The Kabaka of Buganda Ronald Muwenda Mutebi is a proud King right now. As proud as any Father would be.
In the late afternoon of Tuesday the Kingdom’s Prime Minister JB Walusimbi expressed his pleasure at announcing that the King and the Kingdom had gotten a baby boy. The PM said that the King’s young son had been named Ssemakokiro Richard with an unnamed woman. Thats not all. The baby boy was born last year, in July.
Here is the official announcement made on the official Buganda website.
DADDY'S BOY: But who is the mother?
Things to note here:
1. The announcement was made on a website and not on radio or with the sounding of drums. This is significant because I believe it’s designed to show that the old kingdom is now a modern entity.
2. The Statement is extra brief. Typical of celebrity announcements. The Kabaka is Uganda’s number one celebrity and is especially revered in Buganda.
3. The Prime Minister and not the Kabaka makes the announcement. This is designed to show authority and class. The Kabaka doesn’t sound his own drum.
4. The baby having born in July last year, is about SIX months now. That this could happen for this long without a leakage is credit to the Kingdom and those around the Kabaka. Even the nosy security agencies and their millions of spies had no idea. This ultimately will show a kingdom in firm control of its affairs. Not even Museveni’s boys had a clue about what was going on with the Kabaka’s private life.
Things to worry about:
The Kingdom PR machine is definitely positioning the kingdom as a modern entity but its treatment of women is still appalling. I know many people will be silent on this issue, fearful of angering their Baganda friends. But this needs to be said. The kingdom might be now modern but its treatment of women is still as old, as old-fashioned and as terrible and abhorring and as despicable as during the days of stone age.
Now don’t tell me about culture when you are using the internet to make an announcement so important to the future of the Kingdom. The Kingdom needs to go with the times but currently they have no regard for the mother of the young Prince, she gets no recognition other than that she comes from the Nsenene clan. She has no face, no name. She’s just an object of desire for the King. and that makes my stomach turn.
Then what about the Kabaka’s wife. The Kabaka and the Nnabagereka were married in church and later hosted the whole kingdom to a massive party. The Nnabagereka has not been pregnant. She has a daughter who is a swimming champion. It’s clear that this young prince is born out-of-wedlock. I have been told that in Buganda the Kabaka is the Culture and the Law and the culture and the law is the Kabaka in Buganda. No one questines his authority, no one puts the King to any judgement. I am probably overstepping the line here. In this era of moralism, of women emancipation, of political correctness, of HIV/AIDS and sexual networks, people will ask questions about the moral uprightness of the Kabaka.
You can say that in Baganda culture the Kabaka cannot be accused of philandering and that all women belong to him, but that’s ancient and has no place in a modern kingdom that takes pride at running a website it uses to make announcements. The Kabaka is national institution and the Kabaka is a role model for kids across Buganda and across the country. What message is he sending to the young ones? That you can have a married wife, leave her at home and go sleeping around and having kids with other women?
The Baganda and the Kingdom will put up all kinds of defenses and justifications. They are definitely delighted about their Prince. They can chest thump all they want but this is a scandal that will tarnish the image of the Kabaka. You cannot have a wife and treat her like rubbish. Where does the Nnabagereka fit in in all this one guy asked on twitter? She might keep her cool and not make noise but she has people who look up to her. She is a role model for so many young girls. She’s beautiful, stylish and runs a ballet school teaching young girls to express themselves through dance. She cannot keep quiet and be the traditional wife who covers her eyes and plugs her ears to the philandering of her husband. How will she now show her face in public if she keeps silent about this. Will she expect the other women who look up to her to hide away in shame too? She must say something. The Nnabagereka cannot simply take this public humiliation. If she does, she will have let down millions of Ugandan women who look up to her, to her grace and honor. She must not disappoint.
This announcement of a baby Prince will damage the institution of the Kabaka in the eyes of so many. In this era where radio stations are inundated with adverts about the sexual network and multiple partners, the Kabaka is the last man who needed to confirm that he too is very active and reckless on the sexual network.
Questions will come up, how many more Princes are out there awaiting their day in the sun or on the website? Did he plan to have the baby or was it an accident a fling gone bad? And then the speculation on who the lady is. Everyone will want to know who the Royal Side Dish is. I can see this filling newspaper front pages till Easter.
