On the eve of colonialism in the late 1880s East Africa, and in particular the Great lakes Region was in state of flux. Rwanda and Burundi were already generating refugees.

The Buganda and Busoga kingdoms hosted refugees from far and wide, and intercommunal were a way of affirming superiority. Kings fought over beautiful women.

Busoga and Buganda are replete tales linking Kenya’s founding President Jomo Kenyatta to the rivalries over beautiful women. Born at a time when there were no birth certificates, medical records or recorded family pasts, Jomo Kenyatta’s date of birth, place of birth and his childhood have remained a mystery.

It is on record during one of former President Uhuru Kenyatta many tours of Uganda, he was asked by members of royal families in Busoga and Buganda kingdoms to accept and recognise his bloodline that they trace back to Uganda.

It sounded like banter and it quickly receded. The story is ever-present and Jomo Kenyatta is said to be a descendant Basoga woman parents who fled into exile following a fight between members of Busoga Kyabazinga (kingdom).

Influx of Rwandese Tutsis into Uganda

During the colonial period, Rwandans crossed into Uganda from the 1930s to work as casual labourers in coffee plantations in the Buganda kingdom. There was a large influx of Rwandans, mainly Tutsi, in the 1950s due to ethnic tensions that pitted the Tutsi against Hutu.

Whereas Banyarwanda are listed in the Uganda Constitution 1995 among the indigenous groups, many of them settled in Uganda after 1926 or did not have documented proof of their grandparents’ residence in Uganda and thus lost their citizenship of Uganda. Their children and grandchildren, despite being born in Uganda, were stateless. Many of the combatants of Luwero belonged to this groups Rwandese children and grandchildren and worked had to ensure that the Uganda Constitution 1995 at the centre of which they were when making it made them an indigenous group of Uganda.

Today, the government of President Tibuhaburwa Museveni has made it easy for them to access Uganda’s sovereignty, citizenship, dual citizenships and employment. The refugee-sensitive policy of the government is allowing so many refugees from areas dominated by the Chwezi to flock into Uganda.

The government created even a budget to ensure that they access the best education in Uganda and outside Uganda. I recorded this in another article I wrote sometime back. This means that as Ugandans are exposed to poor quality primary and secondary education under Universal Primary Education (UPE) and Universal Secondary Education (USE), refugees will access quality education in the fashion of separate development, or something close to it. It means when it comes to jobs, they will access the lucrative, well-paid jobs at the expense of the indigenes.

In Busoga many parents are selling their land to the Chwezi to educate their children up to university, but the majority never get jobs. They have to settle to being sent out of the country to the Middle East to engage in international slave labour. I heard recently that the government of Tibuhaburwa Museveni has also reached an agreement with the government of Japan to send 6000 young people to work there. Government gets a lot of money from such workers. Unfortunately, little is cowed into the development of the country since a lot of it ends up being stolen by politicians and bureaucrats. It is said that government loses Ush 10 trillion to thieves, mostly officials.

Did Kenya’s founding president, Jomo Kenyatta belong to Soga culture?

Kasedde Mukasa (2007), writing in the New Vision of  March 25, 2007, observes that many people, including Kenyans, never knew the father of Kenya’s late President Jomo Kenyatta. He says that when he visited the national archives of the Seychelles in the early 1990s, he found information in a document marked Exile No. 3-1901. That Exile was the fallen Omukama Kabalega of Bunyoro-Kitara. He and his son Prince Kabalega, together with the fallen Buganda King, Mwanga, had been exiled by the British colonialists to Seychelles.

According to the narration by Kasedde-Mukasa, the two kings were transited through Nairobi, where King Kabalega is believed to have had an affair with a Kikuyu girl who later gave birth to a baby boy. The boy was strongly believed to have been Jomo Kenyatta, who ruled Kenya for some 15 years (1963-1978).

