Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

EACOP Project: A displacement crisis and cultural erosion threatening Ugandan communities.

Published

on

By Witness Radio and Südnordfunk teams.

Thousands of people in Uganda are affected by the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project, which spans from the oil production towers and refineries to the pipeline’s route and extends to its final destination in Tanzania. The Ugandan government portrays it as a promising project for the country’s development, often labeling those who criticize it as agents of imperialism.

The French oil company Total Energies wants to build a pipeline in Uganda and Tanzania. EACOP project was first introduced in Nanywa ‘A’ village, Nanywa Parish, Ndagwe sub-county in Lwengo district in around 2018. Back then, hundreds of people hoped to benefit from it.

In several meetings conducted by Total to introduce the project to the affected communities, such as those in Lwengo District, the Total Energies team communicated that the project would offer enhanced support to vulnerable groups, including widows, the elderly, persons with disabilities, and orphans.

“Total often called us into their meetings, where they assured us that everyone would benefit from the project, with particular attention given to groups such as widows, orphans, and the elderly.” One of the affected residents, Mr. Katoogo Kasim, told Witness Radio.

Accordingly, the impacted communities mentioned that the project was highly hyped by its implementers as a pathway to development and wealth generation. But what turns out are regrets and curses from the would-be beneficiaries of the Eacop project. In areas where the project is passing, they claim it has exposed them to poverty, adversely affected their health, criminalized project critics, and greatly affected their social lives and cultures.

90-year-old Tereza Nakato (name changed) of Nanywa, a village nine kilometers from Lwengo town, suffers from high blood pressure. According to her, her health has been deteriorating daily since the project implementors expressed interest in her land. Before the project, she was living happily and enjoying her old village life.

“A lot has changed in my life ever since these oil people came and took my land. The pipeline now passes through my compound, just three meters from my house, and this has caused me to develop hypertension due to the constant stress of worrying about what might happen next,” the 90-year-old woefully revealed.

During our visit to her home, a brick-structured four-roomed house surrounded by a small farm of two cows and goats, she was still locked in her house by 9 am when we reached there. Next to her home is her son’s house, which is also on the same land. He, too, is affected by the EACOP. Due to her illness, the old widow could not speak much, so her son, Mr. Katoogo Kasim, assisted her in talking to us. The EACOP is supposed to pass right through her compound. The construction work has not yet begun, but signs of its beginning can be witnessed.

Katoogo Kasim told us that the pipeline is located just three meters from his mother’s house. The three meters between the pipeline and the house will be the compound, leaving her with no space to do her chores.

She (Nakato) worries that her house may be damaged due to heavy trucks and machines that will construct the pipeline, and the poor compensation stresses her. Along with other effects, it has worsened her health. For instance, her family has to spend more than 50 Euros every month on her medication – money she does not have. She received some compensation for the land taken for the project. But she says it was inadequate to improve her life. Instead, it is used up quickly by her sickness.

“This project is a disaster, bringing havoc to me and my family. It’s the time when my mother got sick, and all the money that was given to her as compensation was used up for her monthly Hypertension medication,” Kasim further said.

According to Nakato, initially, Total told her that she would be relocated elsewhere or that they would construct a new house. But these were empty promises well-intentioned to coerce her to surrender her land to the project. When she sought relocation or construction of a new home due to the imminent impact on her and her house after giving them her land, the project implementers told her that it must first get cracked or fall.

Nakato is not the only one to cry out about the impacts of the EACOP project on her land and home. Lawyer Brighton Aryempa is advising affected community members and representing some of them in court. In an interview with Südnordfunk, he, too, says that being displaced from their land is one of the significant impacts on the communities:

“Communities are suffering because they are being displaced from their ancestral land without compensation, and even when they pursue legal action. The court cases have dragged on for years, yet land is crucial for creating livelihoods for families and communities. This is happening despite laws outlining how land should be compensated when taken for public interest.” He said.

While the government is allowed to acquire land for public interest, the acquisition should follow due process. This has often been different for the EACOP project. He emphasizes that community members have the full right to demand adequate compensation:

“Some people think the government compensating them is just helping them, which is untrue. These are inherent rights. So, we want them to know some of these basics so that they can negotiate. They can have better compensation rates and are not cheated,” he added.

Similar concerns about injustices caused by the project are echoed in the neighboring Kyotera district. Residents report a feeling of powerlessness. They are being told they must surrender their land for the project and accept the compensation offered, as it is a government initiative that cannot be halted. Likewise, the landlords too are complaining.

Uganda has four land tenure systems under which a person can hold land: mailo, freehold, leasehold, and customary. In these particular areas of Kyotera, most of the project-affected persons live on the Mailo land tenure system. Here, the landlord owns the land, while tenants may have rights to use the land but lack full ownership unless granted by the landlord through purchase with a land title.

Mr. Ssekyewa Benedicto is a landlord in Lusese village in Kyotera district. The entire village survives mainly on agriculture. We found coffee, maize, and bananas growing during our visit to his home. Ssekyewa says about seven of his tenants were affected by the pipeline. He blames the government and the project implementers for not educating him and other affected people about the project’s adverse effects.

