This week the US government has protested the Uganda government’s alleged attempts to block communication on social media networks and live broadcast of the ‘walk-to-work’ protests.
The Deputy State Department Spokesman, Mr Mark Toner said in the statement that the US government was also concerned about the loss of life and continued arrest of opposition leaders by the security forces during the protests.
This follows several directives from the Uganda Communications Commission, the communications regulator, to several Internet service providers instructing them to block Face-book and Twitter networks for 24 hours during the protests that left five people dead.
The same body has also approached broadcasting houses and advised them to avoid live coverage of the ‘walk to work’ demonstrations against high fuel and other commodity prices. These actions deserve outright condemnation by all people of goodwill. Since in a democracy people should not use armed means to demand for their legitimate rights, the only platform left for them to express themselves is through peaceful demonstrations and the media.
Freedom of expression, the media and peaceful assembly are fundamental human rights and critical components of a democratic society. The government should respect these rights as granted to the Ugandan people by our national constitution in order to make public officials accountable.
Gagging the media and free speech can only inflame the situation and drive the dissenting voices underground. This is a situation that should not be allowed to manifest especially after we have had largely peaceful general elections. The issues for which people have reallied to protest are real and need the urgent attention of the government .
The high cost of living is unbearable for the majority of Ugandans. People can hardly live within their means. And they have now come out in a spirited show of solidarity to demand for government’s urgent intervention. This is the best civil manner in which people can express themselves.
The government, therefore, should not block these un-confrontational means of communication left for the people to channel their grievances. Our national leaders should instead listen and address the critical issues affecting Ugandans. Only then shall the country have peace.
The writer is a Journalist and Advocate of the Hih Court of Uganda
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Makerere Should define its riorities
Makerere University has asked government to approve a proposal to increase student’s tuition fees up from shs.3m to 6m per academic year. According to the Makerere university Secretary, Mr Muhwezi Kahunda, the increase in tuition fees is necessary because the expenses incurred at the university are very high.
For sometime now Makerere has been toiling with the idea of increasing fees but has faced strong resistance from both the students and the general public. With the liberalization of University education, the increased number of student enrolment and , introduction of many new courses one would have expected student fees to remain reasonable and affordable. Unfortunately this is not the case.
With the increased cost of living in Uganda today due to high fuel and other commodity prices , one wonders how parents will afford to pay tuition fees for their children at the university.
The proposed fees increment will have a significant disincentive effect on youngsters yarning for university education. The Makerere administration should ensure the right balance between enabling as many people as possible to get a degree and helping the university sustain its finances. When a middle level public servant earns estimated 15 million per annum in salaries and allowances how can they afford to send their children to Makerere.
And here is the irony. While the Makerere university claims to be short on money to fund its operations, they can afford at the same time, to buy a Land Cruiser VX, at shs. 360m for the vice-chancellor. Already the lavish life style of the top administrators at Makerere has attracted criticism from Dr Tanga Odoi, the Chairman of the lecturers’ association MUASA.
DR Tanga Odoi has stated: “ Makerere’s problem is not shortage of funds but the failure to understand our priorities.” He is spot on. The hypocrisy of those charged with the management of our public institutions must be stopped.
And in this case, Makerere University administration must fully explain the resources needed to maintain the institution’s national , regional and global status and offer the very best student experience without fleecing the unsuspecting public. Makerere should not be given a blank cheque when its vast resources are not put to proper use.
For sometime now Makerere has been toiling with the idea of increasing fees but has faced strong resistance from both the students and the general public. With the liberalization of University education, the increased number of student enrolment and , introduction of many new courses one would have expected student fees to remain reasonable and affordable. Unfortunately this is not the case.
With the increased cost of living in Uganda today due to high fuel and other commodity prices , one wonders how parents will afford to pay tuition fees for their children at the university.
The proposed fees increment will have a significant disincentive effect on youngsters yarning for university education. The Makerere administration should ensure the right balance between enabling as many people as possible to get a degree and helping the university sustain its finances. When a middle level public servant earns estimated 15 million per annum in salaries and allowances how can they afford to send their children to Makerere.