There is, however, another narrative of Jomo Kenyatta’s ancestry, which asserts that Kenyatta belonged to Soga culture and was thus a Musoga of the Chwezi Igaga clan, to which Prince Byaruhanga Ndahura, the founder of the Busoga Kingdom at Nnenda Hill, and His son Wamara Byaruhanga Ndahura, the first King of Busoga, belonged. According to a credible story, Kenyatta’s father was called Katagiro. Katagiro was engaged in a spear fight with some of his classmates over a “beautiful” woman called Katundu in a place called or close to Nsambya, near the location of Ikumbya Primary School, in Luuka County in present- day Luuka District.

Others involved in the light were one nicknamed “Fuluma” (Who ended up in Rwanda) and “Kalayakumaiso” (who fled to present-day Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The story goes that Katagiro, like the others, were defeated and fled to Kenya with his son who was renamed Kenyatta”. Kenyatta became very fluent in Kikuyu language and settled at a place identified closely with him and called Gatundu – perhaps so-named in remembrance of the woman who caused the migration of his father with him to Kenya.

To confirm the story, John Taliyuwula, who has done a lot of research on the Chwezi Igaga clan in Busoga, says that one day during a ceremony to open the palace of former Kyabazinga of Busoga the late Sir William Wilberforce Kadhuumbura Gabula Nadiope, Jomo Kenyatta who was the chief guest, in the presence of the Prime Minister of Uganda. Dr Milton A. Obote and the Prime Minister of Tanganyika, Julius Kambarage Nyerere, spotted one Waidhuba, a leader of the Igaga clan and relative of his in the crowd. He left the high table and walked straight to Waidhuba whom he remembered. He whispered to him in Lusoga in the presence of Nadiope who accompanied him to Waidhuba. “Muna ofuna ekiseera waidha wankyalirangaku (Friend, get time and visit me in Kenya! ).

Taliyuwula says that afterwards Nadiope travelled to Waidhuba’s home in Kigulu just to find out how Kenyatta came to know Lusoga. He asked Waidhuba, “Aye muna, Jomo Kenyatta yayegerawa Olusoga?” (Friend, where did Kenyatta learn Lusoga from?).

Waidhuba answered, “Kenyatta Muganda wange era wa kika kya baise Igaga eyabula eira” (Kenyatta is my brother and member of the Igaga clan who got lost long ago). The story of Kenyatta is a good ‘recipe’ for further research on the Busoga-Jomo Kenyatta family connection, Bunyoro-Jomo Kenyatta family connection. There are, therefore, two theories seeking to explain the origins of Jomo Kenyatta:

1. Jomo Kenyatta had Busoga origins.
2. Jomo Kenyatta had Bunyoro origins

Basoga and water management

The Basoga have many lessons to offer in water management, particularly in terms of how their local relation to Bujagali Falls reflects not only why the falls have survived in the landscape as a sacred place, but also in indigenous governance, institutions, leadership and cultural and spiritual survival over a long span of space and time.

The diverse environments in which the Basoga live are deeply embedded in their production activities and spiritual relations mediated by Bujagali Falls (e.g., see UNEP, 1999) and the total environment. However, unlike what has been happening elsewhere in the last 25 years (e.g., Gray, 1999), the indigenous Basoga have not become as increasingly vociferous and assertive in the environmental defence of their identification with Bujagali Falls.

Therefore, they have not strongly resisted their culture and spirituality being defiled by others, who claim they are developing them and other Ugandans by targeting Bujagali Falls for hydropower development. If there are any people whose social justice, environmental democracy and environmental justice is being violated today in the name of development and investment it is Basoga.

Bujagali Falls, electricity and local civic action

In terms of fundamental environmental, cultural, ecological and spiritual rights to Bujagali Falls, the Basoga have been painfully fearful, silent and docile leaving the whole business of defending the critical landform feature from violent development to Save Bujagali Crusade (SBC), the National Association of Professional Environmentalists (NAPE) and a few other national and international non-governmental organisations (NGOs).

