ASSETS AND PROPERTY OF THE TRADITIONAL RULER OF BUGANDA

Standard

The Traditional Rulers (Restitution of Assets and Properties) Act 1993 (Ch 247) lists the properties below as those assets to be restored to Buganda’s traditional leader.  The “Akenda” and all that it represents in reality is none of those properties.  Just for your information. 
 

The Bulange
The Lubiri at Mengo
The Butikkiro
The Buganda Court Building
Kabaka’s official 350 square miles of land
Namasole’s ten square miles of land
Banalinya’s land
Kabaka’s lake
Former Omulamuzi and Omuwanika’s official residences of Mengo
Land adjacent to Lubiri on which three Buganda Ministerial houses used to stand
All Bassekabaka’s Tombs
Buganda Works Building at Kakeeka
Basiima House
Nalinya’s house at Lubaga
 
Lance Corporal (Rtd) Otto Patrick

UAH forumist

Note:
 
As you are aware, the Buganda Lukiiko at its sitting of 4th October 1960 set out arrangements for Buganda’s independence which was supposed to fall on 31st December 1960.
 
The Lukiiko memorandum sent to the UK government is available at Compatriotto at this link: http://www.scribd.com/doc/22058682/Buganda-Declaration-of-Independence-1960.

About ekitibwakyabuganda

Ba Ssebo ne ba Nyabo, Twebaza Abaganda bonna abulumulirwa Obuganda . Era twebaza ne mikwano gya Buganda gyonna wonna wegiri munsi yonna. Omukutu guno gwatandikibwawo nga e’kigendererwa kwe kuyigiriza abantu ebintu ebikwatagana no’Buganda era nokuwanyisiganya ebilowozo nebanaffe abatali Baganda. Abaganda ne mikwano gya Buganda mukozese omukisa guno muwereze ebirowozo byamwe no’bubaka bwona obunaagasa Abaganda na’baana Buganda berizala mu maaso eyo. Obumu ku bubaka obuwerezebwa ku mukutu guno bugyibwa mukuwanyisiganya ebirowozo okubera kumukutu gwa Ugandan’s at Heart (UAH) Forum ogwatandikibwawo Mwami Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba. Era twebaza muzukulu wa Kintu ne Nnambi ono olw’omulimu gwakoledde bana Uganda bonna abali e’bunayira mungeri yo kubagatta mu byempuliziganya no’kutumbula okukolaganira awamu.

44 responses »

  1. Mr. Otto
    Thanks for the list below. If I can ask again some few questions if you are still willing to help us out:
    Have all those assets listed below been given back to Kabaka and Mengo administration? If not, why the delay?
    Why is Buganda ’s amagombolola not included in the assets to be given back to Buganda ?
    I assume that all assets that belonged to Buganda before the 1966 crisis would still be called Buganda ’s assets, how did the legislators come out with only the list below?

    I’m just seeking for answers, sir, because I don’t know anything. Please let us know if you know something. Brother Ahmed Katerega gave us an answer for the 3rd question above but it was not satisfactory. So I assume that you will be able to fill that gap for us.
    Thank you once again for the list below.

    Abbey.K.Semuwemba

  2. GOMBOLOLA AND SAZA HQS CANNOT BE “EBYAFFE” OR PROPERTY OF THE KABAKA
    Mr Semuwemba,

    1/6 The focus of my contribution to the debate thusfar has been on the haze and falsification surrownding the so-called Akenda, and not whether or not the government of Uganda has upheld the law in regard to the Traditional Rulers (Restitution of Assets and Properties) Act 1993. It is very important that government hands back whatever the law indicates as properties/assets that should be returned; but this does not seem to be the issue at hand.

    2/6 The current debate on Buganda assets does not seem to dwell on implimentation of the law as it is; but forcing its ammendment by stealth, arm-twisting/haranguing/black mail of the managers of the country to ‘return’ even what is not covered by the act. “Akenda” is talked about as though it is part of those 14 items. If it is felt that it should have been on the list then the priority now should be for ammending that law to include the “Akenda” and everything else that those concerned feel should hae been included. Bottomline, have the law ammended. Ask those that propounded and promulgated that law to explain why they decided to couch it that way…there must have been some rationale. Noise, name-calling, insults, Tutsi, Balaalo etc may not achieve much. Some in Buganda seems to think otherwise!

    3/6 I suppose amagombolola/amasaza were not included on the list because they were not part of the assets that were personal to the Kabaka, but rather, they were part of the infrastructure for the political governance of Buganda. As long as political governance of Buganda continues to be a necessity, the authority that undertakes that task is the one that should have entitlement to use that infrastructure. If it is the federal state of Buganda, it will have that entitlement. If Uganda is overrun and occupied by aliens from Mars and they take over the responsibility of managing Buganda politically, it would be silly of Uganda to clamour for those gombololas. If the Martians are thrown out by aliens from Jupiter, the latter will be the ones with the sole entitlement to use that infrastructure. In fact, you should count your blessings over the ‘return’ of 1 and 4 in the act.

    4/6 Up to 1966, the political authority in Buganda was the Kindgom structure under a federal dispensation. From that time, Uganda reverted to unitarism, the Kabaka lost politcal authority over the region and logically, he lost the right to using the infrastructure for the political managment of the province. Gombololas are the counties where people reside. The physical infrastructure called Gombolola Headquarters is used by the politcal authority managing the gombolola. In 1966 the Mengo authority lost the right to manage Buganda politically, so it had to vacate that infrastructure and give way to the authority that was from then on, going to manage the province politically, i.e., the central government. Infrastructure for the political management of Buganda is not the personal property of the Kabaka. It is official property for the people of Buganda.
    5/6 If you want the gombolola buildings back, the first thing to do is to launch a campaign for political authority over Buganda to be returned to the Kabaka, i.e., the reversion to federalism. Asking for gombololas before regaining federal status is putting the cart before the horse….or worse, putting the quart before the hearse (…or being fatally drank…). It is like a dimissed soldier who clamours for regaining his combat helmet, without first launching a campaign for being reinstated in service…i.e., turning logic on its head. The latter appears to me to be the pervasive failing of the pro-Mengo lobby.

    6/6 There is need to urgently rethink that whole notion of “Buganda assets”. It is ill-thought out, it disregards the existence of the Uganda state, it is misguided, infantile and potentially problematic for Buganda herself.

    Lance Corporal (Rtd) Otto Patrick

  3. I thought most of the 9.000 sq miles is vested in the District Land Boards of Buganda districts!?! So this demand is directed at whom? The LC5 Chairpersons of Buganda districts or what? The percentage of the 9,000 that Uganda Land Commission holds is negligible! So who holds the answer here?

    ROGERS MATAKA
    BAK OF UGANDA

  4. I thought most of the 9.000 sq miles is vested in the District Land Boards of Buganda districts!?! So this demand is directed at whom? The LC5 Chairpersons of Buganda districts or what? The percentage of the 9,000 that Uganda Land Commission holds is negligible! So who holds the answer here?

    What is the raw deal baganda hav got under M7? That Baganda dominate in almost all spheres of Uganda’s life? Even in the army, if the Baganda had stuck it out, they
    would still dominate! So what is the raw deal? That the president is not from Buganda?

    If Buganda wants to secede from Uganda, it should come out clearly and say so! All other Ugandans can forge ahead without Buganda! There are some retrogressive forces in Buganda who think the rest of us in Uganda are a useless extra baggage to Buganda. They that the sooner Buganda frees itself of this baggage, the better it will be! But these people are very shortsighted indeed! They have not taken cognizant of recent history and their surroundings! Swaziland and Lesotho are kingdoms with monarchs!

    Swaziland in particular has not the political convulsions that Uganda has had. But in spite of its proximity to South Africa, it has not progressed any further than Uganda which has been convulsed in many problems! Why? The prominent position of the Baganda in all spheres of life in Uganda is not in isolation of the other parts of Uganda! The riches amassed by Baganda have not come from trading with only fellow Baganda but from doing business in the whole Uganda! It seems this pride is really getting to some people’s heads and they think that Buganda can exist successfully on its own and that all the others are just impediments to its development! I have never seen a more flawed kind of reasoning!

    the only person who can talk on behalf of government is the Minister! The local government are also part of government! I assure you, simply threaten the District Land Boards have over the properties they have managed and you will see their fangs! Don’t be deceived by their silence my friend!
    ROGERS MATAKA

  5. Because federo is about geographyica boundaries. Banyoro reject Buganda’s version for this very reason. We have a saying, “Omwigo gurwanirwa nkagutema, tigurwanirwa nkagukoma”. Meaning a walking stick should be rightly claimed by the person who cut it from the forest, the original owner, BUT NOT A PERSON WHO ACCIDENTALLY CAME ACCROSS IT ON THE ROAD AND PICKED IT” If Buganda could go back to the drawing board and redraw the federal states geographycal boundaries, and remove the seven lost counties, and Kooki, from Buganda, then that would be a good begining of the discussions.
    Henry Ford Miirima
    Bunyoro spokes persn

  6. I have always criticised Mengo for not doing anything for it’s people yet they have the means and the man power to do so. This is the reason I don’t support their federo demands, because I clearly see it would benefit a few.

    You can not believe the kabaka has large chucks of land empty and his people sleep in ghettos. Since 1993, I have not seen anything mengo has done apart from a radio station, all the palaces have not even had a new coat of paint, I wonder if families today go to visit these places like when we were going up.

    When people like Kyanjo make noise of picking up guns I wonder whether really that is the way forward, with the wealth Buganda has today, they don’t even need to pick guns. Economically empower your people and see what economic empowerment can do.

    Isaac balamu
    UK

  7. Brother Isaac
    what happened to criticizing people after assessing the situation on the ground? How much income is Mengo generating at the moment to start building rented residential properties for its subjects? What is the annual budget of Mengo as far you are concerned? I remember i wrote about this issue about 3 years ago and at that time i depended my assessment on the 1993-2004 budgets and my conclusions were:

    1. Mengo does not collect enough income to do anything outside keeping the loyal family, kabakaship and the administration happy. The little money they collect can only cater for the day to day running of the kingdom activities. Ever since Obote interfered with the income at Mengo they have been struggling to do anything entrepreneurial as people are demanding.
    2. Mengo has been largely depending on hand outs from rich Baganda mainly those from abroad. Recently the katikiro has been receiving several delegation from Ugandans abroad who contribute something to the kingdom’s treasury in terms of money and scholarships. FDC/ Besigye or the opposition leaders have also been buying certificates every time they visit there.
    3. The central government owes a lot of money to Mengo from renting their buildings but up to now they have not paid up. They are just fooling around
    4. Some assets have not yet been returned back into the hands of Mengo despite the orders from the constitution
    5. e.t.c

    Please i would like you to assess Mengo’s sources of income and expenditure before you jump on Mulindwa’s band wagon to criticise them. These guys have no official sources of income and that is why they are fighting for Federalism

    Byebyo munange

    Abbey

  8. Abbey Ssemuwemba

    Mengo has so much money hanging out there you only need to have nationalism, how many Kings has this King visited? What has he got from them so far? The ideology of Mengo is going to get financing in taxing Ugandans to death is total ignorance of how such institutions run in 2009. And even if Mengo was going to collect those taxes what jobs has it created in Buganda to tax? No it does not need taxes to create the jobs but to use the good will and invite investors. It is what has failed to be common in Buganda.

    Common sense.

