those of the central government to six of the country’s provincial governments. This arrangement was an invitation to an immediate power struggle between the provinces and the center, and it occurred shortly after the handover of government authority.

As expected, such a power struggle broke out in the first few days after the country gained its independence. Lumumba, who favored a strong, centralized, and truly national government, was made prime minister, while his political rival, Joseph Kasavubu, who favored a loose federal structure and the creation of a BaKongo state, became president. Lumumba thought that a strong, centralized, and truly national government was best.

Assassination of Patrice Lumumba

Riots, which were then followed by a mutiny within the Force Publique, which demanded better pay and conditions, were the initial indicators that the system was beginning to fail. These upheavals caused people all throughout Europe to leave their homes. The vast mineral richness of the Congo meant that a number of Western nations, including the former colonial powers of Belgium, Britain, and France, as well as the United States, with the primary motivation of Cold War strategy, were not prepared to see these resources become unavailable to the West.

Lumumba was accused of “selling” the country to the Soviet Union, which led to a political struggle between him and Moise Tshombe, the charismatic political leader of the mineral-rich Katanga province. Tshombe’s sympathies were pro-Western, and he enjoyed close ties with Western business interests. Lumumba was accused of “selling” the country to the Soviet Union.

The new prime minister felt that he and the Congolese people had been treated unfairly when he was not scheduled to speak at the formal ceremony handing over power on June 29, 1960. On Independence Day, which was attended by the King of the Belgians, the new prime minister felt that he and the Congolese people had been treated unfairly.

Assassination of Patrice Lumumba

Lumumba defied protocol and delivered a radical speech in response to King Baudouin’s paternalistic speech, in which he praised Belgium’s great “civilizing mission” in the Congo. In his speech, Lumumba condemned the brutality and injustice of Belgian rule in the Congo. King Baudouin had delivered a paternalistic speech. By doing this, the Belgian prime minister just proved what the Belgian government already thought, which was that Lumumba was an unrelenting enemy of Belgian interests in the area.

Tshombe made the announcement that Katanga would be breaking away from the Congo on July 11, 1960. The next day, Lumumba made a plea to the United Nations for assistance in reestablishing order and preserving the unity of the Congo by preventing Katanga from breaking away from the country. The United Nations was up against a difficult challenge, and despite the fact that Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold moved quickly, the organization was unable to prevent Katanga’s imminent separation from the rest of the Congo.

The soldiers of the government were successful in regaining control of Kasai Province and stopping a second secession attempt there. Tshombe attempted a breakaway from Belgium, which had significant economic stakes in Katanga’s mineral wealth; Belgium aided Tshombe in his attempt by providing mercenaries and other forms of political support. As a direct result of this assistance, the province was not to be brought back under the control of the central government for a period of three years.

After Lumumba was fired by Kasavubu in September (at that point, the West viewed him as “too independent”), the United Nations recognized the new Kasavubu government that was set up in October; this split African opinion, dividing continental opinion between radicals who supported Lumumba and moderates who supported Kasavubu.

Assassination of Patrice Lumumba

Lumumba was given UN security while in Leopoldville, but on December 2nd, when he attempted to travel to Stanleyville, the heart of his support, he was kidnapped by Kasavubu soldiers. On January 17, 1961, he was delivered to Tshombe in Katanga, where he was subjected to torture before being put to death. The Assassination of Patrice Lumumba happened on January 17, 1961. After his passing, Lumumba was elevated to the status of a national and continental hero. Tshombe’s death hurt not only the United Nations, which couldn’t help him, but also his reputation.

Even though he was the first Congolese leader to organize a national rather than a regional party, Lumumba’s significance stemmed more from the symbolism associated with him than from any actual political accomplishments he may have accomplished. People thought that he was the victim of Western interference in the affairs of a young, weak state that would not be allowed to run itself because of its potential wealth.

Assassination of Patrice Lumumba

Documents that were made public in Belgium in the year 1999 showed proof of main Belgian culpability in Lumumba’s assassination. On December 9, 1999, the Belgian parliament made the decision to establish a commission of investigation to investigate Lumumba’s death and Belgium’s responsibility for it.