This defence starts with the late Martin Mukasa Musumba’s decision, in 1997, to found SBC in order to bring to the fore the plight of the Basoga with regard to Bujagali dam. He was convinced Busoga would gain more from Bujagali Falls being left to play its traditional role as an ecological, cultural, spiritual, ethical and moral stabiliser of the Basoga and as a tourist site than if allowed to be flooded off the face of the Earth in favour of a dam at Dumbbell Island, two kilometres downstream from the falls.

Musumba, who became the coordinator of SBC, then travelled to Makerere University to convince me to join him as a key player in building local resistance and action and providing intellectual leadership in the crusade against the destruction of Bujagali Falls. That was sometime in 1998.  I had just emerged out of a protracted struggle to prevent the spraying of Lake Victoria with deadly chemicals, which the government was convinced would eliminate water hyacinth but did not give attention to the possible eco-sabotage and ecocide that would ensue from the implementation of the action.

Although Musumba was a long-time friend of mine he had never found a good reason for paying a visit at my Flat 2 residence at Ssemakokiro Flats, Makerere University. I immediately saw reason to fight against the destruction of Bujagali Falls. Besides a white anti- Bujagali dam crusader called Lineweaver had just been deported from Uganda as a white lady whose name I cannot remember off-cuff was allowed to go around promising peasants’ heaven on earth if they did not resist the construction of the dam.

Musumba said, “This Bujagali struggle requires intellectual leadership as well. You are best poised to provide this leadership. You exhibited your capacity to do so during the struggle to prevent Lake Victoria being sprayed with dangerous chemicals in the name of eliminating water hyacinth”.

I agreed to join the crusade saying, “Martin, I speak for those living and non-living things, which cannot speak for themselves but which would speak louder than humans put together if they had mouths and capacity to speak. Besides, my other name is Kiira [Nile], which I have by virtue of being a son of a daughter of the Naghamwena clan. I have to defend the Nile from strangulation by dams”

I soon realised that the struggle to save Bujagali Falls would be protracted and required institutional approach as well.

SBC was a citizen pressure group, which was not registered although it had big names in it such as former MP from Bugweri County called James Mwandha. That visit by Musumba ushered in a new role for me in Uganda and East Africa, and may be the world. It never was the same for me, especially in the area of environment and development. I began to think differently, see things differently, write differently and influence differently from the way I used to. I think since then I have had an imprint on issues of water, energy, environment and development in Uganda, Nile Basin, Africa and the world. But time will judge me more absolutely”.

I decided to approach a Mrs. Byaruhanga, a lecturer in the then Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry at Makerere University who owned an Institute which was training people in environmental education, including the current President of Burundi, Nkurunziza. The name of the institute was “Makerere Institute for Environmental Education and Natural Resources Conservation”. I approached Byaruhanga because operating under the auspices of her institute, was a non-governmental organisation called “National Association of Professional Environmentalists (NAPE) duly registered by the Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO) Board. He wanted to interest the NGO in water issues in general and Bujagali dam process in particular and convince it to join SBC in the struggle to save Bujagali Falls from violent development.

I told Byaruhanga, “Bujagali offers enormous opportunity for environmental activism and education. Let us seize it and make a difference. If we lose it will set in motion the loss of numerous environmental resources associated with it. We shall lose a sustainable ecology in the area. The Basoga will be both deculturised and despiritualiszed”. All this I did in a bank at Makerere University, the then Uganda Commercial Bank – Makerere Branch. Byaruhanga soon detected the importance of the approach I was making to her. She said, “I will withdraw money later. Let me take you to the right person. He is called Frank Muramuzi. He is the President of NAPE. I know he will welcome the idea of working together”.