    EDWARD MULINDWA
    Bugerere Headquarters

  9. Mr.Mulindwa Edward,
    I repeat Mengo have not got enough money to cater for the interests of Baganda and Ugandans in Buganda. Investment is not a one day affair as you portray it and im sure Mukyala Maggie Kigozi of the Uganda Investment agree with me on this one. It’s not easy to attract big investors in a country where there is always political uncertainity as Uganda, such that even Museveni and his collegues have ended up attracting a few investors for the last 23 years they have been in power. Unfortunately, in the process some investors have pulled the plug on them,for instance, the Saudi Prince who was supposed to build a five star hotel where Shimon demonstration School used to stand, is a gonner. Now Maggie Kigozi has decided to invest some of her energy in local investors and Ugandans in diaspora because foreign investors have been a big disspointment so far. The government has wasted a lot of money on foreign trips attracting foreign investment but most deals attracted have so far either flopped or not lived to their expectations, and i think the current ambassador of Uganda in Dubai, Ssemakula Kiwanuka , agrees with me too.

    On the otherhand, Buganda have tried to do with the little they have got, obviously with the help of good samaritans who keep buying certificates all the time and donating to the kingdom. CBS was started with the help of rich Baganda guys like Dr.Sulaiman Kiggundu, Ssebana Kizito, Kaddu Kiberu and others……… because Mengo do not have enough money. The problem now is that rich Baganda are also gonna start being afraid of openly financing Mengo activities because of the way president Museveni has distabilised the CBSfm and those associated with it by temporarily closing it. This same fear set in when Greenland Bank was closed, and as a result several business men decided to start calendestinely supporting NRMO financially, not out of choice but as a survival mechanism.

    Buganda has got one of the best brains at Mengo and if they didn’t they would not have survived for such a long time since 1993 without serious money coming in. The brains at Mengo have realised that land is gonna be the biggest wealth anybody could have in Uganda in the next 15 years. This is why they are demanding for mailo akenda(9000 sq miles of land) which were taken away from Buganda government after the abolition of the 1962 constitution by Obote. The central government has never returned this land back to Buganda despite the restoration of kingdoms in 1993. It were only the 350 sq miles that belonged to the Kabaka of Buganda that were returned. Other properties like Amasaza or where the current Gombololas are located , have also not been returned.

    If Buganda can manage to rescue whatever they can from the mailo Akenda then this will go down as one of the biggest achievements of the brains at Mengo because Land is such a valuable wealth globally. When one has got land, then attracting investors becomes easy provided other factors remain constant. Again, the brains at Mengo have realised that if the recently passed land bill of 2007 becomes law, the mailo akenda they are fighting for may not beneffit them as much as they wanted to. This is because land with a lot of tenants who have got rights is not as valuable as land with tenants on the mercy of landlords. Mr.Otto Patrick was also supporting Mengo’s opposition to the land bill for this same reason when one reads the land document he sent to the Observer newspaper and UAH forum two years ago.

    One thing for sure: Mengo will create more jobs than it is creating now if Uganda becomes a federal state. If they don’t then they will have a bigger problem of you and me than the one they have got now. The current president of Uganda does not simply want federo because he does not want to create indepedent power centres in the country. I still think he is postponding the inevitable because the way i see things now, Buganda and Kabaka are already another political and cultural power centre without money. Terrorists organisations cannot survive without money, media and membership; UAH forum cannot survive without membership; Mengo cannot survive without money, media and Kabakaship but they have managed to survive for a long time with only Kabakaship.

    Byebyo munange

    Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba

  10. Abbey

    Investment is not a short-term goal we all know that but there must be a plan, for a person like you who live here in England you would not be the one fronting such arguments. Do you want to tell me when you are to build a house you do not buy land first, dig the foundation, build to the slab, put on the roof, close the house and furnish it.

    In simple terms I’m saying you must have a plan in place, today we hear about crossrail here in UK, do you know when that was first thought of?

    What plan is in place at Mengo, tell us, for all these years what have they accomplished apart from a radio station? Do you know how long Samson Kiseeka was vice president for before he built a hospital he left functioning?

    Do you know that Obote left all those plans of roads in place, for example of the northern bypass and one to have a dual carriageway from Busia to Katona.

    You talk of the mailo akenda, can you tell us where that land is anyway which obstacting all the plans mengo have is. Do you want to say Buganda is mailo akenda and without it Buganda is non existent.

    How much land is vacate now and is owned by the kabaka. Have you seen the land below Lubowa hill, next to Micthell’s land, do you know the owner and how much that land is worth?

    Okay you have praised Kigundu and correctly so, but how long did it take for him to build his Greenland Empire, do you know one day he sat in his office and said he would have Greenland Towers. This man was a muganda, do you know there are many times he tried to engage mengo in business and there refused, do you know also that he spent part of his money on the radio station which towards the end of his life he could not even come near.

    I know you know the kabaka has his company of which his son is a shareholder and this deals in real estate, has this company done anything in Buganda’s name.

    Abbey do not become like some of these NRM guys who defend the indefensible.

    The land today Buganda has is money my friend and there is no more money required to build an empire.

    Look at Jordon, UAE, Qutar and others I may not know, how have those people developed and provided for their masses

    Do not defend those people; they are the cause of the suffering of the people of Buganda.

    I can sit here and produce an investment model for Buganda in less than a day how come those guys can not do anything for the people of Buganda.

    When I hear you defending them, Abbey I lose words for you. Do you know how much money that walusimbi was paid for renovating State house Entebbe, by the way my friend Mr Musisi is a loyalist of the kabakaship, but he sees this, even you you see it naye I think there some one you want to please.

    For me challenge me to produce an investment model and I will produce one, and I will show you how those guys are just warming chairs and waiting for free things from state house, there want revenue collections in Buganda, but what is there for them to show us for the money the get from land today.

    Happy New Abbey
    ISAAC BALAMU

  11. Brother Abbey Ssemuwemba, but has Buganda Land Board accounted for the money it collects? When Muliika asked for accountability,he was sacked! l disagree with Muliika polotically but l think on that one, he had a point.
    AHMED KATEREGA
    NEWVISION

  12. In Kabaka Mutebi’s 2009 christmas message, he acknowledges that 2009 has been such a very difficult year and i agree with him but it has also been a year which presents the opposition in Uganda with the biggest opportunity to show Ugandans what they are made of. Buganda is clearly no longer a friend of Museveni and NRM but the opposition have not taken so much advanatge of this apart from Dr.Besigye and FDC. The FDC delegation led by Salam Musumba recently paid their respects to the Katikiro before Besigye started his Buganda tour which i thought was a good gesture of ‘TULI WANU NAMWE'(we are together in this”).

    The kabaka is clearly still sadened by the loss of lives that happened on 11th September and his message is a reminder to those whose relatives died on this day that Buganda is feeling their pain. Those that were killed were of different religions since bullets never discriminate when they start flying around. Yes, he specifically congratulates christians for reaching this day because in all fairness, x-mas is supposed to be a religious day. Other people particulaly here in the west hijacked this day to serve as a family reunion where everybody get to have a share of the big turkey.

    Courage and strength

    His most important statement was: ‘…….we wish all our people a peaceful ending of the year 2009 and entering the New Year with great courage and strength.” Those with courage will go through 2010 and 2011 sucessfully. This is the time for people to show their intellectual muscles. Those with courage will be willing to take Museveni heads on. Those with courage will be willing to face anything thrown at them in 2010 to defend the things they believe in.

    Overall, i think the Kabaka x-mass message was very bold. He does not sound like a mere traditional leader. He is in the thick of politics right now. His message is very strong and im sure that NRM political experts are witnessing a man ready to take them on come 2010. By the way, did anyone watch the youtube message on the following link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IChYU7eozDg where the Kabaka is not smiling at all because he has got no reason to smile. I told WBK one time that people in the thick of things like Besigye and Kabaka have got no reason to sound nicely anymore when addressing people. They all thought that Besigye was just angry for personal reasons but i couldn’t stop admiring the Kabaka in this particular video clip. I like the part in the video where he said that ‘It’s difficult to take away a thing that rightly belongs to somebody”, obviusly referring to Buganda’s remaining Ebyaffe.

    Byebyo ebyange

    Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba

  13. Mw. Otto,

    You are advancing for the umpteenth time these old and tired so-called calculations of what YOU think should be the 9,000 square miles. These are your views for what they are worth and whatever veneer of authenticity you attempt to give them, and you are entitled to them. What is claimed back is 9,000 as stated, whether actual or figurative, that is immaterial, just hand land back – a thief cannot afford to negotiate with the lawful owner. All that needs to be done is return that land, is that too much to ask? If I have identified you as the thief who walked away with my pocket money containing an established $900, you do not continue to hang onto it and go about explaining to that it actually contained less than that. You in the first place had no business taking property that doesn’t belong to you, because it is an offence. And it is sheer arrogance and unlawful to continue to hang on to it. Your position is untenable.

    MB
    Auckland

  14. Mr Musisi,

    Yes indeed, I refer to the opium of the dispossessed. It is good that you put that opium in figures: 9,000 sq miles, that you always claim was stolen by government. So, about 8,000 sq miles given to 1,000 notables with the massive displacement of many bataka was no theft!

    So, to more-or-less sing “sirikawo baby” to the Bakopi Bazukulu who had to unearth the bones of their dear ones to give way to the new lords, Mmengo pushes a pacifier into the mouths of the expropriated. The pacifier, the dummy is the Akenda: the government has it!

    Facts:

    1. The 9,000 sq miles alloted to government for public use was on the assumption that Buganda had land to the tune of 19,600 sq miles. Buganda was surveyed and found to be 16,138 sq miles (9.689 in Mmengo; 3,781 in Masaka and 2,668 in Mubende). The 1900 agreement stated that, any shortfall upon survey of Buganda would be deducted from the public 9,000 sq miles. Therefore, right from go, that land was actually 5,538 Sq miles. Any talk of 9,000 sq miles is, to use your word, idiotic.

    2. As you know, 667 sq miles of the 5,538 sq miles (NOT 9,000) was in Buyaga and Bugangaizi. The 1964 referendum returned that land to Bunyoro control. It is, to use your word, idiotic for any body to hope that land was stolen by government from Buganda. Completely idiotic. Do we want to reverse the results of the referendum? Anyhow, what was left then was 4,871 sq miles.

    3. Of the 4,871 sq miles, 644 sq miles went into the Buruli, Masaka, Singo ranching Scheme leaving 4,227 Square miles.

    4. That land remains under the control of the public political authority which, up to 1962 was the colonial government, hence the reference to Crown Land. In 1962, the public political authority in Buganda was the federal state of Buganda, so it controlled that land. In 1966 Uganda ceased to be semi-federal so all public land was reverted to central authorities. How does a change in constitution amount to theft of 9,000 sq miles of land, which in fact did not even exist in the first place? If you want Buganda to control the land, why don’t you secede and become an independnet state or launch a campaign for reinstating your federal status?

    Anyhow, isn’t it idiotic to insistently refer to 9,000 sq miles when what existed in the first place was 5,538 sq miles? Isn’t it even more idiotic to refer to the same 9,000 when what is actually at stake is 4,227 sq miles?

    Lance Corporal (Rtd) Otto Patrick

  15. Mw. Otto,

    You write: “You see, that is why I refer to the opium of the dispossessed.”

    Who is dispossessed? And if anyone is dispossessed on account of the theft of the 9,000, isn’t therefore truistic for Mengo as a duty to try to retrieve this land? You see, Buganda is highly centralized even in the present difficult circumstances, not anarchic, that it recognises its central authority. If that suprises you, which it appears to be, then blame the culture and long years of politico-adminstrative maturity and order.

    You write further: “In light of the Basudde/Kasa letter which you have already seen, isn’t any reference to “Ssabataka” in modern times clearly preposterous?”