Also Read: The Nationalist Leader Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s Biography (1909-1987)

History of Yorubaland

History of Yorubaland

The History of Yorubaland is comprised of a diverse population that has a shared linguistic and cultural background. Yoruba is their traditional language (there are dialectal variations from one group to another). The Ife, Oyo, Ijebu, Remo, Awori, Egba, Ijesa, Ekiti, Ilaje, and Ondo people are included in this group. Western Nigeria is considered to be the ancestral home of the Yoruba people.

In comparison to many other areas of Africa, the Yoruba-speaking people of Sub-Saharan Africa appear to have adapted to a sedentary way of life at a far earlier stage than other populations on the continent. The Yoruba appear to have developed a political system that got more complex over the course of time and bore comparable traits across the territory of western Nigeria.

This system may have been in place as early as the tenth century. The fact that virtually all of the states and kingdoms formed by the Yoruba people claim shared lineage and heritage from Ile-Ife has been largely cited as the cause of the similarities in the political structure (Ife for short). According to the Yoruba, Ile-Ife is the beginning of the universe and the place from whence people migrated to all corners of the globe.

It is believed, both in ancient and modern Yoruba cultures, that a successful linking of genealogy to Ife immediately confers legitimacy on any Yoruba traditional monarch. This belief holds true in both ancient and modern Yoruba civilizations. It is believed that Ife was the place where Yoruba culture began. With its auxiliaries, which comprised a great number of sociopolitical and economic chieftaincies, it was instrumental in the genesis and development of political centralization, playing a major part in both processes.

It would appear that the idea and principle of governmental centralization originated relatively early on in Ife and then spread to other regions of Yorubaland in the years that followed. In essence, the significant advancements that have been made in the field of centralized administration can be traced back to a famous historical figure named Oduduwa. Oduduwa is known in modern times as the person who was responsible for the development of Yoruba civilisation.

History of Yorubaland

Ife is where kingship and the institution of monarchy as it exists today in some parts of Yorubaland can be traced back to their beginnings. However, scholars agree that to find the real growth of the monarchy and the addition of checks and balances to keep it from becoming too powerful, one must look to a later kingdom. This later kingdom was set up far to the northwest of the cradle by people who had moved there from Ife.

If the real growth of a monarchy were to be located, the search would have to focus on this later kingdom. This was the kingdom of Oyo, which seems to have attained its highest level of governmental centralization sometime around the twelfth or thirteenth centuries. Oyo is significant not just because it is an offshoot of Ife, but also because it is the place where the concept of checks and balances as an essential element of any political organization was first developed.

Although the alaafin was the ultimate source of political authority in the Oyo kingdom, the institution of the oyomesi served to limit the alaafin’s ability to utilize the ostensibly absolute powers that were at his disposal. The oyomesi was the cabinet, but it also served as the legislative body, and it had the authority to dispute a decree issued by an alaafin.

The oyomesi was a political oligarchy consisting of seven or eight members, and it was led by a bashorun. This group had the power to push an alaafin into exile or even urge him to end his own life, and they did so on several occasions. The military, which was led by the kingdom’s military chief, the are-ona-kakanfo, had the ability to temper the powers of the oyomesi. The are-ona-kakanfo may lead his men to confront any unwarranted disrespect or disobedience to the person and office of the alaafin.

There is evidence to suggest that such a moderating effect was exerted during the time of the Oyo kingdom. In a similar manner, the Oyo empire formed the institution of ogboni, which was a quasijudicial body of elites who reserved the ability to pronounce judgment on those who had been accused of committing crimes. Therefore, in a sense, Oyo emerged as a civilization with many of the accoutrements of contemporary political administration, with the division of powers serving as the primary focus of attention.

History of Yorubaland

These concepts were quickly adopted by a great number of communities that had either been created by individuals who had previously been a part of the Oyo community or were subjugated by Oyo’s armies. Oyo fell into disrepair as a result of the diminishing importance that was put on the division of powers. At this time, influential people had begun to have an undue influence on the system that had kept the kingdom afloat for ages.

It is essential to keep in mind that the emergence of a political civilization brought with it significant advances in socioeconomic conditions and cultural development over the entirety of Yorubaland, including in Ife and Oyo. The formation of creative traditions was an essential component of this process and was an important aspect of it. Yorubaland still has a plethora of African works of art that date back many centuries; the sheer volume of these works is enormous, and they come in a variety of shapes and materials.