And here is the irony. While the Makerere university claims to be short on money to fund its operations, they can afford at the same time, to buy a Land Cruiser VX, at shs. 360m for the vice-chancellor. Already the lavish life style of the top administrators at Makerere has attracted criticism from Dr Tanga Odoi, the Chairman of the lecturers’ association MUASA.
DR Tanga Odoi has stated: “ Makerere’s problem is not shortage of funds but the failure to understand our priorities.” He is spot on. The hypocrisy of those charged with the management of our public institutions must be stopped.
And in this case, Makerere University administration must fully explain the resources needed to maintain the institution’s national , regional and global status and offer the very best student experience without fleecing the unsuspecting public. Makerere should not be given a blank cheque when its vast resources are not put to proper use.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
SAVE THE UGANDA MUSEUM
There is disheartening news that one of Uganda’s cultural heritage centers – the National museum will soon be no more. It has been reported in national newspapers that the home of the only remaining national museum will be demolished to allow the construction of a 60-storey office block for the Ministry of Tourism, Trade and Industry. What a travesty.
But it's no surprise that government officials can take such a decision given that the Uganda museum is one of those important national institutions that have been neglected for rather to long. The structure that houses the museum was designed by a German architecture Ernst May more than 60 years ago to suit the purpose of the institution.
Thefore, apart from being a national historical monument , the museum houses a collection of historical artifacts and is a source of information on well over 650 cultural heritage sites dotted across the country. What this means is that the national museum is a center of learning about life, culture and heritage of the people of Uganda.
Dr Ephraim Kamuhangire, the former commissioner for Museum and Monuments and curator of the now dilapidated national museum is one of many Ugandans who are disappointed that nothing has been done to upgrade the institution-the only remaining national reference center on our cultural heritage.
Dr. Kamuhangire has noted that due to lack of funding , the Uganda museum has lost its place as the best in the East and Central Africa region. Uganda still needs this institution and every effort should be made by all concerned parties to protect its existence for the benefit of the present and future generations.
The idea of demolishing this historical monument must be scrapped and in its place plans are made to upgrade the museum to capture and reflect the country’s cultural and socio-economic transformation over the years. All advanced societies have preserved these institutions because of their unique and important functions in collecting scientific, educational and methodological works that seek to enhance the sense of national identity .
Government must therefore, support the role of the Uganda national museum to increase and preserve our cultural heritage, from the nation´s earliest settlement through to the modern day.
Its at the national museum that the past meets the present.
SATURDAY AND SUNDAY MONITOR
EDITOR
ADVOCATE OF THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA
msserwanga@monitor.co.ug
msserwanga@yahoo.com
msserwanga@gmail.com
msserwanga.blogspot.com
+256772434677
But it's no surprise that government officials can take such a decision given that the Uganda museum is one of those important national institutions that have been neglected for rather to long. The structure that houses the museum was designed by a German architecture Ernst May more than 60 years ago to suit the purpose of the institution.
Thefore, apart from being a national historical monument , the museum houses a collection of historical artifacts and is a source of information on well over 650 cultural heritage sites dotted across the country. What this means is that the national museum is a center of learning about life, culture and heritage of the people of Uganda.
Dr Ephraim Kamuhangire, the former commissioner for Museum and Monuments and curator of the now dilapidated national museum is one of many Ugandans who are disappointed that nothing has been done to upgrade the institution-the only remaining national reference center on our cultural heritage.
Dr. Kamuhangire has noted that due to lack of funding , the Uganda museum has lost its place as the best in the East and Central Africa region. Uganda still needs this institution and every effort should be made by all concerned parties to protect its existence for the benefit of the present and future generations.
The idea of demolishing this historical monument must be scrapped and in its place plans are made to upgrade the museum to capture and reflect the country’s cultural and socio-economic transformation over the years. All advanced societies have preserved these institutions because of their unique and important functions in collecting scientific, educational and methodological works that seek to enhance the sense of national identity .
Government must therefore, support the role of the Uganda national museum to increase and preserve our cultural heritage, from the nation´s earliest settlement through to the modern day.
Its at the national museum that the past meets the present.
SATURDAY AND SUNDAY MONITOR
EDITOR
ADVOCATE OF THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA
msserwanga@monitor.co.ug
msserwanga@yahoo.com
msserwanga@gmail.com
msserwanga.blogspot.com
+256772434677
Friday, February 18, 2011
THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION SHOULD DO THE RIGHT THING
MS
Millions of Ugandans have turned out to cast their votes in yet another historic general election that is likely to change the political landscape of the country. The presidential campaigns have been innovative and unprecedented as the candidates embraced the fast changing dynamics in communication especially the social networks.