‘We lack complete information about how this project will be conducted. This project was introduced to us without proper education or consultation,” he stated.

As a landlord, Ssekyewa claims he has not benefited from the project as promised. He says he was never consulted or informed about how the valuation of his land was conducted. “We were not informed as owners of the land that this is what we are to be compensated or what was valued from our land because the government isn’t clear on the exact valuation,” he maintained.

In the same village, Ssalongo Kigonya Vicent was promised compensation for his two pieces of land affected by the pipeline project. Still, he received less than the amount that was initially valued.  He said he was made to sign a large sum of money on a document over 30 pages long, written in English—a language he did not understand. “I signed 28 million (about 6,916.98 Euros) for two plots of my land where the project passed, but to my surprise, I received only 3,800,000sh, equivalent to 938.73 Euros on my account.” He revealed.

For now, he still has his house on part of the land that was left. But where his crops are, construction will soon be taking place. He reveals that. “I was told that no one can stop the government from implementing a pipeline project. They said they can do it wherever they want.”

Lawyer Aryampa points out that the compensation is often too little. He mentions that government agencies take the value of land from years back but only pay it later when a piece of land is worth much more.

Besides compensation, Mr. Kigonya faced another challenge. One of his pieces of land accommodated the grave sites of his deceased twins, requiring their exhumation and relocation. Total supported the relocation of the graves and promised to support ceremonies after relocation, including celebrations of twin rituals.

In the Buganda culture of the Buganda kingdom, where Kigonya belongs, one has to perform twin rituals celebrating their birth and celebrate twin rituals if the graves of twins are exhumed or relocated due to cultural beliefs and traditions associated with them. In the same culture, twins are considered sacred and hold a special spiritual significance. When twins pass away, their graves are typically treated with relevance, and the relocation or disturbance of these graves can be seen as disrupting spiritual harmony and traditional practices. The Baganda performs specific rituals after the graves are exhumed or relocated to restore this harmony and honor the twins’ spirits.

But up to date, the rituals of Kigonya’s twins remain unperformed. The project implementers did not fulfill their promises, and the father had no means for it alone. According to his conviction, not performing these rituals is exposing his family to significant consequences, including poverty, family separations, and body burns.

Not far from Kigonya’s home is Mr. Bwowe Ismail’s in Bethlehem village, a father of 20 children. His family is living in misery after the project grabbed his entire land without compensation. When he demanded to be compensated fairly, state authorities intimidated, arrested, and charged him with false offenses, claiming he was sabotaging the government project.

In Uganda, criminalization is one tactic used by multinational companies, the government, or its bigshots to silence community land and environmental defenders and project critics for raising the adverse impacts on projects being established.

Bwowe, on one of the cases, was arrested and slapped with charges of robbing a confident, wealthy man. Total offered to lend him support with legal fees and representation in court only if he allowed to sit with them at the table and accept the compensation. But Bwowe refused.

Many individuals affected by this project are dissatisfied but cannot voice their complaints because it is a government project, and they witness how their neighbors are intimidated. Mr. Segawa Abdallah, Chairman of an affected village in Nanywa A, confirmed this sentiment, adding that they resorted to keeping this pain in their hearts.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

A decade of displacement: How Uganda’s Oil refinery victims are dying before realizing justice as EACOP secures financial backing to further significant environmental harm.

Published

on

By Witness Radio team.

“Laws are like spider webs: they catch the weak and let the powerful go free,” said Anacharsis, a Greek philosopher. These ancient words still ring painfully true for thousands of residents from Kyakaboga Sub-county in Hoima District, Uganda, who were displaced over a decade ago to pave the way for the country’s first oil refinery project. Despite 13 long years of broken promises and unending court delays, these communities continue to fight for justice, their unwavering resilience a source of inspiration.

Recently, the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project secured financial backing, including both debt and equity. The project is estimated to cost around $5 billion, with the project owners contributing about $2 billion in equity and raising an additional $2.4 billion – $3 billion in external debt. Funds were secured from Standard Bank, Stanbic Bank Uganda, KCB Bank Uganda, and the Islamic Corporation for the Development of the Private Sector in Saudi Arabia, among the financiers backing the project.

Many people consider EACOP to be responsible for causing significant environmental harm in Uganda. The project is projected to impact numerous protected areas, including forests and national parks, and could potentially lead to the destruction of habitats and displacement of endangered species. Additionally, the pipeline’s construction and operation pose risks to water resources, including the Lake Victoria basin, which is a vital source of water for millions.

In 2012, the Ugandan government compulsorily acquired 29 square kilometers of land affecting over 13 villages in Buseruka Sub-county. More than 7,000 people, including 3,500 women and 1,500 children, were evicted to make way for the oil refinery. The project, touted as a symbol of national progress, instead left a trail of disrupted lives and systemic injustices —a stark reminder of the moral outrage that underlies this issue.

According to the Petroleum Authority of Uganda, the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for the refinery offered affected people two options: cash compensation or resettlement with new houses built by the government. However, to date, many remain uncompensated, and others who opted for cash claim that their land and property were undervalued.