She led me to a small office where Muramuzi worked as a teacher of adult education. She introduced me to Muramuzi saying, “I want to introduce a new person in your life. This is a colleague, a lecturer at Makerere University and a renowned environmentalist. He is called Oweyegha-Afunaduula. He is a member of Save Bujagali Crusade (SBC) committed to saving Bujagali Falls from destruction by further damming of the Nile. He is proposing that that we work with SBC.I am convinced we should”.

Muramuzi looked excited. He said he had heard of Oweyegha-Afunaduula for many years but had never got a chance to talk to him at close range. Muramuzi then said, “I know him as an action-oriented Secretary-General of the Makerere University Academic Staff Association (MUASA) and a crusader against the spraying of water hyacinth on Lake Victoria. He is a famous man who has made a lot news as an environmental activist. He has had a lot of environmental influence in our country. I am honoured to meet him at a close range”. He extended his hand to greet me  and showed me a seat.

 “I welcome the idea”, said Muramuzi. At that time, Mrs Byaruhanga left. Since then, there was no looking back for Muramuzi and NAPE and in fact eventually I became the secretary of NAPE, a position I held for many years. Martin Musumba and myself became members of the Board of NAPE and SBC became more or less a project of NAPE to ensure effective coordination of the struggle to save Bujagali Falls. All this constituted the right strategy in the environmental struggle to put sense where there was nonsense.

Let us go back to Muramuzi in his small office at Makerere University. Muramuzi told me that there was an urgent need for a meeting between SBC and NAPE to formalise the new relationship. “It can be at Byaruhanga’s institute or at SBC”. A day was fixed. When I briefed Musumba of the

progress made at linking the efforts of NAPE and SBC, he was extremely happy. At that time SBC was run at a flight and forwarding company called Lifeline Ltd, which was Musumba’s company with offices at the National Insurance Company (NIC) in Kampala.

It was decided that the first meeting between NAPE and SBC leaderships to formalise cooperation would be held at Byaruhanga’s institute. When the day for the meeting came, SBC was represented by Martin Musumba and myself. NAPE fielded a big team, which was composed of, among others, Muramuzi himself, Geofrey Kamese, Byaruhanga, Chris Bakuneeta, Fred Balinda, Henry Bazira and many others, reflecting how seriously NAPE was taking the meeting. It was a good meeting. A taskforce, the Anti-Bujagali Dam Task Force, was formed with Martin Musumba as chairman and Frank Muramuzi as vice chairman. Other members were Chris Bakuneeta, Mrs Byaruhanga, Henry Bazira and myself.

Without money, the taskforce set out to sensitise the public of what was, what should be and what was not in the Bujagali dam process through seminars.

It linked up with Edward Balidawa (who later became a member of parliament), a computer expert and producer of Yellow Pages, so that the Save Bujagali Crusade struggle could be globalised. Balidawa developed a website for the struggle.

The taskforce held meetings with the Parliamentary Committees on the Economy and Natural Resources and met delegations from various institutions such as the World Bank, African Development Bank (ADB) and International Finance Corporation (IFC) and even petitioned the World Bank Inspection Panel to investigate the Bujagali dam process. It walked out of a World Bank/IFC meeting when it was suggested that there were no alternatives to large dams towards satisfying Uganda’s power needs. One time it became the first civil society leadership in the history of Uganda to hold a press conference in parliament when the speaker of parliament failed to address it as earlier agreed and to receive books on large dams and ecology written by Patrick McCully.

It made presentations at the World Commission on Dams Consultation in Cairo, Egypt in 1999 and even made campaigns in various world capitals. It was represented at the Second World Water Forum at The Hague, Netherlands, and was a party to the NGO statement rejecting water as an economic good and insisting that the resource is a cultural and social good.

By this time, however, the taskforce had thinned to three people – Martin Musumba, Frank Muramuzi and myself. The others had left without announcing. It was true. When the going gets tough, only the tough get going.