But the Kabaka will also take a real battering for the way he has hidden the identity of the mother of his child. The Kindgom of Buganda might have modernized, but the way they have treated the mother of the young prince (I don’t believe she requested not to be outed otherwise the PM would have said so) shows that to the Kabaka and the many who surround him, the advisors and friends, women are nothing but child-bearing machines, with their place right behind the curtains of the bedroom. I don’t think this the message that the Kabaka wants to sent to his subjects otherwise we shall be back to the stone age.
And the modern-day woman of Uganda doesn’t want to be seen as just a child bearing object of pleasure to be hidden in behind palace rooms.
Let face it. What the Kabake did is pure old-fashioned BAD MANNERS. And he cannot be applauded for this.
I will wait to see if the religious leaders have the guts and the firmness to tell it straight that the Kabaka has made a mistake and need to seek forgiveness from his wife and his God.
proudugandan
Ben Mugabo
February 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM
With all due respect to every one most especially to the Baganda who support the Kabaka’s deed, you seem not to use what you acquired from school. It is known by every one -unlike the cultured retarded people, that its the man who determines the sex of the child.
Even Naginda was so dense to think that if the Kabaka slept with another woman, he might get a boy (the so called heir). If those sperms were to be dropped in Naginda that day, she would also have conceived a baby boy.
I think the only argument would have been; How dense are the Baganda (the whole kingdom) right from the infant to their kabaka regarding this whole issue??
I arge the Baganda to accept that they are pretending to be modern in an old fashion belief and learn from there i.e either go modern or stick to yo old fashioned thinking.
BTW, as u claim on equal rights…can’t a female be a heir to the Baganda?
Peace Kags
January 23, 2012 at 10:11 AM
How many kids does the Kabaka have???? Are they from Naginda???Nooo. why then waste time discussing the young one… Like the man alone……You don’t know how it hurts for a king being demanded for a prince…. Naginda please accept the boy and raise him as your own…The King wasn’t reckless..this was a planned thing
Julian Mwine (@Jaymwine)
January 19, 2012 at 5:13 PM
Though I do not agree with the whole of the post I must say I agree with its gist. The Kabaka and his ilk cannot ask to be viewed as modern Baganda when it suits them and then revert to centuries old culture to defend practices that are at odds with the modern image of the Kingdom that they try to present at times.
The Ganda culture fully sanctions the Kabaka’s actions and I am OK with that. What cannot take is the criticism that seems to be directed at anyone who takes issue with the Kabaka having a child out of wedlock. The truth is we live in a society where the foreign culture that everyone loves to bash at times like this because it does not respect our ways of old, colours very many people’s world view and that’s not a bad thing (its just what it is). So when Mugumya takes issue with the apparent disregard the mother of the child is being treated with or the fact that the kabaka’s actions fly in the face of all that has been said about sexual networks etc I see no reason why everyone has to go culture-happy and immediately make the unsupported assumptions that the mother of the prince has been having a special sanctioned relationship with the Kabaka or that Nagginda must have accepted said relationship on account of her inability to give an heir. Any knowledge of the way these cultural institutions operated way back then would make assuming the opposite more likely.
patricia kahill (@pkahill)
January 19, 2012 at 3:48 PM
As a Muganda educated woman, i think it should have been the so called victims (the Queen and the Mother to the Prince) to show dislike of what is happening to them other than outsiders who do not know what happened.
When you forget where you are coming from you are bound to fail thus Buganda embracing modernity does not mean it should throw away its traditions and cultures, NO. Best to emerge them in your culture than to drop yours and adopt the new. Buganda is using modernity to its own advantage and thus every one got the news.
And remember always history does repeat itself and if you know yours then you should not be asking and writing this but joining in the happiness that is filling the Buganda and its people.
Keishamaza Rukikaire (@Keishamaza)
January 18, 2012 at 1:37 PM
Why is everyone assuming that the Nnabagereka is a sad victim here? Isn’t it possible that – realizing that her chances of providing an heir were very slim – she and the Kabaka, in the interests of the kingdom, agreed that he should find another woman who could do so?
And as for him setting a bad example; he is a king and not a regular man – the same rules do not apply. Buganda has clear cultural rules, and if they are acceptable to the people involved then who are we to pass silly judgement that we learned from foreigners? If other men are stupid enough to think, “well, if the king did it then so can I”, it is likely that they are too dumb to be helped by good advice anyway.