    I hope I am not telling you news that throughout Buganda history, there have been dissenters, renegades and freedom to take individual or collective position with regard to contentious issues. It would appear that the Basudde letter is penned by a group of Bataka who were so inclined, nothing more than that, in my view. In any case, we can’t really dwell on a 1921 letter by a group of Bataka and continue to accord it undue importance in 2009. The demands of 2009 are clear and know. Yours is a red herring. Positions change and shift – just a couple of years ago, positions shifted from Regional Tier to Federo, and may even shift further to secession. Does that again surprise you?

    Now to the Entebbe oligarchy. You write: “But you are now painting the picture of an Entebbe oligarchy.”

    Yes I am and its is a realistic picture, do you suggest otherwise?

    MB
    Auckland

  16. Otto, there is no idiocy or idiosyncraticism for that matter in belonging to the potato shapped geographical enclosure called Buganda. Political pingpong and legal expediency not withstanding, all the land in this potato shaped enclosure… not just the 9000 boogey boomerang square miles … makes us not only proud to belong but entitled to be considered first in accessing its use for our personal wellbeing as Baganda.
    I do not care for your skirt-shaped geographical turf, or the Karamajong’s bum shaped expanse. Just look at the prick-shaped Busoga area and see what people are ready to live and die for in the name of belonging. Not only the 9000 square miles exist and belong to the Baganda, but so do the 11 million squatters that have acquired a temporary tenure on this land been instantly converted into the unwilling subjects of Ssaabasajja Kabaka Mufumbisagganda Nnantabalirabatyabi.
    I am just curious, except for the really really poor, how many of the so called landed gentry (squatters if you ask me, Sserwajja Okwota if you ask NJ) ever get burried in their vast estates???? You guessed right, we ride with them all the way and dump them off rightly where they belong… in the lands of their fathers and fore fathers, living the fertile land of the Baganda untainted by (for want of a better word) these shameless land grabbers. Just wait to see what they are going to do to the land in Bunyoro… they will take it away by the truck loads, the spoon loads until all there is to show is a yawning hole in the ground.
    Ssalongo Ssennoga
    Kampala

  17. Ssalongo,
    When i was in Uganda in May this year, i listened to a gentleman from Mengo who described for us in details where the 9000 sq miles are. It was a long document and it was more detailed than anything i have read on this forum. Unfortunately, i failed to get time to visit Bulange to see if i can get some of these documents.

    Please i ask those in Uganda to go to Mengo and get us these documents. The only reason why Mr. Otto is winning this debate is because he has got his BWINO and his opponents have only got mere words. With the BWINO i heard on CBSfm, im sure if availed here, even Mr.Otto will start fighting for Buganda’s Mailo 9000.

    Nze Bwendaba

    Abbey.K.S

  18. Mr Semuwemba,

    I imagine the document you are referring to is the statement by the Mmengo “Attorney General”, Apollo Makubuya. Just in case you want a copy of that document, I am pasting it below.

    I found the document particularly funny especially in the manner that the authors conflate “land” with “territory”. There is that comical quote by Mr Makubuya to the effect that “Buganda’s land is ancient and it is owned by the Baganda”: comical indeed. His “ancient” also refers to lands annexed from Bunyoro after 1896 where most of the 4,227 sq miles (Akeenda!) is situated.

    Anyhow, read through and we pick up from there.

    Lance Corporal (Rtd) Otto Patrick

    “THE SAME HEAT THAT MELTS THE BUTTER HARDENS THE EGG”
    =============================================================

    A REBUTTAL OF THE MINISTERIAL STATEMENT TO PARLIAMENT ON THE 9,000 SQUARE MILES OF LAND IN BUGANDA [MAILO AKEENDA] DELIVERED BY HON. DR. E. KHIDDU-MAKUBUYA, M.P., ATTORNEY GENERAL/MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS.

    1. Governments Position on Buganda’s 9000 Sq Miles:

    On 11th March 2008 the Hon. Attorney General of Uganda made a Statement to Parliament in answer to questions raised by the Hon. B Kamya on the status of Buganda’s 9,000 sq. miles of land. The AG’s statement may be summarised as follows;

    (i) The 9,000 sq miles of land derive their origin in the 1900 Buganda Agreement. This agreement amongst other matters, divided up the land in Buganda among various interests. The 9,000 sq miles were designated as Crown Land vested in H M the Queen of Great Britain.

    (ii) Land in Buganda was surveyed in 1936 and it was found to be 16,138 sq. miles excluding water and swamps. Open water was 8,250 sq. miles and the swamps were 1714 sq. miles. [This means that the total area of Buganda was 26,120 sq. miles and not 19,600 sq. miles as was estimated in 1900] . As of 1962 of the 16,138 sq. Miles was less by 9005 sq. miles [allocated to the Kabaka, members of the royal family, the three regents, Mbogo, Kamuswaga, the twenty Ssaza chiefs and notables] it was also less by central forests reserves 446 Sq. miles; less by local forest reserves 281 Sq. miles; less by 21 sq miles being national parks, game reserves and animal sanctuaries; less by 76 sq. Miles for gazetted townships; less by 360 sq. miles alienated to non Africans. This totalled 10,198 sq. miles. The unalienated land (Crown Land) was 5,949 sq miles. When Buyaga and Bugangaizi reverted to Bunyoro, Crown Land in Buganda was further reduced by 667 Sq miles leaving a balance of 5,282 sq. miles.

    When Ranching schemes were established in Buruli, Masaka and Singo, crown land was further reduced by 644 Square miles leaving a balance of 4,614 sq. miles.

    Since 1962, various controlling authorities have alienated land to individuals and companies in form of leaseholds and free holds – the Attorney General did not elaborate to whom and how much land has been alienated in this way and what remains. If the AG’s statement were to be correct then what is left of the public land is far less than 4,614 sq. miles.

    (iii) In 1962 the Crown Land Ordinance vested all Crown Land in Buganda in Buganda Land Board.

    (iv) The 1967 Constitution, that abolished Kingdoms, vested all official estates and all land that was vested in the Buganda Land Board in the Uganda Land Commission.

    (v) The 1975 Land Reform Decree declared that all land in Uganda was public land.

    (vi) The 1995 Constitution provided that that all land belonged to the citizens of Uganda under four tenure systems namely customary, freehold, mailo and leasehold. The aspect of public land in Uganda disappeared at this point in time!

    (vii) The 1995 Constitution created District Land Boards whose functions include holding and allocating land in districts which is not owned by any person or authority – therefore according to the AG, former Crown Land or public land, land which is not owned by any person or authority is now vested in the District Land Boards. Also the former public land is now owned by the people who are customarily living on it.

    (viii) District Land Boards can facilitate people customarily living on former public land to acquire certificates of customary ownership or free hold titles. This is on going. [ According to a Commissioner in the Ministry of lands this is done for a paltry 22,000/=]

    (ix) On the 1,500 sq. miles the AG states that these are managed by the Government and Local Government under S. 45 (10 of the Land Act …. for the common good of the people of Uganda.

    (x) The practical route to revesting the 9,000 Sq miles of land in Buganda is through operationalisation of Regional Governments and the Regional Land Board.

    (xi) On the return of Buganda’s confiscated assets under the 1993 Traditional Rulers (Restitution of Properties ) Act, the AG points out that negations for the return of these assets are on-going and he challenged Hon. Betty Kamya to produce evidence that Government is dragging its feet on this matter!

    In sum, the AG is telling Buganda that the 9,000 sq miles is more-or-less no more. By 1962, only 4,614 Sq miles of land were left. Today this land has been further reduced by give-aways by the Government to company’s and individuals that have bought it from the districts, however that if any remains then it belongs to the people who customarily living on it. This has been legalised by the 1995 Constitution that abolished the notion of public land in Uganda. Leaving such land to be land owned by no body and giving Districts powers to alienate that land as it pleases. But, he advises, if Buganda is interested in having a right of the residue of that land then it should accept the regional government under he Constitution.

    The Attorney General’s statement was followed by the now famous remarks of Lt Gen. Tinyefunza in Parliament that “ the current talk of the Mengo Clique of Buganda being only for Baganda and the mailo akeenda of being ettakka lyaffe lya Buganda. It is rubbish and nonsense and it must stop” also that “in 1964, ranching schemes were created in areas of Kabula, Mawogola and Singo and people were displaced. Therefore what the Movement Government is trying to do is to right the wrongs which have been perpetuated by bankrupt post independence governments” . the LT Gen concluded his submission thus “ the land question will not derail this country; that is thuggery will not be allowed to continue and the security services are looking and will deal with them”.

    Need-less to say, the Governments’ statement on the status of the 9,000 Sq miles is alarming, but also begs a million questions! These include –

    (i) Given that Buganda’s communal land was illegally confiscated by the state in 1962 can the Government explain to the rightful owners i.e the people of Buganda – how it has alienated this land including on a free hold basis?

    (ii) Can the Government explain how it converted former public land into – either customary land and /or private free hold land without the consent of the people concerned or without due compensation?

    (iii) If former public land is now customary land how then can the districts be able to alienate the same land on the basis that it does not belong to any body under Art. 241 of the Constitution? Also, what is the legal basis for the districts leasing or issuing free hold titles on customary land??

    (iv) What is the relevancy, if any, of the “on going negotiations” for the return of all assets confiscated by Obote regime under the Traditional Rulers (Restitution of Properties ) Act – which undertook to return all such assets – if in fact they are already.

    (v) Assuming Buganda accepted the Regional Government, how will it be able to own and/or control land which is now customary land owned by the people customarily living on it?

    (vi) What is the status of the people who are staying on Buganda’s customary land who migrated or have been resettled on this land – does it belong to them and can they be said to be customarily living on the said land??

    2. The Facts on the 9,000 Sq. Miles:

    As we search answers to the above questions from the AG, we wish to re affirm our understanding on the status of the land in issue. In our considered opinion, the following constitute the UNDENIABLE FACTS about Buganda’s Communal Land popularly referred to as the 9,000 square miles or Mailo Akeenda:

    Fact 1: Before 1900 all land in Buganda belonged to the Baganda and was administered by the Kabaka, assisted by the Bataka and the Bakungu, Batongole in accordance with the customs, traditions and practices (customary law) of the Baganda.

    Fact 2: In 1897 the British ousted Kabaka Mwanga II, as Kabaka of Buganda because he was resisting their imperialist efforts and installed his infant son Kabaka Daudi Chwa II with three Regents, Apollo Kaggwa, Stansilus Mugwanya and Zakaria Kizito. In 1900 the British Crown, represented by Her Majesty’s Special Commissioner, Sir Henry Hamilton Johnston, coerced the Kingdom of Buganda, represented by the said Regents and some Chiefs, into the 1900 Buganda Agreement.

    Fact 3: Under the said Agreement, the British Crown took control of: 1,500 square miles of forests; 9,000 square miles of waste and uncultivated land; and 50 square miles taken up in Kampala, Entebbe, Masaka and elsewhere for Government stations (This land totalling 10,550 square miles came to be known as “Crown Land”). These figures were approximations based on an estimation of Buganda’s land mass, inclusive of Buyaga, Bugangazi and swamps, at 19,600 square miles.

    Fact 4: No where in the 1900 Agreement did the British Crown buy or the Kingdom of Buganda sell any land. Therefore whilst clause 15 of the Agreement spoke of one thousand chiefs and land owners “receiving the estates” i.e. ultimate ownership in perpetuity of the 8,000 square miles (which came to be known as Mailo Land) clauses 15 and 18 of the same agreement only talk about “vesting” or “cession” of “the right to control” over the Crown Land.

    Fact 5: In the premises the British Crown took control of the Crown Land NOT as beneficial owner but to hold it in trust for the use and the benefit of the Baganda, born and yet to be born, who had not benefited from grants of private Mailo Estates[1]. This was Buganda’s surviving communal land.