Many areas of Yorubaland have been excavated, and the results have produced a significant amount of archaeological evidence attesting to the long age of Yoruba artistic traditions. In particular, the cities of Ife and Oyo have left behind a significant amount of evidence of their great creative history. Figurines made out of clay or bronze were a specialty of the art industry that sprung up in places like Ife, which led to the development of that sector of the economy.

Ife artisans became skilled very early on in the production of works made of bronze and terracotta, in addition to becoming skilled in the carving of wood and stone and the beading of glass. Because the Yoruba are likely the most skilled woodcarvers in all of West Africa, the art of Ife has benefited greatly from this fact. It appears that the majority of pre-colonial traditional Yoruba woodcrafts consisted of the many wood objects that were uncovered in Ife. Many of these artifacts are related to religious ritual.

History of Yorubaland

Stone carvings that were uncovered at Ife provide further evidence that these objects fulfilled the same historical and religious functions as the bronze and terra cotta works that were discussed before. There is no doubt that stonework occurred in Ife before metalwork. Figures of humans, fish, animals, reptiles, and birds, as well as other types of animals and reptiles, were carved out of stone and unearthed.

Glass beads of a transparent blue-green tint were discovered during excavations at Ife. These beads stood in stark contrast to coral beads, which are of more recent and current development. The great arts of Ife have been examined not only in relation to later Yoruba sculptures but also to other sculptural traditions of West Africa, particularly seemingly older ones from areas such as the Nok area to the north of Ife.

This has been done in order to better understand the origins of the great arts of Ife (Central Nigeria). Since the excavation that took place in 1910 by the German anthropologist Leo Frobenius, the antiquity of Ife art has been brought to the notice of people all over the world. This has been a significant contributor to both the widespread understanding of Ife art and the notoriety of the Yoruba race.

History of Yorubaland

In a similar manner, Oyo produced comparable art and expanded upon the traditions that seemed to have been inherited from Ife, despite the fact that there is evidence that both Oyo and Ife art were developing at the same time. However, in addition to working with stone and metal, which are usually accepted as being the heritage of the Yoruba, the Oyo also established a recognised competence in carving calabash, which still exists today. This calabash carving expertise is still in existence.

Also Read: Who are the Yoruba People? A Complete History Of the Yoruba Other Than Ife and Oyo

Sadio Mane wins Socrates Prize for his good works in his home country.

Sadio Mane wins Socrates Prize

It’s a happy moment that Sadio Mane wins Socrates Prize. The first-ever Socrates Award was given out by France Football to Sadio Mane in honour of the charitable work he has done in his home country of Senegal.

Mane, who is 30 years old, is used to creating headlines on the pitch, but the ongoing efforts he is putting in off of it are what are really making a difference in the game. In recent years, the forward for Bayern Munich built a public hospital, donated money to schools and families, and provided financial assistance to families in his home village of Bambali. Additionally, he donated money to the Senegalese National Committee to assist in the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic.

“The Socrates Prize identifies the best social initiative by committed champions,” said a statement from France Football magazine, which added the humanitarian award to the 2022 Ballon d’Or ceremony.

Sadio Mane wins Socrates Prize

This honor was given in memory of the late football player Socrates, who was also a co-founder of the Corinthians Democracy movement in the 1980s. This organization stood in opposition to Brazil’s reigning military dictatorship at the time.

Mane, who is now the recipient of the African Footballer of the Year award, was considered for the Ballon d’Or as well. In his final season with Liverpool, he scored 23 goals while also contributing to Senegal’s first-ever success in the Africa Cup of Nations. Since then, he has contributed nine goals and an assist in 16 competitive appearances for Bayern Munich, and he did so while playing for Liverpool.

“I’m really happy to be a guest tonight,” Mane said. “Sometimes I’m a bit shy, but I’m really happy to do what I can do for my people to make things better.”

Also Read: Benin Stolen Bronzes: US Returns British-stolen Benin Bronzes

Benin Stolen Bronzes

Benin Stolen Bronzes

Following the Benin Stolen Bronzes by the British in the latter half of the 19th century, these artifacts may now be found in museums all over the world.