As for the Queen – she remains the same gracious, giving, respectable representative of her kingdom that she has always been. I don’t see how this incident could possibly change that – your assertion that she is being treated “like rubbish” is baseless. She married a King, and knew full well that if she failed to provide an heir he would likely look elsewhere for one. While it is sad that she has not had a son, I’m sure she understands that what has happened has been for the greater good of the kingdom – it does not diminish her place as Nnabagereka nor Sangalyambogo’s place as a treasured princess.
Get off the man’s case and celebrate with Buganda the birth of the prince.
proudugandan
January 18, 2012 at 3:44 PM
Thanks for the comment.
Whereas the Kabaka has the right to marry as many women as he pleases, being the Kabaka. There is no argument there the culture permits him. But the Kabaka isn’t only a cultural leader, he is a role model for kids and others but even lets leave that aside. The Kabaka was wedded in the christian church. And Christian marriages don’t allow people to fornicate outside marriage.
On christian morals alone, the Kabaka is in a mistake and needs to seek forgiveness. If he knew that there is a possibility of marrying another woman or even of sleeping with another woman, then he shouldn’t have exchanged rings with the Nnabagereka, he should never have exchanged those vows to remain faithful to his wife.
On that alone I find the Kabaka a disgrace and a bad example whether culturally he is justified or not. His fornication set a terrible example and if I were the bishop who wedded them, I’d be on the phone to him castigating him and asking him to seek forgiveness.
Simon Kaheru (@skaheru)
January 18, 2012 at 11:59 AM
You’re really on a rant, but it’s a little misplaced. First of all, you know quiet well that there are N men out there (not just Ugandan) married in church but with children out out of wedlock, so there is nothing to write home about this one. You yourself acknowledge that the cultural norms allow for him to conceive an heir out of wedlock, so DWI.
Then, where does the issue of the Kabaka being “reckless” come into play? Who says that the mother of the heir was not carefully chosen and kept in one place during a steady relationship?
And to annoy me a little bit, you end the rant with the charge that the Kingdom is showing that they think of women as only “child-bearing machines”! How is that a thought when you consider that the wife who everybody knows and is given N publicity is a champion of many good things?
There is a major lack of focus in that rant!
proudugandan
January 18, 2012 at 3:51 PM
Simon, I know there are very many married men with children out of wedlock but that doesn’t make it right. The Kabaka is a role model for millions. He is a married man, married in the church not a shrine, he has responsibilities, yes, those responsibilities include to provide a potential heir to the kingdom, but he also has a responsibility to the christian church which wedded him, he also has a responsibility to the christian family. He has brought all that into disrepute. Sadly very few people are courageous enough to remind him of his responsibilities.
flashdancer (@flashdancer11)
January 18, 2012 at 10:56 AM
I would really love to commend you for this article. Really I would. But I can’t. And the reason I can’t is because it is totally devoid of context. The current generation knows all about the history of the French Revolution, the history of the American Civil War, but nothing of its own rich history and culture (which is well-documented). Moreover, we imbibe the modern cultures and histories without examining them. We then use those as the basis for all manner of (moral) judgements. Based on things we do not fully understand. What is a “side dish”? Where did you get this term? What was a side dish (if it existed) in African culture? Were we wrong then not to have that term? Were we barbarians when we didn’t know such concepts? And have you ever understood the origins of monogamy in Western judeo-christian tradition?
It is far too easy to express yourself. It takes a little more effort to do so in an educated manner. Because then you have to read. And know.
proudugandan
January 18, 2012 at 4:03 PM
Thanks for the comment. Sadly, the Kabaka is the one who chose a foreign religion in which to get married and has to take the criticism from Christians. If he had been married according to his culture where he is allowed to ‘philander’ where it’s actually not called ‘philandering’ where having as many women is glorified, no one would be criticizing him. But he chose to go to a christian church to exchange vows with the lady he said he loved. He uttered those vows publicly from his heart, no one forced him. We must remind him that he has desecrated the christian marriage, the christian family. Traditional african societies didn’t require men to be faithful to their wives. But the christian church requires those who belong to it to be faithful to their wives. But the Kabaka isn’t a traditional man. He is a married man, married in the church. He must respect christian teachings. If he wants to live as a traditional african King, then let him denounce the christian church that wedded him.