Just last week the first ever mayoral debate was successfully organsised by Monitor Publications Limited and Nation Television (NTV) at Serena hotel in Kampala. Even the most critical opposition candidates at all levels can attest the fact that overall ,the campaigns have been peaceful thus far.
Now the day of reckoning has arrived and as the Electoral Commission readies to announce the results and the eventual winners, let the people’s will prevail. The Ugandan people have made their choices and their decisions at the polls should be honoured.. Elections are a celebration of every citizen's fundamental right to vote and must be respected by all.
It's encouraging that the campaign process has been conducted in a calm and peaceful manner . we now call on all political actors, particularly the candidates to maintain a high level of integrity in the electoral process, and respect the responsibility of managing the elections by the Electoral Commission.
It’s was also prudent for the Electoral Commission, the Uganda Police Force, and Uganda Media Council to generated agreed guidelines and codes of conduct for law enforcement officials and the media during the elections. It is hoped that strict adherence to the governing laws of the country will ensure that the outcome of the electoral process is legitimate and acceptable by all parties and citizens.
But the Electoral Commission, should ensure transparency in the way the votes are counted and the results released to the public. They should ensure that the ballot boxes are not tampered with especially after the votes are tallied at the polling centers.
The results should be released expeditiously in order not to create any environment for suspicion. And all Ugandans should be prepared to accept the outcome of the polls whether our respective candidates have won or not . In other words the t the country should remain united whatever the out come of the polls.
Millions of Ugandans have turned out to cast their votes in yet another historic general election that is likely to change the political landscape of the country. The presidential campaigns have been innovative and unprecedented as the candidates embraced the fast changing dynamics in communication especially the social networks.
Just last week the first ever mayoral debate was successfully organsised by Monitor Publications Limited and Nation Television (NTV) at Serena hotel in Kampala. Even the most critical opposition candidates at all levels can attest the fact that overall ,the campaigns have been peaceful thus far.
Now the day of reckoning has arrived and as the Electoral Commission readies to announce the results and the eventual winners, let the people’s will prevail. The Ugandan people have made their choices and their decisions at the polls should be honoured.. Elections are a celebration of every citizen's fundamental right to vote and must be respected by all.
It's encouraging that the campaign process has been conducted in a calm and peaceful manner . we now call on all political actors, particularly the candidates to maintain a high level of integrity in the electoral process, and respect the responsibility of managing the elections by the Electoral Commission.
It’s was also prudent for the Electoral Commission, the Uganda Police Force, and Uganda Media Council to generated agreed guidelines and codes of conduct for law enforcement officials and the media during the elections. It is hoped that strict adherence to the governing laws of the country will ensure that the outcome of the electoral process is legitimate and acceptable by all parties and citizens.
But the Electoral Commission, should ensure transparency in the way the votes are counted and the results released to the public. They should ensure that the ballot boxes are not tampered with especially after the votes are tallied at the polling centers.
The results should be released expeditiously in order not to create any environment for suspicion. And all Ugandans should be prepared to accept the outcome of the polls whether our respective candidates have won or not . In other words the t the country should remain united whatever the out come of the polls.
Friday, February 11, 2011
MPS: Court erred in interpretation of the law
As we approach the final lap in what has truly been a grueling campaign period , the Constitution Court has thrown the proverbial spanner in the works by declaring the nominations of members of parliament who did not resign their seats before joining parties other than those for which they were elected MPs unconstitutional.
A legal assessment of this judgment handed out by a Coram of 5 judges of the Constitutional court shows that their justices applied the strict and literal interpretation rule when they considered the meaning of article 83(I) (g) (h) of the constitution.
The article provides that a member of Parliament shall vacate his or her seat in parliament if the person leaves the party for which he or she stood as a candidate for election to Parliament to join another party or to remain in parliament as an independent member.
This particular provision is a recent addition to the constitution to cater for the complex issues of independents and errant MPs who cross party-lines in the course of their tenure. Indeed in the 8th parliament there are some 70 MPs who fall in this category and are directly affected by the Constitution Court’s ruling.