Unfortunately, NAPE/SBC efforts did not get wide support from either the Basoga or Ugandans as a whole. The government of Busoga Territory largely distanced itself from the campaign to save the Bujagali cultural and spiritual site for the Basoga and preferred to support government’s intentions to destroy it for electricity. NAPE, realising that it would not be easy to get the support for the struggle to save Bujagali Falls because of fear and deep people’s ignorance of the negative impacts of large dams, decided that it would be best to build the solidarity of NGOs. The Non-Governmental Environmental NGO Lobby Group (ENGLOG) was formed but many of the NGOs that made up the group were not courageous enough to stand and be counted.

NAPE found that it was left to work more closely with SBC. A memorandum of understanding was reached between NAPE and SBC, which effectively made the latter operate more as a project of NAPE. It is this memorandum of understanding that explains the prolonged success of the struggle to save Bujagali Falls. Unfortunately, Martin Musumba was eventually sucked into Busoga politics when he was appointed by the Kyabazinga of Busoga, Henry Muloki, as his deputy prime minister and later prime minister. We thought this was a plot between the Kyabazinga and President Tibuhaburwa Museveni to weaken the Save Bujagali Crusade struggle. It was definitely a plot from the centre to deplete the crusade of its political and economic muscle. However, Musumba remained a strong crusader and did not relinquish his posts as chairman, Anti-Bujagali Task Force and coordinator, SBC. In fact, he went on to make a trip to Europe with Frank Muramuzi to de-campaign Bujagali dam.

Even before his return, Musumba was scathingly attacked by the government mouthpiece, The New Vision, which called for his sacking as deputy prime minister of Busoga, but he stuck to his guns. Musumba said, “I cannot compromise my principles and integrity because of the post of deputy prime minister, which I did not campaign for. I will continue with my anti-Bujagali campaign. It is a worthwhile cause”.

Instead of sacking Musumba, the Kyabazinga promoted him to the post of prime minister.

NAPE and SBC were convinced that it was still central government’s trick to weaken the struggle further. It was a conspiracy to keep Musumba too busy with Busoga issues to have time and energy for the crusade against Bujagali dam.

But they were wrong. Musumba remained in close touch with NAPE and SBC. He remained coordinator of SBC. He was a regular visitor to NAPE headquarters and graced many workshops organised by NAPE. He met many delegations from abroad on our behalf when they sought audience with him at Bugembe, the seat of power of the Kyabazinga.

Before the Kyabazinga sacked him in October 2007 and replaced him with the pro-Museveni Wasswa-Balunywa, Musumba had just met delegations from the World Bank Inspection Panel and African Development Bank that were establishing grounds for investigating the Bujagali dam. We know he spoke to them using the same language, words and thoughts he has consistently used as a leader of the anti-Bujagali dam crusade. Maybe when these met government officials, they told them what the prime minister’s views were regarding Bujagali and government had no choice but to advise the Kyabazinga to sack Musumba”.

When, I contacted Musumba for comment on what exactly led to his sacking from the post of prime minister (Katukiiro), and whether he felt that he was losing now that he was no longer prime minister of the Kyabazinga, Musumba had this to say:

“When I was appointed prime minister, I was not consulted before. When I was sacked, I was not consulted first to seek my resignation and proper handover. In fact, the new replacement has not consulted me on anything although I have been the longest serving prime minister in Busoga’s history (4 years) with valuable grasp of the issues, problems and challenges confronting the territory. It is true that one who appoints has every right to disappoint. He knows why he appointed you and why he is disappointing you. It is always important that when you are appointed you have to immediately start to prepare for the disappointment because it may come like a thief in the night”.

He went on, “One thing is true. I cannot injure my conscious by accepting to do what my conscious has rejected. I spent 4 years serving the Kyabazinga but I was guided by integrity, steadfastness and my conscious. I did not lose anything by being sacked. All I got from serving the Kyabazinga was a security guard and a gun. He could even have turned his gun onto me like did happen to Indhira Gandhi in India, Sankara in Benin and Sadat in Egypt. The car I travelled in was my car. I slept in my own house and of course it was my energy, and time that were deployed. I can assure you my name went before myself in that appointment. I am now struggling to reintegrate my name with myself”.