    Fact 6: Under the Buganda Agreement of 1961, the freehold of all Crown Land in Buganda actually occupied by the Uganda Government for its own purposes was vested in the Uganda Land Commission to hold on behalf of the Uganda Government for the benefit of all of the people of Uganda[2]. Further the agreement vested the freehold of Crown Land in Buganda occupied by the East African Common Services Organisation, the Uganda Electricity Board, the University College of East Africa (Makerere), the Kampala and District Water Board and the Empire Cotton Growing Association in those respective organisations but only for so long as the land was used for the purposes of those organisations[3].

    Fact 7: Other than those two minor exceptions where ownership of Crown Land was actually vested in the Central Government and some parastatal organisations, all Crown Land in Buganda was agreed to be vested in the Buganda Land Board which was enjoined to “hold such land in the name of the Kabaka on behalf of and for the benefit of the people of Buganda”[4]. .

    Fact 8: Pursuant to Article 19 of the Buganda Agreement 1961, on the 1st March 962, Governor W.F. Coutts assented to the Public Lands Ordinance No. 22 of 1962 under which the freehold of all Crown Lands in Buganda, which had not been demised by way of lease under the Crown Lands Ordinance or which were not occupied by the Government of Uganda for public purposes at that time was vested in the Buganda Land Board[5]. It is important to note that the functions of the Buganda Land Board were expressed in the Ordinance to be “on behalf of the Kabaka and for the benefit of the people of Buganda, to hold and manage any land or estate or interest in land which is vested in it under the provisions of this Ordinance or may after the commencement of this Ordinance be purchased or otherwise acquired by the Kabaka’s Government”[6]. In time this was also reflected in the 1962 Constitution wherein land was effectively provided that the Buganda Land Board would be appointed by the Kabaka[7] and hold land for the benefit of the people hold land for the people of the Kingdom of Buganda[8].

    Fact 9: It is therefore very clear from Facts 7 and 8 above that at the time of Independence it was recognised that the radical title to all of the former Crown Land in Buganda vested in the Kabaka of Buganda for the benefit of the people of Buganda and that the departing British intended to and actually did return all Crown Land in Buganda to its rightful owners: the Kabaka of Buganda for the benefit of the people of Buganda. The Buganda Land Board was only a holding and management device established for the Kabaka and the people of Buganda.

    Fact 10: After the violent abrogation of the Constitution of Uganda 1962 in 1966 the Government of Uganda stole or expropriated the former Crown Land in Buganda and other land including the 1500 Sq. miles, the 160 Sq. miles Masaaza headquarters and all Buganda’s official estates and vested it in the Uganda Land Commission to purportedly hold for the benefit of the people of Uganda.

    Fact 11: The Government of Uganda HAS NEVER returned a single square inch of the former Crown Land, irrespective of its actual size, to the Kabaka of Buganda to hold, whether by himself or through any other organ under his control, for the benefit of the people of Buganda.

    Fact 12: The Uganda Land Commission, District Land Boards and any Regional Land Board established under the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 CANNOT legally hold on to the former Crown Land in Buganda because they do not have the constitutional powers so to do. The Uganda Land Commission is only empowered to “hold or manage any land in Uganda vested in or acquired by the Government of Uganda in accordance with the provisions of the 1995 Constitution[9]”. Clearly the former Crown Land in Buganda was not acquired by or vested in the Government of Uganda in accordance with the provisions of the 1995 Constitution. It was acquired by force of arms in 1966! District Land Boards are only empowered to “hold and allocate land in the district which is not owned by any person or authority[10]”. But as clearly shown in Facts 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 above the former Crown Land in Buganda has an owner – the Kabaka of Buganda for the benefit of the people of Buganda. So even though it was violently expropriated by the Government of Uganda in 1966, it cannot be said to have had no owner in 1995 because the institution of the Kabaka of Buganda and the people of Buganda existed in 1995 and still exist today! Lastly, a regional land board if ever established in respect of Buganda, will only have the power to co-ordinate and monitor land use as well as plan land use in Buganda[11]. Clearly this cannot be stretched to include holding or managing of land.

    Fact 13: Whilst the Uganda Land Commission, District Land Boards and regional land boards lack constitutional power to hold on to the former Crown Land in Buganda, the institution of the Kabaka of Buganda is constitutionally recognised as a corporation sole with the capacity to “hold assets and properties in trust for itself and the people of Buganda[12]”. In fact the institution of the Kabaka of Buganda, which is the personification of the culture, customs, traditions, wishes and aspirations of the Baganda, is the only institution constitutionally empowered to hold property in trust for the people of Buganda. District Land Boards and any regional land board established under Article 178 of the Constitution are merely devolved organs of the Central Government and therefore cannot be said to represent or embody the culture, norms and aspirations of the people of Buganda.

    Before turning to the controversial issue of the actual size and location of the former Crown Land in Buganda, it is fair to say that the 13 facts stated above can be succinctly summarised in the chorus of the popular Kiganda song: “Ettaka lya Buganda lya dda! Ettaka lirikko nnanyini lyo!” (Buganda’s land is ancient and it is owned by the Baganda). No amount of sophistry and dissembling will ever get us way from that simple fact.

    The actual size and location of the 9,000 sq. miles of land.

    Regarding the size of the former Crown Land in Buganda it is accepted that the figure of 9,000 square miles was based on Sir Henry Hamilton Johnston’s estimation of Buganda consisting of 19,600 square miles. It is also correct that a survey conducted between 1913 and 1936 placed the total area of the Kingdom of Buganda at 16,138 square miles excluding swamps and open water, with swamps taking 1,714 square miles and open water 8,250 square miles. However, that is where the consensus on this matter ends.

    According to the Attorney General, after the survey of 1913 to 1936, there was only 5,949 square miles of unalienated Crown Land in Buganda, including Buyaga and Bugangazi. He stated, without giving any sources, that as of December 1962, a further 360 square miles had been alienated to non-Africans leaving 5,949 square miles inclusive of Buyaga and Bugangaizi and that when Buyaga and Bugangaizi were restored to the Kingdom of Bunyoro the size was reduced to 5,282 square miles (meaning that there were 667 square miles of former Crown Land in Buyaga and Bugangaizi). With much confidence, the Attorney General further asserted that the 5,282 square miles were reduced by 644 square miles upon the establishment of the Masaka, Ssingo and Buruli Ranching Schemes and ominously concluded with a statement that “Since 1962 various controlling Authorities have alienated this land to individuals and companies in form of leaseholds and freeholds.” In short the Attorney General was pleased to say that there may be nothing left of the original 9,000 square miles.

    However the Attorney General’s statement was either under researched, intended to confuse and disappoint the Baganda or both. In light of the fact that all of the documentary evidence regarding this land is with the Government, the Attorney General should look into the following issues and come back with a concrete and believable explanation:

    (i) The Attorney General talks of the former Crown Land being reduced by “alienation”. However he does not make it clear by whom or to whom this land was alienated and on what basis. Alienation by way of leases cannot be taken to mean that the land has been permanently lost to its owners the, the Kabaka of Buganda on trust or for the benefit of the people of Buganda. We need to know, with precise figures, to whom and by whom the various chunks of land were alienated and on what basis.

    (ii) According to the authors of a book entitled A History of Uganda Land and Surveys the settlement survey of 1913 to 1936 ascertained that the former Crown Land in Buganda actually comprised of 8,307 square miles inclusive of Buyaga and Bugangaizi, and was reduced to 6,804 square miles with the return of the said counties to the Kingdom of Bunyoro[13]. These figures are rendered suspect because they suggest that there were 1,503 square miles of former Crown Land in Buyaga and Bugangaizi, yet according to the Uganda Land Commission the actual land mass of Buyaga and Bugangaizi is about 1,631.8 square miles of which 964.8 square miles is private Mailo Land, leaving 667 square miles of former Crown Land[14]. But be that as it may, if you make an adjustment for the clearly wrong Buyaga and Bugangaizi figures, you would be left with 6,137 square miles of former Crown Land in Buganda. However, the task of settling the correct figures is made more complicated by the fact that in 1970, the Electoral Commission (comprising of Ateker Ejalu – Chairman, Bidandi Ssali, Eric Kyoya and Akena p’Ojok with the assistance of I.K. Kabanda – Government Statistician, G.W. Bakibinga – Commissioner Lands and Surveys and Jjagwe – Land Office Entebbe) issued detailed maps and tables stating Buganda’s land mass, excluding Buyaga and Bugangaizi to be 50,075 square kilometres or 19,334.065 square miles. So in 1970, at a time when the Central Government was openly hostile to Buganda and had every reason to underplay its land mass, a key Government organ was suggesting that Buganda’s size was actually bigger than the figures given in the settlement survey of 1913 to 1936 and we must assume that surveying and mapping technology had improved between 1936 and 1970. We need to know the precise land mass of Buganda using modern and the most up-to-date surveying and mapping technology. From this mass we should subtract the definite area of land held under private, Kabakaship and Official. Mailo to get the true area of the former Crown Land, which constitutes the communal land of the Baganda. Until such time all figures are and will always be suspect and the Baganda will be justified in sticking with use of the upper estimate of 9,000 square miles as a description of their expropriated communal land.

    (iii) There must be records indicating the specific land, in terms of location and area, that was transferred from the British Crown to the Buganda Land Board in 1962. Further there must also be records indicating the specific land, in terms of location and area, that was expropriated by the Government of Uganda in 1966 and vested in the Uganda Land Commission. Furthermore, there must be records indicating the specific land, in terms of location and area, that has been devolved by the Uganda Land Commission to various District Land Board’s across Buganda. Lastly, there must be records showing the all dealings in land in Buganda by the Uganda Land Commission and the various District Land Boards. All of these records are in the hands of the Government of Uganda. The Government of Uganda should give a full account of the dealing in the former Crown Land in Buganda. We must be shown the documents that show the location and the size of the land that was vested in the Buganda Land Board in 1962. We must be shown the documents that show the location and size of the land that was grabbed by the Uganda Land Commission from the Buganda Land Board in 1966. We must have a full blow-by-blow account of all of the dealings that have taken place on that land since it was taken over by the Uganda land Commission in 1966, up to and including all dealings after the land management was devolved to District Land Boards.

    So whilst there is no dispute about the fact that the original label of 9,000 square miles of Mailo Akeenda was based on an estimate, there is no reliable figure for the actual size of the former Crown Land in Buganda, which comprises the communal land of the Baganda. Different figures have been given at different times by the Government, which stands to gain from its own wrongful violent expropriation of this land. It must also be stated, that even if it is found to have been 1 square inch in 1900 – that square inch belongs to the Kabaka in trust for the people of Buganda. Ettaka lirikko nnanyini lyo! It will certainly be no defence to the Government to say that it has given away or alienated the land since violently expropriating it in 1966 in the same way as the alienation of the properties expropriated from the Asians by the Government in 1972 did not defeat the ownership of the same by the Asians.

    Special Appeal to the Peoples of Uganda : At this juncture it is necessary to make a special appeal to the Peoples of the indigenous communities that live in and make up this country called Uganda. In seeking to reclaim what is rightfully theirs, the Baganda are not seeking some kind of special status or hegemony over the other Peoples of Uganda. The Baganda like all the other Peoples of Uganda cherish and value their land. The land that we are talking about was and still is the communal land of the Baganda. It was the land which was to be used for the benefit of the people of Buganda, born and yet to be born. Where they were not in actual physical occupation or user of it, the fruits from it were supposed to benefit the Baganda. All the Peoples of Uganda have land which in one way or another they can call their own. However, if the Government has its way with Buganda’s communal land, all the Peoples of Uganda MUST STAND WARNED!