One of the culturally significant items that has been returned to the government of Nigeria is a bronze sculpture of a West African ruler that has been part of the collection of a museum in Rhode Island for more than seven decades. The sculpture is one of the 31 items that have been returned.

During the ceremony that took place on Tuesday at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, District of Columbia, one of the items that was transferred to the Nigerian National Collections was a sculpture known as the Head of a King, or Oba. This sculpture has been on display at the Rhode Island School of Design Museum (RISD).

Benin Stolen Bronzes

The kingdom of Benin, which is located in what is now the country of Nigeria, was pillaged and robbed by British colonial forces in the year 1897, and the Benin Bronzes were taken during this time.

Sarah Ganz Blythe, the interim director of the RISD Museum, stated in a statement that in 1897, the “Head of an Oba” was taken from the Royal Palace of Oba Ovonranwmen.

“The RISD Museum has worked with the Nigerian National Commission for Museums and Monuments to repatriate this sculpture to the people of Nigeria where it belongs,” Blythe said.

Officials have stated that one object from the National Gallery of Art was among the stolen works from the late 19th century that were later returned to Nigeria by a decision of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution in June. The other 28 stolen works were from the Smithsonian Institution.

“Today, we address a historic injustice by returning the Benin Bronzes, magnificent examples of Benin’s culture and history,” Lonnie Bunch III, founding director of the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture, wrote on Twitter.

“Through this repatriation, we acknowledge a legacy of cultural theft and do our part to return African culture to Africans.”

Benin Stolen Bronzes

In 1939, Lucy Truman Aldrich bequeathed the artifact known as the Head of a King to the RISD Museum. It is thought that the item dates back to the 1700s. A statement from the museum says that it was bought in 1935 from the Knoedler Gallery in New York at an auction of items from the Kingdom of Benin.

On the inside of the book, there is a French customs stamp, which shows that it was once part of a collection in France.

Even though the RISD Museum has not been able to link the sculpture to a particular collection in France or the United Kingdom, it is almost clear that the sculpture is one of the looted pieces. The museum made this assertion.

The head is made of bronze and depicts an oba, or ruler, of the Edo people who lived in Benin, which is located in West Africa. According to the museum, the statues were put on ancestral altars within the royal palace after being commissioned by a new monarch as a way to honor the reign of the previous king.

This repatriation is part of a larger effort by cultural organizations all around the world to return artifacts that were taken during times of colonial conflict. In August, Germany concluded a contract that would give Nigeria ownership of the Benin Bronzes that are now on display in German museums. The theft in 1897 led to 512 pieces of the collection making their way to Berlin. It was said to be the largest significant transfer of museum artifacts from a colonial setting to date.

Benin Stolen Bronzes

During the same month, the Horniman Museum and Gardens in London made the announcement that they would be giving a collection of 72 Benin Bronzes to the government of Nigeria.

Abba Isa Tijani, who is in charge of Nigeria’s National Commission for Institutions and Monuments, hopes that the most recent transfer will encourage other museums to give back African artifacts.

“We hope for great collaborations with these museums and institutions and we have already opened promising discussions with them concerning this,” he said in a statement.

“The entire world is welcome to join in this new way of doing things. A way free from rancours and misgivings. A way filled with mutual respect.”

Also Read: British invasion of the Benin Kingdom in 1897

Angolan War Of Independence

Angolan War Of Independence

The Complete History of the Angolan War Of Independence. The military took over Portugal’s government on April 25, 1974. This was followed by more political action by organized Africans in Portugal’s colonies, which led to the military taking over Portugal’s government. On the other hand, Angola’s natural riches, most notably its oil and diamonds, have drawn the attention of actors from outside the country. At some point in the future, the Angolan civil war will be seen as a miniature version of the Cold War by the media throughout the world.

After the coup, Holden Roberto, the head of the National Front for the Liberation of Angola (FNLA), who was living in exile in Zaire at the time, put together an army with the assistance of Chinese and Zairian instructors. Under the leadership of Jonas Savimbi, the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA) quickly distanced itself from Maoist rhetoric and created avenues of dialogue with the Portuguese government. The socialist Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA), led by Agostinho Neto, was taken aback by the coup that took place in April and was plagued by factionalism.