Asked to comment on the possibility that his silence as prime minister when he should have supported Bujagali dam, the conversion of Mabira forest into a sugarcane estate, and the recent commissioning of the construction of Bujagali by Museveni in the presence of the Aga Khan, and his failure to come out on the side of the president when, while addressing the Basoga on a local radio station over the Musumba – another Musumba-Mubiru political duel in Kamuli, he was abused by many of his listeners that rang in, could have precipitated his sacking, Musumba responded thus:

“I had not thought of that, but the suggestion rings a bell in my ears. Yes, I did not and still do not support the destruction of Bujagali Falls; I do not support the Bujagali dam; I do not support any tampering with the Mabira ecosystem to replace it with grass or target its species of plants for timber. On the abuse of President Museveni, well it was unfortunate. He had not informed me of his coming to Busoga and that he was doing politics, which could have attracted any reaction from voters. Like many others Basoga I was just listening in to the programme. But yes, my stances could have annoyed the president. They were my stances and an expression of my freedom of choice. Since the president is involved in every little thing in this country, he could have worked behind the scenes to remove me. My replacement with Wasswa-Balunywa is a product of the dynamics of his patronage chain. Maybe it is not by accident. I does not uncritically endorse his choices; I am out and Balunywa who is closer to him and is unlikely to contest his choices is in. Time will judge whether my being what I am is graceful or disgraceful for Busoga in particular and Uganda in general”. When asked why he chose silence at the ceremony whereby Museveni was commissioning Bujagali in the presence of the Aga Khan, and yet he attended the function, Musumba responded:

“As prime minister it would have been improper for me to speak from the Buganda side where the function was taking place. It should have been the prime minister of Buganda to speak”.

I had no doubt whatsoever that Musumba would continue with his action-oriented environmental work in Uganda. “It is quite likely that he will do this under the auspices of NAPE. I would not be surprised if he became a member of the board of directors of NAPE to play a more significant role in charting new policy directions for the environmental work of the organisation. This was important because NAPE had distinguished itself as a unique environmental organisation in the world, which will dare where others fear to and must go on adapting to new problems, issues and challenges and even create new ones if that would increase its influence.

Musumba did not only initiate Save Bujagali Crusade, but he supported our formation of Save Mabira Crusade and was recently one of the founders of the Save our National Parks Crusade (SNAPAC) following government decision to first give an important corridor for the elephants in the Queen Elizabeth National Park to Uganda Peoples Defence Forces’ (UPDF) National Enterprises Corporation (NEC). Unfortunately, Musumba died on January 7 2013 after a long illness that made breathing difficult for him. He was buried at his ancestral home in Nawaka-Kisege village of Luuka, Busoga. Thousands of Ugandans attended the funeral. NAPE was represented by myself and executive director Frank Muramuzi. I also eulogised him on behalf of the deceased’s friends.

I had been a friend of Musumba for over 60 years and together we founded Save Bujagali Crusade. I fondly talked of his association with Musumba and how he played a critical role in his life. I said that our decision to fight Bujagali dam was aimed at saving Busoga’s traditions, spirituality and culture. However, the Minister for Lands, Daudi Migereko who represented government said Musumba and myself were sabotaging power development and do not want Basoga to get electricity.  He promised that government would soon supply me with electricity at Bulawa Nawaka, but to date I have not received the electricity. I use solar energy for lighting and powering my solar water pump to ensure water security in the home.

While addressing the mourners, I said of my age-old friend, Martin Mukasa Musumba, before the mourners:

“We were both sick and any of us would have been the first to go but he has gone before me. I am happy to be alive to say good bye to him. We have lost a very intelligent, wise man, that will be difficult to replace. He had a very high concept of himself and provided leadership whenever he saw his leadership was required.