    The Government’s claims that Baganda’s communal land can be given away on a freehold basis to all and sundry for a measly Ug. Shs. 22,000/= and that this applies to all communal land held on customary tenure in the rest of Uganda. Today it looks as if the Government is only targeting Buganda’s land. But if it has its way then no communal land held under customary tenure will be safe. People will come “claiming an interest” in that communal land and under the new section 32B of the Land Act, if the (Land Amendment) Bill is passed they will be impossible to evict. Then those very people will go to the District Land Boards or the Uganda Land Commission with Ug. Shs. 22,000/= and get freehold certificates of title to that land. Then having obtained the freehold title to the communal land for free, they will quickly sell it to big investors from outside for peanuts. Nobody will be able to complain or if they complain they will not be entitled to any help because the Government will simply point to the precedent of Buganda!!

    This is nothing short of NATIONALISATION OF COMMUNAL LAND BY THE BACK DOOR or LAND GRABBING. Today it is the Baganda because that is the community that is easy to hate and because their land was already expropriated. But if Government succeeds, tomorrow it will be land of other Ugandans.

    3. Conclusion:

    We strongly disagree with the statement and the account of the Attorney General on Buganda’s communal land. We demand that the government answers the several questions we raise herein we invite the Lukiiko to resolve that;

    (i) All land that was confiscated by the Government of Uganda should be returned to the Kingdom of Buganda through Ssaabasajja Kabaka of Buganda pursuant to Art. 246 of the Constitution in trust for all the people of Buganda. Buganda should not be intimidated out of, or silenced on its rights. The suggestion that Buganda can only get back its land if it accepts the Regional Government amounts to nothing but BLACK MAIL and should be rejected. Buganda tejja kuva kunsoga eno kubanga by’ebanja byayo bya bwebange ebyanyagibwa ku muddumu gwe mundu – nga buli omu bwakimanyi.

    (ii) Buganda recognises cultural diversity within the Kingdom and accepts that people of other ethnic groups can own and use land in Buganda, this should however be based on lawful and agreeable terms to the people of Buganda. communal land in Buganda is for people of Buganda and not necessarily for all the people of Uganda just like communal land in Acholi, Lango, Teso, Karamoja and Ankole is land for the people in those place. If the Balaalo can not buy or stay on the Bagungu’s communal land in Bullisa, why should they be resettled on Buganda’s communal land? And why should Buganda be expected to be quiet or accused of inciting genocide?

    Accordingly, it is our view that any acquisitions and resettlements made in Buganda based on forceful and illegal means should be challenged. In this regard, we have a duty and must warn all those who have dubiously acquired or about to acquire Buganda’s communal land that was illegally confiscated that their title is VOIDABLE and that the people of Buganda have a legal and legitimate claim over that land now and for as long as that land wrongly remains in the hands of the state. CAVEAT EMPTOR. Kimanyiddwa bulungi nti Buganda okuva edda nedda tesosola mu bantu ba Ssaabasajja wabula tejja kukkiriza abantu okuva Ebule n’e bweya okutwala obutwazi ettaka lyayo awatali ntegereganna yonna.

    (iii) To reject the account and legal interpretation given by the Government of Uganda on the status of Buganda’s communal land and to demand that the Government of Uganda should account to the people of Buganda for all land that it has alienated to private companies and individuals. Twagala okumanya baani abagabanye ettaka era abafunye epyapa ku ttaka lya bantu ba Buganda erya Mailo akeenda era bali funa mu mitendera ki?

    (iv) To demand that the law be amended to provide for public land that was taken away by the 1995 Constitution without the consent of the people of Buganda or compensation to them.

    AWANGALE SSAABASAJJA KABAKA

    Apollo N. Makubuya

    ATTORNEY GENERAL, BUGANDA KINGDOM.

    [1] See paragraph 220(1) Report of the Uganda Relationships Commission, 1961 at page 80.

    [2] Article 19(1) of the Buganda Agreement 1961

    [3] Article 19(2) of the Buganda Agreement 1961

    [4] Article 19(3) of the Buganda Agreement 1961

    [5] Section 12(a) Public Lands Ordinance No. 22 of 1962.

    [6] Section 9(2) of the Public Lands Ordinance No. 22 of 1962

    [7] Article 113(3)(a) of the Constitution of Uganda 1962

    [8] Article 113(7) of the Constitution of Uganda 1962.

    [9] Article 239 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995.

    [10] Article 241(1)(a) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 and section 56(1)(a) of the Land Act cap. 227.

    [11] Article 178 and paragraph 10(1)(a) &(b) of the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995.

    [12] Article 246(3)(a) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995.

    [13] Thomas and Spencer, A History of Uganda Land and Surveys p. 32 and 63.

    [14] General Information on Registered Mailo Land In Kibaale District – the Uganda Land Commission, Department of Land Registration Western Region, Ref: LR. 30, April 1998.

  19. Mw. Otto,

    You write: “I found the document particularly funny especially in the manner that the authors conflate “land” with “territory”.”

    What funny about land and territory being one and the same? All territory is delineated and defined land. What is actually funny is that you find this funny, if you ask me.

    You write further: “There is that comical quote by Mr Makubuya to the effect that “Buganda’s land is ancient and it is owned by the Baganda”: comical indeed. His “ancient” also refers to lands annexed from Bunyoro after 1896 where most of the 4,227 sq miles (Akeenda!) is situated.”

    How do you define ancient – isn’t it a subjective category but with a common connotation? For removal of doubt, Attorney General Makubuya translates into Luganda it for those of you who may seek digrace from the powerful central point he is putting across. I have seen you here displaying your mastery of Luganda, yet again you ignore his Luganda translation and selectively dwell on the english equivalent, which in any case is subjective, if you ask me.

    With evidence, he shreds your old and tired calculations you parrot from government, demonstrating that there have no basis, questionable in law and fact and littered with innacuracies, thereby even raising the prospect that Buganda could infact be claiming more than 9,000 square miles.

    MB
    Auckland

  20. Mr Musisi,

    You note: “…he shreds your old and tired calculations you parrot from government…”

    Could you please summarise for us how he is shredding what I am saying?

    Parroting?: You keep telling us about 9,000 sq Miles. We keep repeating to you the reality (or unreality) of that 9,000 sq miles. What qualifies our assertions as parroting and Mr Musisi’s insistence as something on something that has in fact never existed, as anything less than parroting?

    When government or anyother entity, emphasizes that there can’t possibly be anything like 9,000 sq miles by outlining what that figure was all about, why shouldn’t any body that is honest with himself step back and see how to disabuse himself of adamancy? for example, will your insistence on 9,000 sq miles reverse the fact that 667 sq miles of that land was part of Buyaga and Bugangaizi and Buganda can never have that land back? Will the result of the 1964 referendum be reversed?

    Will your insistence on 9,000 sq miles reverse the fact that the 1900 agreement allocations were based on the assumption that Buganda land (and not territory, the tangent off which Apollo Makubuya reels off) was 19,600 sq miles but in reality it was found to be 16,138 sq miles?

    Then you always go back to insist: “government must had back the 9,000 sq miles”! Is that not worse than parroting, whereby, it seems parroting appears to be the highlighting fundamental truths?

    What calculation is one making by making those simple computations that some of you are playing the ostrich with?

    Lance Corporal (Rtd) Otto Patrick

    “THE SAME HEAT THAT MELTS THE BUTTER HARDENS THE EGG”

  21. Me thinks that akenda is just a scape and may have nothing to do with real argument “and independent self sustaining all powerful Buganda nation”! Whether that is going to be achieved in any life time………! At that rate they enter any unholy agreements with anybody in the quest of that bad ” dream” who in turn, turn their back on them, which may never come to be. The problem is that the rest of non- Buganda in which Buganda is completely intertwined get screwed up! …. and a continuum of this will lead us to a stone age. Imagine a tropical country in this century carrying on front pages a child abandoned by parents who were unable to feed them while Kutesa is not only throwing a $1 million lavish wedding or a $ 500,000 graduation ceremony for an offspring, or the sending a daughter to give birth in Germany. Amin and Obote never did this! Mulago hospital was tops despite the excesses in those regimes! Folks wake up! We all suffer as a result of some egoistic egocentric behaviors!
    ALLAN BARIGYE
    UAH FORUMIST

  22. Dear readers,
    I do not think the problem is returning these properties, I think the biggest problem is Buganda being a cry baby. For I wonder do you have it on record where Buganda is demanding for any service required for Ugandans let alone Baganda? This is an institution that claims to lead a huge percentage of the Uganda population. The population of Buganda is a consideration number on the entire population of Uganda. Yet that entire population has an enormous problem with services to an extent that today for the very first time in the History of Buganda, since its creation in 1300, we have a non Ugandan Mumbejja. SsangaLyambogo is the very first on record known Mumbejja to be a non Ugandan.. And this happened for Uganda does not have a functioning hospital.

    Are you not surprised that in the entire list of requirements that Mengo has made there is no single request that is directed to the population? And I will list them for you again,

    The Bulange
    The Lubiri at Mengo
    The Butikkiro
    The Buganda Court Building
    Kabaka’s official 350 square miles of land
    Namasole’s ten square miles of land
    Banalinya’s land
    Kabaka’s lake
    Former Omulamuzi and Omuwanika’s official residences of Mengo
    Land adjacent to Lubiri on which three Buganda Ministerial houses used to stand
    All Bassekabaka’s Tombs
    Buganda Works Building at Kakeeka
    Basiima House
    Nalinya’s house at Lubaga

    Pray tell me how these demands effect the life of my mother or any Muganda. If Buganda has a real leader is this what Mengo should demand for today? And when the Ssemuwembas the Ssenyonjos the Rehema Muwangas stand to sing Batuwe ebyaffe is this what is ebyaffe? If these things are returned to Mengo how will this change a single bit the life of a Muganda?

    But most importantly, is this why people lined up in Kampala during the riots to be shot at? Was it to receive these 14 items? Are they worth your life? In other words to you as a Muganda are these items worth for you to go and stand in front of a tear gas can? What is in for you if Ssabassajja gets them?So as a critical thinker this is where I ponder a very basic question, for you see a question to be right it has to be
    simple.

    Is it possible that this Ssabassajja is using all of you for his personal gains? No just asking !!!!

    Edward Mulindwa
    CANADA
    Toronto

  23. Mr Patrick Otto,

    You see what a little probing yields?

    I give you a valid (valid in Mmengo’s eyes, at least) reason as to why Mmengo and Baganda are irritated by the smarmy and double-dealing ways of NRM and all I get are more of your inane questions.

    But we stand in different corners so I shouldn’t be really surprised by your shifting of position as everything done and said by NRM and its supporters these days is just silly and off-target.

    If, as you say, Mmengo is wrong in making its ridiculous demands, why should NRM get ridiculous and resort to heavy-handed and barbaric methods and tactics to wish those demands away? NRM wants to be taken seriously, why can’t it act responsibly and honestly when domestic issues arise?

    BUT by taking sides and clandestinely fermenting discord through top-ranked NRM/UPDF officials (who increasingly give the impression they do not know if they are going or coming) NRM sends the message that brinkmanship (a tactic used by tired and clueless regimes) and not civil discourse, is its only means to achieve the end.

    Apart from you, I doubt many Ugandans need more of that.

    Politics is a give-and-take arrangement, but after 23 years of uninterrupted governing, NRM only takes. Greed, excessively greed, defines NRM. NRM wants and takes anything and everything. Giving is anathema to the cowboys in NRM.

    When Mmengo asks to have its stolen property recognized as such and returned, it is not committing a cardinal sin or breaking any laws, so why do people like you keep on kicking off and deliberately clouding the issue by throwing up all manner of twisted questions about the nature and legitimacy of our demands? I’ll tell you this, each and every tribe in Uganda can make demands (within legal limits, of course). But, for some strange reasons, Baganda always get it in the neck for simply insisting on righting wrongs. It is this that attitude that bothers many people.

    Any suffocated people are entitled to remedy their situation but the uproar coming from you lot make whenever we try to loosen the grip around our necks is quite amazing. When the Bunyoro leaders register their misgivings and refuse to be bullied by dodgy politicians, the Tinyefuzas refrain from screaming and shouting abuse and threats and not a disapproving murmur is heard from people like you. Why the inconsistence?

    Just because we are ruled by a bunch burdened with dubious abilities and agendas (many perfectly groomed in ways to hate Baganda and other tribes) don’t assume we will be put off by those whose sole purpose is to make life difficult for us, Baganda. We know that a weak, fragmented and disorganised Buganda is their lifelong (and official) ambition but fail they will. Yes, we will be repeatedly portrayed as the unwanted, the undeserving, the troublemakers but we won’t be cowed by violent authority.

    It is very likely you missed the main reason Kabaka was not allowed to go to Buruli. Museveni explained by saying that he did not want Kabaka to go to that region and “disturb my people.” Until that day, I had not known that there were Ugandans that Museveni referred to as “my people”. By implication some Ugandans are not his people, and since Museveni is the government, those Ugandans are not his responsibility.

    We’ve had enough. We are fed up of living under conditions that reward crooks and those who loath our very existence. The demands we continue to make (much as you dislike and dispute them) are demands meant to protect us from the confusion and agents of confusion that have engulfed Uganda for many years. Being a retarded country, we are faced with a bleak future structured to suit a select group while subjecting others to ruin (the north). That is wrong, a mistake, we can’t carry on sustaining messy systems that benefit only small entities.

    There. Via Mr. Oruni, you wanted to know what Mmengo really wants, sorry I’m a serial gatecrasher!
    KIMEZE MPANGA

  24. Otto,

    The failure of the 47-year-old project called Uganda for some reason appears to instill you in mortal fear, why Major Mutengesa? Uganda is an artificial creation by imperialists – full stop. Uganda must take stoke and adopt a modus vivendi that is in the interests of all the 50 or so tribes that is Uganda today, not in the interests of the White Man who randomly cobbled it together to fit his explotative objectives. With no disrespect whatsoever to your English/England domicile and attachment out in Herfordshire, our former colonial masters have brainwashed you into the perfect neo-colonial agent in sync with your hero Mu7’s status as their blue-eyed boy, thanks to the english carte blanche they enjoy in looting the country.

    Major Mutengesa, the bottom line is, we must do things our own way that is in our interest. The Odoki commission was an attempt at that, but you guys discarded it because it was interfering with yoru interests. Is it any wonder that Uganda is arguably one of the most corrupt countries in the world? Uganda has acquired that status for the first time in its 47-year-old history, and in fairness to you, it is not difficult to defend the status quo where you can hide and loot the state coffers dry. Federo on the other hand would check these excesses and take genuine care of people according to their will, including being in control of their “ebyaffe”. Throwing your weight around with threats of military action is rather outdated, and certainly has not delivered for the past 23 years you have ruled Uganda.

    MB
    Auckland

  25. 1/4 Uganda’s problems are many but some take precedence over others. Uganda faces the question of equittable distribution…education, physical infrastructure, social services etc (which you have chosen to conflate with all the problems the country faces). But there are also other challenges of socio-political integration, institutionalisation, participation, legitimacy, identity and state penetration in the geographical expanse of the national territory (as far as the adjective ‘national’ applies).

    2/4 The confrontation between Mmengo and Entebbe is to do with whether Uganda continues to exist, long before you talk about whether people called Ugandans can read and write, travel on highways or through panyas etc, or whether we can refer to impropriety of public officials etc. The confrontation between Entebbe and Mmengo relates to whether there shall be a public sphere, whatever the level of integrity of public officials.

    3/4 That confrontation by far antedates both YK Museveni and RM Mutebi. The country we now call Uganda was born ingrained with an impasse in that confrontation and this has a bearing on the continued existence of the country as we know it today. The closure of a broadcasting facility that inflames that impasse has to be understood in that context. Buganda wants ebyaffe which includes “Akenda”, the land on which State House, parliament and other infrastructure for the management of Uganda stand. Mmengo is now replaying that fatal message of 1966: remove yourselves from the soil of Buganda. CBS is the mouth-piece for that flippant message.

    4/4 If you rank CBS with the hyenaish public officials that specialise in all manner of grand and petty corruption, then I will quote for you the tedious sound bite of the “Mwana w’enjovu”, Sessanga who can never miss out on blaring out: “hehehehehe”, ad nauseum.

    Lance Corporal (Rtd) Otto Patrick

  26. Mr Musisi (Dr Stephen Julius Lwetutte, PhD),

    1/6 I was talking about red herrings and you have not disappointed…here we go:

    “repression by your hero Mu7 directed against the Baganda, such as the indiscriminate use of live rounds against unarmed demonstrators, torture and ill-treatment, disappearances, unlawful detentions, suppression of the press, deployment of the army in Buganda, house arrest of the Kabaka, etc”

    1/6 All that you list, and are bound to list in future are downstream outcomes of the ebyaffe nonsense. It is because Buganda has allegedly been denied ebyaffe that the Mengo establishment will wish to lure the Uganda state into repression. When mobs go out on to the streets to cause mayhem, and yes, mayhem you should expect public authorities to look on by for fear of arousing the anxieties of a philosopher in human rights law! How about human duties?

    1/6 Sijui: “Deployment of the army in Buganda”: is Buganda Uganda’s neighbour whose territorial integrity is now being violated? So they should remove themselves from the soil of Buganda, you might argue. And you are supposed to be one of the most articulate proponents of the Mmengo claims!

    1/6 The “tragic situation” was a gamble by Mmengo and time will tell whether you will black mail the group in government by thinking that it will ever have any qualms about meeting violence with violence. It is more important for you to fully grasp what you are up against that merely stating that YK Museveni is my hero. Simply look beyond YK Museveni and comprehend what any government would do to deal with separatism in the strategic heartland. You would soon learn that there is alot more of light-hearted physiotherapy in YK Museveni’s approach than radical surgery.

    1/6 You cannot run away from the fact that the focus of Mmengoist mobilisation is Ebyaffe. It is the illusion of ebyaffe that has caused the repression you are talking about. When you know that part of ebyaffe is 4,227 sq miles and you tell mobs about 9,000 sq miles and they go to the streets to loot and burn down busineeses (except those of Baganda); and disarm the police, and kill soldiers; then it becomes impossible for me to grasp what will save you.

    6/6 Bottomline, ebyaffe is the bone of contention. In that ebyaffe delusion, you are sowing piripiri but expecting to harvest tomatoes. When the harvest comes you start preaching to us about “tragic”. Yes let us unpack the ebyaffe, and what you are now calling the “crisis in Buganda” and we see how Mmengo and all the rest of you are hoodwinking the masses of Buganda.

    Lance Corporal (Rtd) Otto Patrick

  27. Forumists,

    1/5 The areas of Buganda as spelt out in the 1900 agreement was assumed to be 19,600 Sq Miles. This estimate was made by the UK War Office, intelligence section. Article 15 of the agreement states: “Assuming the area of Buganda amounts to 19,600 square miles, it shall be divided in the following proportion: Forests 1,500, Her Majesty’s Government under the control of Uganda administration 9,000, His Highness the Kabaka of Uganda 350, Namasole(the King’s mother) 16, mother of Mwanga 10, Princes(Abalangira) 32, Ab’amasaza(County Chiefs) 160, Official estates attached to the posts of the Ab’amasaza 160, the regents each got 32 totaling 96, Mbogo family 24, Kamuswaga of Koki 20, one thousand chiefs 8,000, Christian churches 92, Government stations i.e Kampala, Entebbe, Masaka, Mubende and Njeru, 50.”

    2/5 The same article 15 of the same agreement further notes…and this is the important point: “After a careful survey has been made, if the total found to be less than 19,600sqm then that portion (9000) of the country to be vested in Her Majesty’s Government shall be reduced in the extent by the deficiency found to exist in the estimated area,”

    3/5 The survey was started two years after the 1900 agreement, the year of handover of Buganda from the War Office to the Colonial Office. The survey was interrupted by WWI and finally completed in 1937. The surveyors, Sergeant Major.E.Vaughn, assisted by WV. Morris found out that, the actual are of Buganda was 17,301 sq miles.

    4/5 Therefore the actual area of Buganda fell short of the estimate by 2,229 Sq Miles (19,600-17,301=2,229). According to that same 1900 agreement, that shortfall was to be deducted from the 9,000 sq Miles, the famous ‘akenda’, leaving 6, 701 Ss Miles.

    5/5 So, what is what?

    L/Cpl (rtd) Otto Patrick

    (link to the agreement: http://www.buganda.com/buga1900.htm)

  28. Ahmed,

    If I may ask kindly, which laws needs to be changed for the government of Uganda to pay rent or all money owed to Buganda administration. If I may ask again, which laws need changing for the government to return all the assets that belong to Buganda? I’m still confused about this issue because different people give it different interpretation. I thought the 1995 constitution was very clear about this: restoration of traditional leaders meant also giving them back their assets.

    Please we need some one from the government to clarify on this.. Thanking you in advance.

    Abbey..K.Semuwemba

  29. Abbey Ssemuwemba,
    Attorney General made a presentation in parliament recently while answering Kampala Central MP Erias Lukwago. Our Foreign Ministry or that of Information and National Guidance or even the Parliament of Uganda, can help us.. In summary, the Attorney General said that things that could be restored to Buganda without negotiations including palaces, Bulange, Tombs, Kakeeka etc… were restored in 1993 by the EBYAFFE Act after the constitutional amendment that restored kingdoms. The rest are and will be as a result of negotiations which are still going ON. He requested for a month to give full explanation. He however said that those like 9,000 sq.miles which he said is less, can be restored to Buganda Land Board as it was the case in 1962 Constitution , if a Buganda Regional Government is restored as the 1995 constitution as amended in 2005, is fully implemented.

    under the 1995 constitution, customary tenants (including bibanja holders on akenda), leasholders are entitled for a freehold tittle. Unoccupied land was put under local governments. But districts under a regional arrangement can have a regional board. For the case of Buganda, Busoga, Bunyoro, Acholi and Lango, their districts are deemed to have accepted to cooperate under a regional government.

    Every kibanja holder on akenda is a customary tenant and is entitled for a freehold title. L don’t know what you mean by deeming but the framers of 1995 constituion made a deal with Buganda to ensure that its district are deemed to have accepted to cooperate under a regional government..
    AHMED KATEREGA
    NEWVISION

  30. Forumists,

    1/5 Further to the facts above on “Akenda”, it may not be even as much as “Akakaaga” (6,701 Sq Miles) but rather, “Nkumi nnya” (4, 227 Sq Miles).

    2/5 The 17,301 Sq Miles included swamps. When they were deducted, the land area left is 16,138 Sq Miles.

    3/5 Therefore the shortfall to be deducted from the 9,000 according to Article 15 of the 1900 agreement became 3,462 Sq Miles (19,600-16,138). The Akenda then became 5,538 Sq Miles .

    4/5 When Buyaga and Bugangaizi reverted to Bunyoro after the 1964 referendum, Crown Land in Buganda was further reduced by 667 Sq miles, therefore leaving 4,871 Sq Miles.

    5/5 When Ranching Schemes were established in Buruli, Masaka and Singo, crown land was further slashed by 644 Square miles, therefore reducing “Akenda” further to 4,227 Sq Miles.

