{UAH} The Truth About Buganda MOU - By Apollo Makubuya

The truth about Buganda MOU

Guest Writers

Thursday, 22 August 2013 21:08

Written by APOLLO N. MAKUBUYA

1 Comments

The public has received the recent agreement between the Kabaka and the central government, over the return of ebyaffe, with mixed feelings.

While many say that it has been long overdue, critics see the agreement as nothing but a non-binding gimmick to gain political points for President Museveni ahead of the 2016 election.
From Mengo's point of view, however, there is no doubt that the agreement is some achievement in its 46-year long struggle for the return of its expropriated assets.

The ebyaffe agreement is made under the Constitution and is in accordance with the Traditional Rulers Restitution of Assets and Properties Act of 1993. It was executed between the government and the Kabaka. As such, it is an enforceable and binding contract. There is a view that there is a need to lay the agreement before Parliament for it to have legality. However, this view has no legal basis.

It is the Parliament that passed the Traditional Rulers Restitution of Assets and Properties Act under which the kingdoms properties including the 350 Sq. miles, Bulange and the Lubiri were returned in the past. Section 6 of the act particularly provides that the traditional leader of Buganda shall hold negotiations with the government with a view to returning to them such assets and properties other than those specified in the schedule to the act.

It is on this basis that the Kabaka and the government executed the agreement. It is important to point out that the ebyaffe agreement has resulted in long and difficult negotiations that started in the times of Katikkiro John Baptist Walusimbi at the end of 2010. Walusimbi entered those negotiations with the express instructions of the Buganda Lukiiko.

In fact based on the frustrations and delays on the return of ebyaffe, the Lukiiko asked the katikkiro to consider taking legal action against the government. Private individuals even set up a fund to support a legal battle. It is against this background, and with the permission of the Kabaka, that Katikkiro Charles Peter Mayiga concluded the discussions where the government undertook to return to the Kabaka the former estate of Buganda kingdom.

By any measure, this agreement is a landmark achievement in Buganda's struggle to return its properties that were 'stolen' under Dr Milton Obote's regime. Given the history of how these assets were confiscated, the long and painful struggle that Buganda has endured, Mengo cannot be blamed for signing this agreement.

It may be recalled how this government has in the past argued that it could not return the assets unless and until we accepted the regional tier. Also, that it could not return the assets because Buganda did not show them where they were. In this context, the governments' present undertaking ought to be seen as a positive development.

Will the government respect the contents of the ebyaffe agreement?  Who knows? But as the English say, the taste of the pudding is in the eating. Mengo wants to believe that it will honour its undertaking. No doubt, it shall relentlessly pursue the matter. In the past, there has been doubt within the government circles as to whom these assets should revert and where they are.

With the agreement in place, this excuse is no more. The only question that remains on the return of the assets is only when, and not, if or how?

There is understandable concern on whether the government will act with haste in implementing the agreement. Will it hand over these assets with urgency or will it aim to maximise political capital and drag the matter over years to come? Time will tell. The other question has been whether or not the Kabaka will require permission from Ssabanyala or Ssabaruuli to visit the counties of Bugerere or Buruuli.

The government has undertaken to ensure, in accordance with the Constitution, that the Kabaka enjoys his freedom of movement in any and all parts of Uganda provided that he respects the rights of other cultural institutions/leaders as enshrined in the Constitution. On his part, the Kabaka undertakes to respect the cultural norms of other related ethnic communities located in Buganda such as the Baruuli and Banyala and to leave to them land where the former administrative units were situated.

The reality is that the kingdom of Buganda comprises many ethnic nationalities and, as has been the tradition, the Kabaka recognises all those that respect and recognize his place. This position is not new. The relationship that the Kabaka enjoys with the Kamuswaga of Kooki is an example. In effect, the agreement reconfirms this tradition. For the avoidance of any doubt, and consistent with his constitutional rights, there shall be no need for the Kabaka to seek anyone's permission to travel anywhere in all parts of Uganda.

The other point that has created anxiety is the undertaking, by the government and the Kabaka, to totally refrain from engaging in hostile propaganda against each other. Some have construed this to mean that Mengo shall be required to appease Museveni by not championing the cause of its own people. Nothing could be further from the truth.

We all know that there has been a heated exchange between the kingdom and the president over a host of issues including; on the Kayunga riots, the illegal closure of CBS and the illegal arrest of officials.

However, and in view of the contrition and the overtures of rapprochement coming from the government, as well as Buganda's renown commitment to a civic resolution of disputes, I do not see a need for serious concern.
What is critical for the public to understand is that Buganda will not be gagged and will continue to demand for the full return of all its assets and for the restoration of the federal system of government. Such legitimate and lawful demands would not amount to hostile propaganda in my view.

The author is Buganda's minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs