Today 27th September 2014, the Centre for health Human Rights and development (CEHURD) has joined other civil society organisations working in health to attend a Regional Meeting on Health Committees; Regional consultation for East and Southern Africa which is aimed at sharing experiences and identifying good practices with respect to health committees in the region and to establish stronger networking around health committees. The meeting also intended to identify the role of Health committees in Equitable, People Cantered Health Systems in the South and East African Region.

The meeting which was organised by the Learning Network and held at the University of Cape Town in South Africa has been attended by members from Guatemala, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Kenya, South Africa, United States of America, India, Ethiopia, Malawi and Tunisia.

This meeting follows another regional meeting which was held in Uganda in 2013 under the theme, Health System Governance and community participation in Health whose objective was to share experiences of different models of community participation in health by identifying strengths, and weaknesses in the region.

Among the presenters during this regional meeting included the Chief Executive Director of CEHURD Mr. Mulumba Moses, the Director of Health and Human Rights at the school of public health at the University of Cape town, Professor London Leslie, Walter Flores form Centre for the study of Equity and Governance in Health Systems in Guatemala, Edgar Tatenda from the Community working Group in Zimbabwe and Veronica Masanja from Kiboga (Nyamiringa Health Centre III) in Central Uganda.

Among the issues discussed during the meeting include but not limited to the role of health management committees in democratic governance, experiences of the operation health committees in the region focusing on Uganda, Zimbabwe, and South Africa.

In order to accomplish the objective of sharing experiences and identifying good practices with respect to health committees, participants in the meeting where requested to share their experiences on what has worked, what has not worked and, what lessons learnt in regards the operation of health committees in  different countries.

The Center for Health, Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) within the Coalition to stop maternal mortality due to unsafe abortion (CSMMUA) is calling upon Concepts in form of story ideas from journalists in mainstream media (Print, Electronic and Online) from East African states countries (Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda and Burundi). These story ideas will form a basis from which successful candidates will be invited to participate in a media fellowship for the year 2015.

The objective of this competition and media fellowship is to build capacity of journalists in main stream media to pursue high-quality, balanced and informative reporting on Sexual Reproductive Health and Rights through training and a mentoring aiming at increasing awareness of the public about the magnitude of the public health crisis of unsafe abortion and its impact.

As 2015 fast approaches, East African countries (Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda and Burundi) are finding themselves in the unfortunate position of not being able to achieve Millennium Development Goal (MDG) number five which among others aims at reducing maternal mortality by three quarters (¾) and achieving universal access to Reproductive Health (RH) by 2015.

It should be noted that maternal mortality ratios in East Africa remain unacceptably very high. For example, according to the Preliminary Uganda Demographic Health Survey 2011, the maternal mortality ratio in Uganda stands at 438 for every 100,000 live births (UBOs 2012). In Kenyathe maternal mortality ratio is estimated at 460 deaths per 100,000 live births as well as 454 in Tanzania (TDHS, 2012). This adds up to about 500 maternal deaths per 100,000 in Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania. On the other hand for example, in Kenya unsafe abortion accounts for more than 35% and 26 % in Uganda of maternal deaths, this is far higher than the global rate standing at 13%.

Successful applicants will attend a week long residential orientation training on sexual reproductive health and rights and will be supported to investigate their submitted story concepts which will then be edited printed and published.Find FULL CALL FOR STORY IDEAS

By: Nakibuuka Noor Musisi

New research released in Uganda on the 8th of September 2014 shows that health care is the most alluring issue to Ugandan voters. The research that was conducted by a Columbia university researcher in collaboration with the coalition to stop maternal mortality comes in at a time when Uganda is nearly passing its financial year budget 2014/2015.

The research revealed that vast majority of voters will not support any Member of Parliament who does not prioritize health issues, such as correcting medicine stock outs or increasing health financing, motivating health workers, ensuring a sufficient budget for Primary health care etc.

The civil society organizations today thus called upon Members of Parliament to take action based on this data, specifically that Parliament not approve the FY2014/15 national budget unless it includes dramatically scaled up investments in recruitment and motivation of front line professional health workers, alongside expansion in primary health care (PHC) funding for health facilities.

The coalition correlated the health sector to security and noted with concern that in as much as security is key in ensuring a peaceful nation, the health sector should be given priority and to ensure that peace is secured for a healthy nation.

The coalition members while speaking to journalists specifically demanded for:
•    A progressive salary enhancement that gives more to those who need it most: They demanded that the wage increment should be focused on these lower cadres whose work is essential and life – saving: midwives and nurses, at a cost of UShs 13.3 bn.
•    Dramatic enhancement to Primary Health Care (PHC) non-wage funding by 41.2bn in order to ensure lower level health facilities can deliver essential life -saving services, catering for fuel, electricity, immunization, supervision, coordination, hygiene inspection, and health education. They related PHC underfunding to more women dying from lack of access to emergency obstetric care in all Health Center IVs and health facilities not being in position to respond to the leading causes of preventable maternal death—post partum hemorrhage, sepsis, obstructed labor, unsafe abortion and eclampsia—unless they are equipped to provide essential health services.
•    The recruitment exercise of 3,371 health workers is completed at a cost of UShs 28.3 bn in annual salary and allowances.
•    Double the national investment in HIV and TB treatment in order to close the funding gap created by expanded HIV treatment eligibility.
This data comes in at a time when the first ever- landmark maternal health case (Constitutional appeal No. 1 of 2013- arising out of Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2011) will be in the Supreme court for the first hearing on 11th September.

It is important that the desires and aspirations of people are put into consideration. Could be that the voters are worried about the high numbers of maternal mortality in the country- indeed 16 women die un necessarily every day in child birth – the causes of which are preventable.