By September of 1974, the MPLA had already been divided into three distinct groups. The Eastern Revolt, led by Daniel Chipenda, was responsible for opening lines of contact with both the FNLA and UNITA. A cease-fire deal had been approved by UNITA with the Portuguese approximately two months prior. By the end of October, both the MPLA, which was commanded by Neto, and the FNLA had reached an agreement with the colonial authorities.

The MPLA was compelled to make a request for help from the government of Cuba as a result of the defection of Chipenda. The Soviet Union started providing support for the MPLA through the OAU Liberation Committee in the month of November. This was in part a response to the aid that China was providing to the FNLA.

Angolan War Of Independence

An accord promising peaceful collaboration, the promotion of national reconstruction, and the maintenance of Angola’s “territorial integrity” was signed on January 3, 1975 in Mombasa by Neto, Savimbi, and Roberto. The deal was signed on January 3, 1975. After another two weeks had passed, the three parties finally signed the Alvor Agreement. The accord stated that Cabinda, the region of Angola that had the oilfields and which had been the focus of an independence movement, was “an inalienable component portion of Angola.”

Independence was declared to take place on November 11, 1975, and it was acknowledged that the MPLA, the FNLA, and UNITA were “the sole legal representatives of the people of Angola.” In addition, the agreement established a coalition government composed of the three parties. With the help of the high commissioner general, this administration was given the job of setting up parliamentary elections and writing a temporary constitution.

The goal of American involvement in Angola was to establish a functioning government through the Alvor process. At the tail end of January 1975, the anticommunist FNLA received clandestine funding of $300,000 from the United States of America. The city of Luanda was rocked by fighting, and Chipenda publicly allied with the FNLA during this time. As a direct result of the US involvement, the Soviet Union increased the amount of weapons it sent to the MPLA.

During this time, UNITA was attempting to strengthen its foothold in the central highlands, while Savimbi was searching for financial support in other countries. In the month of June, the three heads of state met for discussions in Kenya, which were presided over by Jomo Kenyatta. The MPLA were able to drive the FNLA out of Luanda, which allowed them to maintain control over the northern areas of Angola. The FNLA worked closely with Portuguese members of the right-wing.

Angolan War Of Independence

Concern was expressed by the American government over the military advancements made by the MPLA, which at this point were linked to communists working within the Portuguese state. The United States government increased funding for both the FNLA and UNITA on July 17th.
At the same time, positions were being taken up by the South African army along the border between Angola and Namibia. The South African military conducted a series of incursions into Angolan territory under the pretext of hunting out rebels affiliated with the South West Africa People’s Organization (SWAPO).

The MPLA made an effort to raise awareness of these measures, but their efforts were fruitless. While the FNLA and UNITA waited for the weapons that were sponsored by the United States to arrive, they contacted South Africa in an effort to receive assistance. On September 21, 1975, authorities from South Africa came to Silva Porto in order to assist UNITA in their conflict with the MPLA.

Operation Zulu was initiated by the South African army on October 14, and it consisted of an armored force that was assisted by helicopter gunships. This force moved quickly up the coast of Angola, pushing the MPLA army away as it went. The MPLA were surrounded on all sides when they were in Luanda. While the FNLA made preparations for an attack in the north, UNITA and South African forces were establishing themselves as the dominant forces in the south. Cuba and the Soviet Union both responded swiftly to assist the MPLA in its efforts. The airlift of Cuban combat forces began on November 7, when “Operation Carlota” was started.

Within a few days, the tide of battle began to swing in favor of the MPLA. Angola’s Portuguese government evacuated the country on November 11, the same day that Angola declared its independence. The People’s Liberation Army of Angola (MPLA) promptly made an announcement on the establishment of the People’s Republic of Angola. As a direct response, the FNLA and UNITA came together to form a coalition that would later become known as the “Democratic People’s Republic of Angola.”

As of the 22nd of November, when the population was made aware of the involvement of South Africa, support for UNITA began to decrease. On November 27, Nigeria acknowledged the MPLA administration and extended an offer of financial assistance to them as a sign of their support. The attempt made by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to give further funding to the FNLA-UNITA alliance in the United States was unsuccessful due to opposition from the Senate. The Tunney-Clark amendment, which was passed on December 18, prevented any more covert assistance.