But with due respect to the learned judges of the court, their interpretation of the meaning and application of article 83 was right in some respects but flawed in others. For instance the judges are right to hold that MPs who cross from one party to another must first vacate the seats for which they were elected as per the provisions of the constitution. This principle of the law also applies to independent MPs who have since joined parties of their choice before vacating their seats as independents. But because the term of the 8th parliament has come to an end and because the law (the constitution judgment is Law until otherwise quashed/reversed by a superior court) the errant MPs can only be compelled to refund the emoluments earned from the date when they illegally crossed party lines.
On the other hand, however, the Court erred in law when it extended the application of article 83 to the nominations of MPs for the next parliament.
It’s clear from the wording of the provisions of article 83 that it’s application is limited to the term of every seating parliament and therefore cannot be extended to the next Parliament which is even not yet constituted.
The candidates for seats in the next parliament therefore need not to resign as per article 83 as declared by court.' Otherwise how can one resign from a parliament that is not yet in existence?
In fact by operation of the law once a member of Parliament is nominated to contest seats in the next parliament their term as MPs should automatically expire. The sad thing, though, is that the law is silent about the transition period between nominations and when the next Parliament is inaugurated in May.
The learned judges again erred in law by interpreting article 83 in isolation of other provisions of the constitution especially article 72 which allows people to contest for elective positions on any political party platform they so wish.
One of the core principles of constitutional interpretation is that the constitution should be ready and interpreted as a whole. I hope the Supreme Court will revisit some of the contradictions in the Constitution Court ruling and settle the issues in clear terms.
Writer is Journalist and Advocate of the High Court of Uganda
msserwanga@gmail.com
A legal assessment of this judgment handed out by a Coram of 5 judges of the Constitutional court shows that their justices applied the strict and literal interpretation rule when they considered the meaning of article 83(I) (g) (h) of the constitution.
The article provides that a member of Parliament shall vacate his or her seat in parliament if the person leaves the party for which he or she stood as a candidate for election to Parliament to join another party or to remain in parliament as an independent member.
This particular provision is a recent addition to the constitution to cater for the complex issues of independents and errant MPs who cross party-lines in the course of their tenure. Indeed in the 8th parliament there are some 70 MPs who fall in this category and are directly affected by the Constitution Court’s ruling.
But with due respect to the learned judges of the court, their interpretation of the meaning and application of article 83 was right in some respects but flawed in others. For instance the judges are right to hold that MPs who cross from one party to another must first vacate the seats for which they were elected as per the provisions of the constitution. This principle of the law also applies to independent MPs who have since joined parties of their choice before vacating their seats as independents. But because the term of the 8th parliament has come to an end and because the law (the constitution judgment is Law until otherwise quashed/reversed by a superior court) the errant MPs can only be compelled to refund the emoluments earned from the date when they illegally crossed party lines.
On the other hand, however, the Court erred in law when it extended the application of article 83 to the nominations of MPs for the next parliament.
It’s clear from the wording of the provisions of article 83 that it’s application is limited to the term of every seating parliament and therefore cannot be extended to the next Parliament which is even not yet constituted.
The candidates for seats in the next parliament therefore need not to resign as per article 83 as declared by court.' Otherwise how can one resign from a parliament that is not yet in existence?
In fact by operation of the law once a member of Parliament is nominated to contest seats in the next parliament their term as MPs should automatically expire. The sad thing, though, is that the law is silent about the transition period between nominations and when the next Parliament is inaugurated in May.
The learned judges again erred in law by interpreting article 83 in isolation of other provisions of the constitution especially article 72 which allows people to contest for elective positions on any political party platform they so wish.
One of the core principles of constitutional interpretation is that the constitution should be ready and interpreted as a whole. I hope the Supreme Court will revisit some of the contradictions in the Constitution Court ruling and settle the issues in clear terms.
Writer is Journalist and Advocate of the High Court of Uganda
msserwanga@gmail.com
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Optic fibre Internet project is long overdue
Optic fibre Internet project is long overdue
BY MOSES SSERWANGA
One of the major challenges Uganda is facing today is the slow speed of the Internet or absence of the service in most parts of the country. Unlike Rwanda where the authorities are determined to ensure that our neighbours become an ICT hub in the region, in Uganda no serious efforts are being made to challenge this competition. The UN has established that there is a direct link between the spread of Internet and economic growth. The International Telecommunication Union found that every 1 per cent increase in Internet penetration results into a $593 (about Shs1.4million) increment to GDP per capita.