It was the capacity to influence in a difficult socio-political environment that made NAPE a unique NGO and a household name. The leaders of NAPE thought that it is because of this that the Uganda Government tried to infiltrate it in 2004 by using some of its influential leaders to rebel against and drag management, principally, Frank Muramuzi, the executive director, and myself – the Secretary – to the NGO Board and to High Court, claiming that it was being mismanaged. The rebellious NAPE leaders were led by Balinda Alfred, a NAPE Board Member, who was said to be a member of President Museveni’s Internal Security Organisation (ISO); Jane Musinguzi, who was the then secretary of the board of NAPE; Patricia Kabatabazi and Fred Kayondo. The case was still in court but the presiding judge advised the management of NAPE to continue with its mission.

The greatest challenge facing civil society resistance to violent development such as Bujagali dam is likely to be corruption of development. According to NAPE, Bujagali was nothing but a product of a corrupt and bankrupt socio-political process favouring individualisation of political governance and the proliferation of a new ownership society. “Civil society has reason to be wary of the new ownership society of mainly people with exogenous roots, and the choices it is making in development.

For God and My Country

• A Tell report / By Oweyegha-Afunaduula / Environmental Historian and Conservationist Centre for Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis (CCTAA), Seeta, Mukono, Uganda.

About the Centre for Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis (CCTAA)

The CCTAA was innovated by Hyuha Mukwanason, Oweyegha-Afunaduula and Mahir Balunywa in 2019 to the rising decline in the capacity of graduates in Uganda and beyond to engage in critical thinking and reason coherently besides excellence in academics and academic production. The three scholars were convinced that after academic achievement the world outside the ivory tower needed graduates that can think critically and reason coherently towards making society and the environment better for human gratification. They reasoned between themselves and reached the conclusion that disciplinary education did not only narrow the thinking and reasoning of those exposed to it but restricted the opportunity to excel in critical thinking and reasoning, which are the ultimate aim of education. They were dismayed by the truism that the products of disciplinary education find it difficult to tick outside the boundaries of their disciplines; that when they provide solutions to problems that do not recognise the artificial boundaries between knowledges, their solutions become the new problems. They decided that the answer was a new and different medium of learning and innovating, which they characterised as “The Centre for Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis” (CCTAA). They saw their innovation as a new opportunity to demystify disciplinary education and open up academia and society to new, interlinked knowledge and solutions to complex or wicked problems that disciplinary education cannot solve. To this end, the CCTAA promotes linking of knowledge through the knowledge production systems of Interdisciplinarity, Crossdisciplinarity, Transdisciplinarity and Extradisciplinarity (or non-disciplinarity), which allow for multistakeholder team knowledge production instead of individualised knowledge production, which glorifies individual knowledge production, achievement and glorification.

The issue of alternative analysis towards deconstruction and reconstruction of knowledge is taken seriously at the CCTAA. Most recorded knowledge needs deconstruction and reconstruction within the context of new and different knowledge production systems listed here in. Therefore, instead of disciplinary academics, scholars or professionals, we can begin to produce new ones. We can, for example have professors of interdisciplinarity, crossdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity and extradisciplinarity or non-disciplinarity. Besides, academics, scholars and/or professionals, civil servants, researchers, etc can choose to reorient themselves via the CCTAA and become enhanced learners via the new and different knowledge systems.

It is attitudinal change to thinking, reasoning and practice in knowledge production and use towards solving simple and complex problems! We are all learning beings, and by virtue of the construction of our brains we are supposed to continuously learn and to be good at thinking correctly and reasoning effectively.  As learners who can engage in critical thinking and alternative analysis, we become more open to change and alternatives to development, transformation and progress of society, embrace change, imagine possibilities, learn through the activity of experience, and rejuvenate ourselves and ourselves continuously. The CCTAA is committed to enabling this to happen. It does not abhor resistance but creates opportunities for meaningful resistance that opens opportunities for all.