Angola, Jamba, September 1994 Die UNITA entstand als Befreiungsbewegung im Kampf gegen die portugiesische Kolonialherrschaft und fand ihre Anhänger hauptsächlich unter den Ovimbundu im zentralen Hochland Angolas, der größten Ethnie des Landes, zu der ihr Gründer und langjähriger Anführer Jonas Savimbi gehörte. Im Bürgerkrieg in Angola (1975 2002) befand sich in Jamba von 1976 bis 1992 das Hauptquartier der UNITA. Foto: Soldaten der UNITA Angola – UNITA *** Angola, Jamba, September 1994 UNITA emerged as a liberation movement in the struggle against Portuguese colonial rule and found its supporters mainly among the Ovimbundu in the central highlands of Angola, the countrys largest ethnic group, to which its founder and long-time leader Jonas Savimbi belonged During the civil war in Angola in 1975-2002, the headquarters of UNIT

The number of Cuban reinforcements that were sent to Angola continued to rise. After Chipenda’s faction of the FNLA was routed in the north, the remaining members of the FNLA in the south gave up any pretense of organized battle. The Chipenda FNLA and UNITA eventually engaged in combat with one another, which resulted in the initiation of a battle within a war. The inability of the OAU to give majority support for either a condemnation of the Cuban intervention or a tripartite political settlement was the ultimate blow that was dealt to the forces that were fighting against the MPLA.

On January 22, 1976, South African forces started pulling out of Angola. They had been there since 1975. Late in the month of February, the MPLA-Cuban army announced their victory over UNITA. By the middle of 1976, the MPLA had solidified its position as the party that led the government of Angola. Holden Roberto and UNITA had retreated to their previous positions as insurgents, while Jonas Savimbi and UNITA had gone back to their exile in Zaire. Savimbi, on the other hand, managed to keep in touch with members of the South African military, connections that would later be used to cause trouble in Angola.

Also Read: Mau Mau Revolt: The Kenyan uprising that ended in African decolonization

Ukraine Russia War Update

Ukraine Russia War Update

On Monday, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba once again encouraged African nations to forsake their neutral attitude on the Russian invasion of his country. Kuleba made this request during a press conference in Kyiv.

During his trip to Nairobi, he gave an interview to a local news outlet called The Citizen. In the interview, he indicated that his government is requesting that Africa not stay neutral.

“Neutrality will only encourage Russia to continue its aggressive and malicious activities across the world, including in Africa,” Kuleba stated.

Ukraine Russia War Update

“Moscow needs to hear your message that this war is unacceptable and must stop. This week, the United Nations General Assembly will vote on the resolution condemning Russian aggression and illegal attempts to annex Ukraine’s territories.”

“Ukraine is counting on your valuable support for this important document,” Kuleba’s statement read.

This speech was made on the same day that Russia started major missile assaults against Ukraine in what Russian President Vladimir Putin has later defined as “retaliation against terrorism.”

The foreign minister made the following announcement in his statement: “Cruise missiles and ‘Kamikaze’ drones launched by Russia and Belarus attacked residential areas, power plants, railways, shopping centers, and bridges in yiv, Odesa, Dnipro, Kharkiv, Rivne, Lviv, and Ivano-Frankivsk, as well as other cities.”

Ukraine Russia War Update

The minister continued by saying that the morning assaults had resulted in at least eight deaths and twenty-four injuries in the city of Kyiv alone. As rescue workers search through the wreckage of the damaged infrastructure, the number of fatalities continues to rise.

According to Mr. Kuleba, the conditions were so heartbreaking that he made the decision to cut short his vacation to Africa and immediately return to Ukraine.

“Deliberate attacks on critical civilian infrastructure are a war crime. Russia is attacking non-military power plants to deprive civilians of their basic needs – heat, electricity and water – when the cold sets in,” Kuleba said.

It is important to keep in mind that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine started on February 24.

Also Read: President Of Uganda Labels European Members of Parliament “Arrogant Boys and Girls” For Opposing Country’s Oil Projects

Angola launch second satellite.