Indeed its very encouraging that one of our leading universities - Makerere - through the Faculty of Computer Science has taken the lead to not only train students but also develop software solutions that can be suitably deployed to address many technological challenges that face the country. It can thus be argued that Makerere’s contribution to the development of the ICT industry will to a great extent help Uganda to remain at the same level or even exceed other players in the region like Rwanda. It should also be noted that Rwanda is set to establish “on-line Campuses” throughout the country to benefit an estimated 50,000 students in higher institutions of learning.
This will not only allow almost all students in Rwanda to attain higher education but it will also significantly reduce on the cost of education. There are a number of bottlenecks to Uganda’s development of the ITC industry and the major one being access to the Internet.
The optic fibre cable project being implemented by a Chinese company - Huawei Technologies Company - has been slowed down by disagreements over cost and quality of work . These issues need to be sorted out because its the fibre cable network that will allow Internet providers to spread these vital services to most parts of the country. It’s claimed that Rwanda paid to Korea Telecom and Horizon $38 million to cover a distance of 2,300km as opposed to $61 million paid by Uganda for 2,100km.
Yet according to Rwanda ICT Framework presented by the Rwandan Minister in the Office of the President in charge of Science and Technology, Prof. Romain Murenzi, the country’s National Broadband was to cost $66 million for a distance of 2,300km and not $38 million.
Therefore, Rwanda is spending $66 million, out of which $38 million is for equipment and the rest for civil works. On the other hand, according to the agreement between Uganda and Huawei, government is investing $61 million for a distance of 2,118.6km including the fibre construction with 28 transmission sites and two protective rings. The component will also have access to 28 government departments and network security system. The other investment of $44 million, which brings the total cost in Uganda to $106 million, is for E-Government infrastructure.
Looking at the Uganda-NBI project Investment Comparison analysis with that of Rwanda, its clear that the unit price of the Rwandan project is a meagre variation and yet the Uganda project covers more components. These development projects which are vital for the provision of essential services to the majority Ugandans need to be supported to make us competitive in the global market.
It is encouraging that after wide consultation involving the ICT ministry, the national information technology authority, MPs and Huawei Technologies, members of the parliamentary committee on information technology have okayed government to go ahead with the second phase of the Optic fibre project to speed up the process of extending these services to the countryside where the majority of Ugandans live. The Committee chairperson, Mr Nathan Igeme Nabeta has rightly noted that the more time the cable lies incomplete the more Uganda will lose .
The writer is a journalist and an advocate
msserwanga@gmail.com
+256 772 43 46 77
BY MOSES SSERWANGA
One of the major challenges Uganda is facing today is the slow speed of the Internet or absence of the service in most parts of the country. Unlike Rwanda where the authorities are determined to ensure that our neighbours become an ICT hub in the region, in Uganda no serious efforts are being made to challenge this competition. The UN has established that there is a direct link between the spread of Internet and economic growth. The International Telecommunication Union found that every 1 per cent increase in Internet penetration results into a $593 (about Shs1.4million) increment to GDP per capita.
Indeed its very encouraging that one of our leading universities - Makerere - through the Faculty of Computer Science has taken the lead to not only train students but also develop software solutions that can be suitably deployed to address many technological challenges that face the country. It can thus be argued that Makerere’s contribution to the development of the ICT industry will to a great extent help Uganda to remain at the same level or even exceed other players in the region like Rwanda. It should also be noted that Rwanda is set to establish “on-line Campuses” throughout the country to benefit an estimated 50,000 students in higher institutions of learning.
This will not only allow almost all students in Rwanda to attain higher education but it will also significantly reduce on the cost of education. There are a number of bottlenecks to Uganda’s development of the ITC industry and the major one being access to the Internet.