    L/Cpl (rtd) Otto Patrick.

  31. Otto and his likes would do Uganda and Ugandans justice if they were honest enough to admit that the biggest problem the country is now experiencing is DICTATORSHIP/AUTOCRACY. There is no way you are going to have a country being governed like one’s private estate and expect that you will have it go forward. To blame it then on the so-called “Buganda-chauvism” or Kingdom or the Kabaka is simply redundant and opportunistic. Uganda can only regain its peaceful path and think about real development once democracy returns to that country, term limits are restored and a peaceful way of handing over power from one president to the other is put in place.

    Tara.Nankindu
    UAH FORUMIST

  32. Nankindu Tara,

    Otto’s (Major Sabiiti Mutengesa’s) supposedly analytical mind appears to hibernate regarding anything Buganda – one wonders how our good Major could miss the analysis on this matter by some of the more advanced son’s of Uganda on this forum, including Ladit Pilipo Oruni Oloya and Andrew Mwenda! The good Major is likely bugged by a familiar complex which must be clouding his rationality badly, to the extent that even his Muganda wird had not been able to shift. In that case, there is usually not much you can do – it is a matter of “tough luck”, if you ask me!

    MB
    Auckland

  33. Mr Musisi,

    1/5 I made a very specific claim, namely that, the shallow/narrow/hollow-mindedness of the Mengo establishment is a cancer that will take Uganda to her grave; and that in the event of Uganda going to the grave, it will not be fun for Buganda. That is a very specific claim. Just to take you back to the context from which I quoted myself, we were debating the question of the wonderful “Akenda”, or 9,000 Sq Miles that Mengo claims is the property of Buganda.

    2/5 It was being stated in that message that:

    a. Nine thousand square miles has never existed and infact there is a very serious problem with any individual or group that lays claim to 9,000 sq miles and I outlined all the facts to support my claim.

    b. What actually exists as public land in Buganda is 4,227 and not 9,000 Sq Miles, as many of you continue to argue, and to excite the public in Uganda. I indicated that, to lie to the public about the existence of 9,000 sq miles when such land has never existed makes the Mengo clique a burden for the Buganda public, including Baganda.

    c. That public land is Buganda land only to the extent that it is in Buganda; but it actually belongs to the authority that is charged with the political management of Uganda and Buganda, and in the present circumstances, the owner is the Government of Uganda.

    d. The land was at one time called “Crown land” because Buganda and Uganda were territories of Britain and the head of government in Britain was the Queen. It was “Kabaka’s land” from 1962-1966 because the Kabaka was the embodiment of political authority in Buganda under the 1962 pseudo-federal constitution. Once unitarism became the system of government, that land reverted to the central government.

    e. That land belongs to the Central government, and that can only cease to be the case if Buganda secedes or if Uganda is becomes a federal state. We have argued here on the forum that, instead of Mengo wasting time whipping up the emotions of mobs, it should launch a sobber and well thought campaign either to secede or to have Uganda run as federal state. It is then and only then that “Ebyaffe” talk can cease to be the nonsense that it is now.

    3/5 Mr Musisi, (Lwetutte PhD) here are your counterclaims…with all your PhD:

    a. Otto is Major Mutengesa

    b. His mind hibernates when he talks about Buganda

    c. He is unanalytical, he should have read the comments by Oruni, and Mwenda!,

    d. Otto, the Major is badly clouded by irrationality

    e. His wife is a Muganda

    f. His Muganda wife (wird, bird) should shift etc etc.

    4/5 By degenerating to that style of debate, if I may call it that, you are just resorting to what are commonly called logical fallacies. In your case, they are several: appeal to spite, appeal to ridicule, ad hominem, smoke screens, red herrings, etc. When you resort (or in Dr Lwetutte’s case, permantly employ) logical fallacies, it means you really have no case or cause and you are hding something dubious.

    5/5 How do you help the Mengo cause by debating in that style? If the most articulate pro-Mengo debators are specialists in smokescreens/red herrings etc, what then is the Mengo cause?

    Lance Corporal (Rtd) Otto Patrick

  34. brothers and sisters, lets move forwards, not backwards. you know that the source of these problems are the demands for restorations from the central government.

    So why 1962, not earlier? wha historical position, where do start calculating the historical position? and how do you say that buganda was not a party to the central government handed over in 1962?

    since you have refresshed peoples memories, let me also refresh yours about how we happen to have a central governments in africa.

    We have a central government and it is one which we happen to have inherited from the British.

    I presume that everyone is familiar with what we Africans call independence days; well this is just a transfer of administration from the colonialists to, well, call it what you may.

    And so effectively is Buganda saying it wants to get out of this arrangement that the British put us in?

    Now there is one problem with this; we have to remember that it is Buganda’s then king mutesa 1 (renamed, as he was previously know as the tyrant “mukabya”) who invited the colonialists. And one of the reasons and key achievements from this invitation was to fight and steal bunyoro land. I believe even Ugandan history records that bunyoro was superior to Buganda quite significantly; to the extent that the Buganda king at the time, on noticing that the British had superior weapons, immediately realized that he could have at last got the solution to the dominance of bunyoro. The cultural leaders should not lie about this because we felt the strength of bunyoro from here in kisumu.

    If so then we could interpret this as Buganda asking for restitution to where it was before the British came.

    History is normally written by the victorious, and that fact that together, the British and Buganda conquered bunyoro land is well documented with glory. This is a critical intrinsic fact that is now exposing its ugly head. That if we are to restore Buganda’s things, and then we have to give back to bunyoro all its land. That land starts a location that is called tanda just before mityana town. In history, it is recorded that Buganda could not go beyond that point because that is where the Buganda god of death / darkness entered the ground. Hence the king of Buganda could not authorize military exploits beyond that point.

    To the north, there was a famous battleground at the borders of Buganda and bunyoro. It was called “irwaniro” by bunyoro and “dwaniro” by Buganda. That place still exists and I recall visiting it sometime in the 1960’s. It is now the name of that sub-county. I believe that point marks the place where the borders of the kingdom were.

    So bunyoro should be crying the loudest! Unfortunately, the cultural leaders in Buganda would like the world to believe that they are being cheated, but would like to suppress information regarding the amount of land that would have to be returned to bunyoro.

    We then get into the fact that there was genocide committed by both Buganda and the British, and forcibly converted many people into Buganda. These were atrocities, as that kind of human rights abuse is a crime using current laws.

    Just to make sure that we are getting this straight; it is a pity that almost all of the Buganda generations alive at the moment may not be aware that they have lived a lie. And that the “glory of Buganda” is not that glorious, and it is built on serious deception, crime (genocide) and theft.

    Most importantly, we believe that the cultural leaders of Uganda kingdoms should get serious; they have an opportunity to build peace, harmony, restore cultural values, etc. we don’t have such an opportunity in the constitutions of Kenya and even neighboring Tanzania. We gather that in Rwanda, the cultural leader lives in exile and dare not step there. Now see how Uganda’s leaders waste the opportunity. There are strong cultural positive values that should be restored to prevent vices such as domestic violence, child care, street children, homosexuality, dress code, etc,

    Dr. Adyeri Muchori.

    adyeri.muchori@hotmail.com

  35. who ever that denied people of Bugerere, Buluuli, or any other part of Buganda, a right to elect their own representative to Lukiiko, is the first culprit. Then the one who wants to subdivide Buganda along ethnic lines. is a second culprit. The third is the one who exploit the situation to seize popularity in Mmengo, especially opposition parties like DP and FDC. The THIRD ARE THE THUGS WHO WERE LOOTING AND RAPING INDISCRIMINATELY.

    let’s go back to the drawing board as Buganda and revise our strategy and tactics as far as reclaiming EBYAFFE is concerned. We should allow Kabaka’s subjects to elect their own representatives to Lukiiko, and we should accept a Lukiiko with powers to make laws, as enshrined in the constitution.

  36. WHAT IS WRONG WITH MMENGO LEADERS!
    Long time compatriots,
    it is disappointing ad embarassng to see a former Ambassador and UPC cadre, and now Deputy Katikkiro of te kingdom of Buganda and its Minister for External Relations, Ambassador Emmanuel Ssendawula claiming that the 11th September 2009, thugs who indiscriminately; Looted, burnt buildings and motor vehicles, raped and robbed idividual belongings irrespective of whether they supported Mmengo, NRM, CP, UPC, JEEMA, UFA, name it, were “nocent” people murdered in cold blood!
    Nateete Police Station was burnt to ashes, an Indian hardware warehouse burnt and looted in Bwaise, a Coca Cola lorry was burnt and loted in Busega.
    Silent females were raped and robbed of their belongings, to name a few incidents.
    Business came to a stand-still n Kampala City, its suburbs and other Central Region towns.
    Why is Ssendawula and Mmengo group only concerned with the thugs and not their victims, big and small? Where is the objectivityin this “mourning?”
    Mmengo shall never advance, if it is full f self seekers and opportunists like Ssendawula whose past and preset is anti-Mmengo, but purport/ pretend to be fightig fr Mmengo’s interests, if any.
    The so called Career diplomat who served Obote and Amin and now pretends to be serving, the Kabaka, s still s much wanting. Let him first apologise for legtimising and conslidating Obote and Amin regimes before he pretends to be more Cathlic than the Pope?
    Who does nt know that Ambassador Ssendawula, is from Kooki, in far away Rakai District, on a boarderline, but pretends to behave like a Muganda proper from Mawokota, simply because during his retirement age, he has settled in the heartland of Buganda?
    Shame to these AGIP, Any Group in Power. There are many at Mmengo, and it is high time they got retrenched.

  37. Mr. Byansi,

    Mengo leaders are right on this one. The Deputy Katikiiro is right in whatever he said regardless of his political or non-political affiliations before. Whatever happened on 9/11/09 was an act of self defense in response to provocative actions of the occupation regime of NRM on Buganda soil. People have a right to self defense. Baganda have a right to protect their Kingdom which is now under total ocupation. Occupied people are not liable for the consequencies of their actions. It is the occupier who is responsible and that is why you saw the government of occupation rush to compansate whoever lost property during the riots. The constitution of Uganda gives citizens the right to self defense

    I’ll just answerer some of the issues you’ve raised.

    (1) The people who rapped women were soldiers of the UPDF and anti-riot police who were sent to crash the rebellion but instead decided to take advantange of the confusion and rapped innocent victims. This explains why none of the arrested Buganda partriots has been charged with rape. If it is true that the rapped victims are there, and the rapists has been arrested; don’t you think that it is wise to do a DNA test and nail these rapists once and for all? But because the rapists are soldiers who had done the same thing in the DR Congo and N. Uganda, Govt in not keen on following this line.

    (2) Natete police station was burnt down by local residents who were tired of tortures and harrassment from thugs manning the station and masquarading as policemen. Everyone in Natete knows someone who has been arrested and released only after paying a ransom to officers at that station. Everyone knows a victim of torture by officers at that station. When residents saw a chance to finally get rid of the station they did just that. The President came and said that the station will be built within 3 months but up to now nothing is going on why? Because residents will burn it down again and there will be no Buganda rioters to blame.

  38. Michael Senyonjo, but Mmengo should stop only hiring UPCs of yester years and today. For example, Obote’s Solicitor General who helped Attorney General Godfrey Binaisa to write 1966 Pigeonhole constitution, Nkambo Mugerwa, and who wrote 1967 Republican Constitution even after Binaisa had resigned, and who was Amin’s Attorney General, until recently, was Chairperson of Buganda Land Board. A career diplomat could not survive Obote ll as many like Ibrahim Mukiibi who was for Scandinavia, resigned in 1982. Those people were UPC members some were GSU some NASA some SRB and they should not be at Mmengo.
    Now they want to revenge on NRM which restored kingdoms and if it was not wrong elements at Mmengo, we would have been with a Buganda Government with an Assembly to make laws by July 1st 2006.