From the reading of the research, voters are interested in ensuring having functional health facilities, motivated health workers among others which call is more less the same call in the court case filed. The time is now that Uganda stood up to its citizens- we need to abide by their wishes and as they note, the 2016 campaigns are most likely going to be influenced by what the government prioritizes’

Health should thus be key.

By: Rebecca Carr

As I was buying souvenirs from Uganda’s craft village in Kampala, last weekend, I began chatting to several vendors about maternal health. I usually try to avoid harping on about work, and about the human rights related issues I’ve encountered; especially on a weekend, but for some reason: small talk, maybe? Interest, perhaps, in what a “Muzungu” (white person) would be doing in Uganda for more than a few, vacation-appropriate length weeks? – Many a probing question about my activities was sent my way.

Compliantly, I told them I was working on issues concerning Ugandan’s rights to health and of recent, on issues of maternal mortality in particular. That, however, was more than enough to get the conversation flowing; as each had some personal story to share concerning their wives and or other female relations’ encounters with issues of maternal health; issues that fuelled visible despair and upset among them as to the current, and often shocking, status quo.

Despite the global hype and dogged hope that has surrounded the Millennium Development Goals’ (MDGs) objectives, government efforts to achieve the fifth MDG in Uganda: to reduce by three quarters, between 1990 and 2015, the country’s maternal mortality ratio, to a rate of 131 per 10,000 live births, have been disappointing.

The rate of maternal mortality in Uganda, at an estimated 438 per 100,000 live births in 2011, remains far above what a number of other countries in the region have been able to achieve and, being socially stratified, is also largely preventable. Arguably, the main factor prohibiting the rate’s amelioration is resources: and further, underpinning this is a lack of political will to make maternal health spending a clear priority.

For instance, the government of Uganda does not currently allocate the resources that are required to deliver Uganda’s Minimum Health Care Package; a policy which has as an objective: the improvement of maternal and child health through, amongst others, the supply of basic maternal health commodities and increased health worker staffing.

In fact, since the millennial year the MDGs were announced, Uganda’s budgetary allocation towards the health sector has remained inadequate, with government health expenditure averaging at around 10.2% between 2009-13 according to the World Bank (which is below the 15% that is required and was pledged by Uganda in the African, Abuja declaration).

This stands in contrast to the 17.2% of government expenditure the World Bank says was devoted to Uganda’s military expenditure in 2010/11: which included the controversial purchasing of top-notch Russian military fighter jets that reportedly cost USD $740 million to buy, at such a time when Uganda was even being taken to court to account for the country’s high rate of maternal deaths (See discussion of Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2011, below). Uganda, however, is not at war; but with 16 preventable maternal deaths a day, there are clear health battles at home to be reckoned with.

The cases of Jennifer Anguko and Sylvia Nalubowa expound this. Jennifer, a mother of three, needlessly bled to death in the maternity ward of one of Uganda’s major public hospitals. There was no available doctor to examine her for over 12 hours and the nurses repeatedly ignored Jennifer’s family’s pleas for help; even rebuking her husband for interrupting their idle conversations with his protests. By the time an obstetrician eventually arrived, it was tragically too late, and she had died.

Sylvia Nalubowa, a farmer and mother of 7 arrived at hospital needing emergency obstetric care to deliver her second child; she was unexpectedly having twins. Sylvia, however, arrived with none of essential items that women are expected to bring (including razor blades, gloves, cotton wool etc.,) for the birth of this second twin, given its unexpectedness, nor did she have any money to pay for the airtime the nurses allegedly demanded she pay to enable them call a doctor.

According to family members, Sylvia was consequently taken to the maternity ward and simply left there, unattended to for the 7 hours that she suffered: screaming in agonising pain, even “pledging her kibanja [squatter piece of land], hens and pigs if the nurses helped her out.” The nurses, however, were not interested in her pleas and instead of giving birth that day Sylvia also left hospital in a coffin, along with her unborn child.

These cases are not isolated events. They are symptomatic of the broader inequities that women face in Uganda and require systemic action in order to effectively address their causes. This is the rhetoric of human rights and indeed, providing women with access to maternal care is a core obligation “of comparable priority” in international human rights law, that is incumbent upon Uganda, as a party to the relevant treaties, to fulfil.

Holding the government to account for its progress (or lack of) in realizing this obligation is something that, according to recent technical guidance produced by the UN Human Rights Council on reducing preventable maternal mortalities, may include the typically unchartered avenue of judicial remedy.

Where government is failing to act, as the guardian of individuals’ fundamental rights and freedoms, the judiciary must act to protect the basic human rights of its country’s peoples. According to the guidance, this may even stretch to the judiciary’s reformation of “laws, polices and budgets that do not adequately protect sexual and reproductive health rights” in accordance with international law.

Incisively, in 2011 the Centre for Health, Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) filed a Constitutional Petition (Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2011) that sought, among others, a declaration that the non-provision of the essential maternal health commodities that had led to the deaths of Jennifer and Sylvia, among others, infringed their fundamental rights to health and life.

The case – after a number of delays caused by the responding Attorney General – was, however, struck out following a preliminary objection that the case raised questions of a political nature, to which the court allegedly lacked jurisdiction to respond.

This week, however, the case will re-appear on appeal by CEHURD, before Uganda’s Supreme Court, to enable them determine whether the litigation should proceed. The occasion is a critical moment for maternal health in Uganda since, if CEHURD is allowed to proceed with the case, their petition may ultimately result in the budget increments that are required to secure the fundamental (and constitutionally protected) rights of women, to adequate maternal healthcare, that women and their families all over the country, as they have told me, so desperately desire.