The optic fibre cable project being implemented by a Chinese company - Huawei Technologies Company - has been slowed down by disagreements over cost and quality of work . These issues need to be sorted out because its the fibre cable network that will allow Internet providers to spread these vital services to most parts of the country. It’s claimed that Rwanda paid to Korea Telecom and Horizon $38 million to cover a distance of 2,300km as opposed to $61 million paid by Uganda for 2,100km.
Yet according to Rwanda ICT Framework presented by the Rwandan Minister in the Office of the President in charge of Science and Technology, Prof. Romain Murenzi, the country’s National Broadband was to cost $66 million for a distance of 2,300km and not $38 million.
Therefore, Rwanda is spending $66 million, out of which $38 million is for equipment and the rest for civil works. On the other hand, according to the agreement between Uganda and Huawei, government is investing $61 million for a distance of 2,118.6km including the fibre construction with 28 transmission sites and two protective rings. The component will also have access to 28 government departments and network security system. The other investment of $44 million, which brings the total cost in Uganda to $106 million, is for E-Government infrastructure.
Looking at the Uganda-NBI project Investment Comparison analysis with that of Rwanda, its clear that the unit price of the Rwandan project is a meagre variation and yet the Uganda project covers more components. These development projects which are vital for the provision of essential services to the majority Ugandans need to be supported to make us competitive in the global market.
It is encouraging that after wide consultation involving the ICT ministry, the national information technology authority, MPs and Huawei Technologies, members of the parliamentary committee on information technology have okayed government to go ahead with the second phase of the Optic fibre project to speed up the process of extending these services to the countryside where the majority of Ugandans live. The Committee chairperson, Mr Nathan Igeme Nabeta has rightly noted that the more time the cable lies incomplete the more Uganda will lose .
The writer is a journalist and an advocate
msserwanga@gmail.com
+256 772 43 46 77
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
MEANING OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL JUDGEMENT ON INDEPENDENTS
MEANING OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL JUDGEMENT ON INDEPENDENTS
BY MOSES SSERWANGA
Problem is the learned judges of the Constitutional Court, have made a strict and literal interpretation of article 83(I) (g) (h) which provides that a member of parliament shall vacate his or her seat in parliament.
(g) if the person leaves the party for which he or she stood as a candidate for election to parliament to join another party or to remain in parliament as an independent member
Much as this article is a recent addition to our constitution to take care of the complex issues of independents, It doesn’t specify whether it's application is limited to the present or the next parliament. In my view article 83 is limited to the current parliament and not the next .
And if that's the case , my interpretation is that this article doesn’t apply to nominations for seats in the next parliament - people are free to switch alliances or move from one political party to another or more still stand as independents because they are contesting for seats in another parliament and not the present one. The candidates for seats in the next parliament therefore need not to resign as per article 83 as declared by court.
The learned judges again have erred in law by interpreting article 83 in isolation of other provisions of the constitution especially article 72 which allows people to contest for elective positions on any political party platform they so wish.
One of the core principles of constitutional interpretation is that the constitution should be ready and interpreted as a whole.
Another issue is that the judges have not addressed themselves to the transition period between nomination and swearing in of the next parliament.
Writer is Journalist and Advocate
msserwanga@gmail.com
BY MOSES SSERWANGA
Problem is the learned judges of the Constitutional Court, have made a strict and literal interpretation of article 83(I) (g) (h) which provides that a member of parliament shall vacate his or her seat in parliament.
(g) if the person leaves the party for which he or she stood as a candidate for election to parliament to join another party or to remain in parliament as an independent member
Much as this article is a recent addition to our constitution to take care of the complex issues of independents, It doesn’t specify whether it's application is limited to the present or the next parliament. In my view article 83 is limited to the current parliament and not the next .
And if that's the case , my interpretation is that this article doesn’t apply to nominations for seats in the next parliament - people are free to switch alliances or move from one political party to another or more still stand as independents because they are contesting for seats in another parliament and not the present one. The candidates for seats in the next parliament therefore need not to resign as per article 83 as declared by court.
The learned judges again have erred in law by interpreting article 83 in isolation of other provisions of the constitution especially article 72 which allows people to contest for elective positions on any political party platform they so wish.
One of the core principles of constitutional interpretation is that the constitution should be ready and interpreted as a whole.
Another issue is that the judges have not addressed themselves to the transition period between nomination and swearing in of the next parliament.
Writer is Journalist and Advocate
msserwanga@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