    John Baptist, while l almost agree with you on last September riots, l totally disagree with you on classifying Kabaka’s subjects. Just last week but one, Joseph Ochienge, a Sunday Nation columnist and a veteran journalist wrote attacking Organisers of Kenya census who wanted to sub group the Luo community in Nyanza Province saying that they had a hidden agenda of reducing the number of of Kenya’s majority tribes. According to him, his Abasuba group, is part and parcel or an integrated part of the Luo community or Nyanza province, which can’t be done away with.
    He said that the Abasuba, and some other groups in Nyanza province and parts of Rift Valley, were originally Bantu, some claiming from Buganda and Bunyoro, like his own clan, but had intermarried with the rest including Luo invaders, and therefore can not be separated from the rest of the Luo. It reminded me these Banyara, Baluuli saga of ours, where Mmengo is to blame for not recognizing Princess Nang’oma and Prince Namuyonjo, or even Prince Muntu of Bwera, in my home Ssembabule District.
    Back to Deputy Katikkiro Ssendawula, however much that is Ssendawula is a Mukooki, Abakooki are part of Baganda, and Kooki is an integrated part of Buganda. Buganda became great because it had no tribalism like some of our present Mme ngo leaders have learnt to behave, and it will sink, if it toes the latter’s line since we have intermarried and inter mingled to borrow from a Kenyan cerebrated journalist.
    Back to September riots, both government and mMengo share the blame for the Bugerere crisis and opportunists from opposition parties seized the opportunity to cause chaos fueled by hooligans and looters in urban centers.
    We should therefore be objective in handling the matter other than apportioning the blame on government alone or even Mmengo for that matter.

  39. Mw. Byansi,

    Does it not surprise you and/or even both your conscience that in the apparent absence of a report by an Independent Commission of Inquiry into the September 11 riots and/or massacres, the NRM-0 regime and its shameless apologists continue to ridiculously albeit wrongly ostracize Mengo for the causes of the September 11 riots and the ensuring troubles consequent to those riots? Is your conscience also not stirred at all about the fact that the Uganda government has up to now still failed to prove its case against the 23 Ugandans still remaining wrongfully incarcerated under its willful tag of “terrorists” inspite of the fact that this has now taken more than one year? Can you really prove that these 23 Ugandans are the ones who actually burned down Nateete police ? Are you also not bothered with the fact that the NRM-0 regime would naturally prefer to handle matters pertaining to the September 11 riots under some sort of the jungle law rather than as per the Uganda laws established? Does it not intrigue you that the powers-that-be in Uganda all along preferred to “settle” all matters pertaining to the September 11 riots merely through an apology from Mengo rather than through litigation?? Come on, NRM-0 guys! Please give Mengo and other discerning Ugandans a break!!!!

    Not under the National Rigging Movement, Mw. Kateregga!!!! Never, ever!!!!

    1) Saw what’s happened to Busoga with your so-called elections for the Kyabazinga the consequence of which the Basoga now have two “Kings”, one for the Basoga and the other for your boss?? So, do you want to bring the same chaos in Buganda?? Never, ever!!! Mutusanga tulaba!!! The Baganda and Mmengo have never been, are not and will never be a bunch of fools, my dear!!!

    2) With regard to the return of Ebyaffe, I don’t remember Indians having “elected their own representatives” to have all their properties under the former “Indian Custodian Board” returned to them, or did they?? I also have no recollection whatsoever to the effect that the Indians, unlike their Baganda counterparts, did participate in the Luwero Jungle War upon which they could possibly have laid their inalienable claim to their returned properties without any negotiations. Do you also want to mean that Mmengo and by extension the Baganda first need to hold “elections” in order to have the remittance of 20+ billion Uganda Shillings that the regime owes them?? How about instituting an Independent Commission of Inquiry into the September Buganda riots??? ? Get serious, brother!!

  40. Benjamin, you have become a blind student of Besigye’s statement in South Africa. Credit uld be given to my former News Editor Ngabo, Victo Nnaalongo who asked the President why he had returned property to Asians and not to Baganda. Museveni said that ASIANS’ LIKE AGA KHAN’S WERE RELIGIOUS, AND OTHERS LIKE BAGANDA’S WERE CULTURAL. BUT SOME OF bAGANDA’S ARE POLITICAL AND THE CONSTITUTION SETTLED THE MATTER. IT IS ONLY MmENGO OFFICIALS WHO FEAR ELECTIONS THAT ARE GOING AROUND CALLING FOR AN ABSOLUTE MONARCHY WHICH STOPPED IN December 1890.

  41. Ahmed,
    Shame on you for telling blatant lies and grossly misinterpreting the provisions of the 1995 Uganda constitution regarding the subject under debate herewith! Truthfully, If I were your local Imam, I would most definitely banish you from my mosque for peddling a foul-smelling haram of lies and defending the indefensible NRM-ZERO’s fascist politics towards Buganda Kingdom and His Majesty the Kabaka in particular and Uganda in general. But with all due respect Ahmed, the more I read your partisan, twisted and oftentimes uninformed positions regarding Buganda Kingdom/Kabaka, democracy, fundamental human rights and freedoms, free and fair elections, constitutionalism, et.al, the more I discover that the difference between you and maverick Alhaj Seeya Ssebaggala is evidently blurred. Your pretty ignorant “arguments”, of course not uncharacteristically surprising, clearly albeit regrettably negate the very existence and/or supremacy of the supreme law of the land and consequently replaces it with the Mobutuist dictum of “I am the state [of Congo-Zaire] and the state [of Congo-Zaire] is me = Jungle Law!”. Nonetheless, please be kindly reminded of the following provisions of the 1995 Uganda constitution for your further education and clarification on the constitutional issues regarding Buganda’s still confiscated properties by the NRM-ZERO [including unpaid remittances of 20 + billions accruing to rental arrears] Vs. the returned Indian properties earlier on confiscated by the Idi Amin dictatorship:

    Chapter 1, Art. 2 (1-2) of the 1995 Uganda constitution on the supremacy of the constitution reads the following:

    (1) This Constitution is the supreme law of Uganda and shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout Uganda.

    (2) If any other law or any custom is inconsistent with any of the provisions of this Constitution, the Constitution shall prevail, and that other law or custom shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void

    Chapter 4, Art. 20 which is on the fundamental and other human rights and freedoms reads thus:

    (1) Fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual are inherent and not granted by the State.

    (2) The rights and freedoms of the individual and groups enshrined in this Chapter shall be respected, upheld and promoted by all organs and agencies of Government and by all persons.

    The subsequent Article 21 (1-3) of the same chapter further reads that 21.

    (1) All persons are equal before and under the law in all spheres of political, economic, social and cultural life and in every other respect and shall enjoy equal protection of the law.

    (2) Without prejudice to clause (1) of this article, a person shall not be discriminated against on the ground of sex, race, colour, ethnic origin, tribe, birth, creed or religion, social or economic standing, political opinion or disability.

    (3) For the purposes of this article, “discriminate” means to give different treatment to different persons attributable only or mainly to their respective descriptions by sex, race, colour, ethnic origin, tribe, birth, creed or religion, social or economic standing, political opinion or disability.

    Pursuant to article 21 (1-3) above, and for avoidance of any doubt, we further read in Art. 43 (1-2) regarding the general limitation on the fundamental and other human rights and freedoms thus

    (1) In the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms prescribed in this Chapter, no person shall prejudice the fundamental or other human rights and freedoms of others or the public interest.

    (2) Public interest under this article shall not permit—

    (a) political persecution;

    (b) detention without trial;

    (c) any limitation of the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms prescribed by this Chapter beyond what is acceptable and demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society, or what is provided in this Constitution.

    Chapter 6, Art. 1 -2 of the same constitution provides the following regarding the protection from deprivation of property:

    (1) Every person has a right to own property either individually or in association with others.

    (2) No person shall be compulsorily deprived of property or any interest in or right over property of any description except where the following conditions are satisfied—

    o (a) the taking of possession or acquisition is necessary for public use or in the interest of defense, public safety, public order, public morality or public health; and
    o (b) the compulsory taking of possession or acquisition of property is made under a law which makes provision for—
    + (i) prompt payment of fair and adequate compensation, prior to the taking of possession or acquisition of the property; and
    + (ii) a right of access to a court of law by any person who has an interest or right over the property.

    Chapter 16, Art. 246 (3a) of the 1995 Uganda Constitution on the institution of traditional or cultural leaders says that :“The institution of traditional leader or cultural leader shall be a corporation sole with perpetual succession and with capacity to sue and be sued and to hold assets or properties in trust for itself and the people concerned”.

    Consequent to the foregoing, therefore, there’s no single iota of justification whatsoever under the aegis of the 1995 Uganda Constitution why Buganda Kingdom and/or the Kabaka should continue to be unconstitutionally treated in the manner they are by the NRM regime! All what the regime continues to do against Buganda Kingdom and/or the Kabaka is purely monkey politics, devoid of any shadow of discernible legal grounding, period!

    Now, regarding your other tired subject of “elections, blah, blah…” for the Lukiiko representatives, you can rest assured for the umpteenth time that Mmengo, or Buganda for that matter, will never hold elections at the barrel of the gun no matter what the NRM Supremos wish or even do! In the circumstances where by the NRM has increasingly won itself a very well-deserved and unenviable trophy for being the National Rigging & Robbery Movement, Mmengo/Buganda would be pretty much daftly to allow itself to be visited upon the kind of unflattering chaos and violence the world has just recently witnessed of the NRM elections in Namboole in particular and, generally-speaking, throughout the whole country, of course not forgetting the troubles that continue to brew in Busoga Kingdom as a consequence of the meddlesome and partisan interference of “elections” for a Kyabazinga by your boss in the Busoga Kingdom affairs!
    Finally, and lest I forget this, If some fascist thug were to put a gun on my head asking me to choose between what you guys in NRM untenably call “an absolute monarch” but who has the unflinching support of more than 98% of the Baganda who inherently and/or naturally love and revere him so much, and in contrast to what the majority of Ugandans and the world increasingly see as a fascist dictatorship of the NRM regime, you definitely know where my choice would be, right?
    Akuume muganda wange!

  42. Benjamin, SOME OF THE EXTREMISTS LIKE YOUR SELF WHO WERE OPPOSED TO A REGIONAL GOVERNMENT AS ENTRENCHED IN 1995 Constitution as amended in 2005, have ended up in bed with UPC. An example is ex-Katikkiro Dan Muliika. Buganda was a province right from 1900 and a region in post independence era and federalism can be based on regions. What’s wrong with a regional government? Our 1962 status was restored except powers to levy direct taxes, which were hut tax and gun tax that were outlawed much later? Wasn’t Lukiiko elected after second world war? Wasn’t Katikkiro elected after 1`955 Agreement? We should not expose our naivety on this forum.

  43. we should also differentiate between personal property of Sir Edward Muteesa that was supposed to be given to his off springs including Kabaka Ronald Mutebi ll, property of office of Kabaka, like 350 Sq.Mls, property of Buganda Government like estates of officials;Katikkiro, omulamuzi omuwanika, ssaza and gombolola chiefs etc…We can’t be blind followers however much you call us names. We are used to that.Some of you and your parents were in UPC yesterday.

  44. Hullo Folks, my interest is in kabaka, Sir Edward mutesa’s Ros royce.Does anyone know where it has been kept in whatever condition and if there is a possibility of reviving it for purposes of our cultural history such as buganda museum.Thanks

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s