Angola launch second satellite

Today, October 12, 2022, Angola launch second satellite, which is known as Angosat-2. At the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan, the satellite was sent into space on a rocket designated as a Proton-M Blok DM-03. It is a heavy-lift launch vehicle with four stages that was developed in Russia and is based on the Soviet Proton launch vehicle. With today’s launch, Angola has now put two satellites into orbit, increasing the continent’s total number of satellite launches in 2022 to five, and bringing the continent’s overall total to 49.

Angola launch second satellite
Angola launch second satellite

High-throughput satellites like Angosat-2, which will weigh two tons and provide 13 terabytes of data in each lighted region, will be provided by Angosat-2 (satellite signal range zones). The satellite will have a lifespan of 15 years according to its original design and will be based on the Eurostar-3000 platform. The Reshetnev Information Satellite Systems Company in Russia is responsible for the development of Angosat-2, and Angola will incur no further costs for its construction as a result of the insurance package included in Angosat-1’s contract for USD 300 million.

Angosat-1 was a conventional satellite that had a wide communication beam regardless of location, so according to Zolana Joo, the Director-General of the Angolan National Space Program Management Office (GGPEN), Angosat-2 will be seven times faster than its predecessor. This is because Angosat-1 was designed to cover a large area. Because of this, Angola will be able to reduce the problem of the digital divide, making it possible for all people in the country to have equal access to the advantages that are provided by information and communication technologies (ICT).

Angola launch second satellite

The geostationary communications satellite will cover the whole African continent and provide a variety of services, with a primary focus on Southern Africa. Mário Augusto da Silva Oliveira, Angola’s Minister of Telecommunications, Information Technologies, and Social Communication (MINTTICS), stated that within the framework of Angola’s National Space Strategy, the country intends to improve the Angosat-2 satellite transmission infrastructure as well as Angola’s Earth Observation program.

Angola launch second satellite

This was stated by Mário Augusto da Silva Oliveira. This will also include investments in the nation’s internet infrastructure, which will be carried out via both submarine and terrestrial fiber optics. In addition to this, he stated that the development and growth of Africa will be facilitated by investments in space technology.

Angola launch second satellite

The Minister also mentioned that Angola and the satellite operators will profit from the increased availability of telecommunications services as a direct result of the launch. C Band coverage will extend to include the entirety of the African continent as well as a sizeable portion of southern Europe.

Angola launch second satellite

Additionally, the satellite will offer nearly comprehensive coverage of southern Africa in the Ku Band spectrum. The Minister also made note of the aim of the Executive to continue investing in inducing initiatives in order to strengthen the country’s television broadcasting business.

Angola launches its second satellite

Also Read: Former President Jacob Zuma regain freedom: Former South African President Released From Prison After Months In Prison.

Museveni net worth

Yoweri Museveni’s net worth in 2022 is expected to be: Yoweri Kaguta Museveni is a politician from Uganda who has been in office as President of Uganda continuously from the year 1986. It has been said that he is among the most influential persons in all of Uganda.

Yoweri Museveni Net Worth

Yoweri Museveni Net Worth
$13 billion
Date of birth15 September 1944
OccupationPolitician
NationalityUgandan

The Profile of Yoweri Museveni

Both of Museveni’s parents, Mzee Amos Kaguta (1916–2013), a cattle herder, and Esteri Kokundeka Nganzi (1918–2001), a housewife, were illiterate. Museveni was born on September 15, 1944 in Rukungiri. His parents were uneducated.

Museveni’s brother Caleb Akandwanaho, who is better known in Uganda by his Muslim name Salim Saleh, and Museveni’s sister Violet Kajubiri both have Kaguta as their father.

Museveni had his primary and secondary education at Kyamate Elementary School, Mbarara High School, and Ntare School, respectively. It was in 1967 when he enrolled at the University of Dar es Salaam, which is located in Tanzania.
Before Museveni rose to prominence in Uganda in the 1980s, he was active in the uprisings that led to the overthrow of two infamous Ugandan leaders: Idi Amin (1971–79) and Milton Obote (1980–85).

Read More Here: Uganda President Yoweri Museveni: A complete Biography

Yoweri Museveni Net Worth is estimated to have a net worth of $13 billion in 2022. Approximately 34 years have passed during which Yoweri Museveni has served as President of Uganda. It was stated that his net worth was $13 billion; however, a top advisor has disputed this amount.