“At the time of compensation, we realized that the government was not paying us fairly as promised,” said Abigaba Esther Mpabaisi, one of the displaced residents. “Some villages in the same locality were compensated using different rates.” She added.

In response to these over-arching concerns, the residents, through their organization, the Oil Refinery Residents Association (ORRA), filed a case at the High Court in Kampala in 2014, seeking redress for forced evictions and human rights violations. Their courage in the face of a decade-long pursuit of justice, frustrated by systemic delays, shifting court venues, and what they describe as deliberate obstructions by state agencies, is truly admirable.

Christopher Opio, the ORRA leader, said the Court of laws meant to protect the poor had let them down: “We went to court, just like we have tried many other things. But the court has let us down. Even today, over 47 families have never received houses as part of the resettlement.” Opio added.

Uganda’s oil development efforts have repeatedly come under fire for forced land takeovers, delayed and inadequate compensation, and coercion accompanied by gross human rights abuses and violations. Despite communities turning to courts as a last resort for justice and demanding accountability for the harm caused to them, they are often left disillusioned.

Uganda’s judicial system operates with a stark contrast in the treatment of cases. While cases filed by powerful institutions often move swiftly, those filed by people experiencing poverty against the state or investors are subjected to years of postponements. A glaring example is the case in Buliisa District, where the government sued 42 families who refused undervalued compensation for their land for the Tilenga project, part of Uganda’s oil development activities.

The Tilenga project, is a major oil development in Uganda’s Albertine Graben, specifically in the Buliisa and Nwoya districts and it has caused displacement of local communities. The courts delivered judgment just four days after the case was filed, upholding the eviction of the families, who were also the legal landowners.

Meanwhile, the Kabaale case continues to stall. 75-year-old Kato Phinehas, who is also among those affected, reveals that the transfer of the case from one court to another is another factor that victims see as a deliberate effort by the state and courts to deny them justice.

“We started from the High Court in Kampala. There, government officials who were party to the case kept dodging us. Many times, the case was scheduled, but they would be absent, and it would be adjourned for several months. Despite little progress, the case was, to our surprise, referred to the Masindi High Court.

We decided not to give up. We followed the case to Masindi, but it was bounced back to the Kampala High Court. In Kampala, they told us the case had been sent to Masindi. Then, in Masindi, after a long wait, the case was referred to the Hoima High Court. However, in Hoima, they informed us that the files could not be traced. We later learned the case files were still in Masindi allegedly because there was no transport to deliver them to Hoima.

The judicial delays have taken a personal toll on individuals like Kato Phinehas. At 75 years old, he wonders if he will live to see the end of these delays. “this shocked us. We asked ourselves: how can a whole government fail to transport case files from Masindi, which is nearby? I’m 75 years old now, you can see me. I wonder: if these judicial delays continue for another ten years, will I still be alive to pursue this case?”

In addition, the eviction took a toll on the socio-economic life of residents, as Wandera John Bosco explains.

“I have been so much disturbed by the displacement because they evicted us from Kabaale and brought us here in Buseruka, about 25 kilometers away. In Kabale, we were flourishing in our work, had good business, and people were carrying out their daily activities, including farming, which yielded a lot and allowed them to thrive. This is a different case here. Life is hard,” said Wandera John Bosco, one of the Oil Refinery Project Affected Persons.

The economic effects have been severe. Many families who relied on farming lost their livelihoods. With no land and no crops, they couldn’t pay school fees. Children dropped out in large numbers.

“I dropped out of school in 2012,” said Tumwebaze Innocent, who was in secondary school when the evictions happened. “The government imposed a cut-off date and banned cash crops that grow beyond six months. And parents, including mine, had no alternative source of survival, which caused many of us to stop education,” he added.

Despite Article 126(2)(b) of Uganda’s Constitution, which mandates that “justice shall not be delayed,” these communities are trapped in a judicial limbo.

Community leaders are now urgently calling on Parliament, the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, and the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development to intervene not only to expedite the court case but also to revisit the entire compensation process. The need for new, fairer valuations based on current land rates and appropriate compensation for families still residing in inadequate or temporary housing is immediate and pressing.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Carbon Markets Are Not the Solution: The Failed Relaunch of Emission Trading and the Clean Development Mechanism

Published

on

In light of the growing number of cold and hot wars around the world, attention to climate issues has noticeably declined, at least in Germany. Meanwhile, supposed solutions, such as carbon emission trading and the Clean Development Mechanism, continue to be promoted. As Maria Neuhauss argues, this is a bluff with far-reaching consequences.

There was more bad news in January 2025: The European Earth observation program Copernicus and the World Meteorological Organization reported that the global average temperature in 2024 was 1.6 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. This marked the first time the average global temperature exceeded the 1.5-degree target established in the Paris Climate Agreement.

In light of the growing number of crises and conflict hotspots around the world, attention to climate issues has noticeably declined, at least in Germany. While 1.4 million people demonstrated for more climate protection in Germany in September 2019, according to Fridays for Future, it is now almost impossible to speak of a climate movement. The catalyst for the third German ‘movement cycle’ was undoubtedly the rebranding of Last Generation in December 2024. The group had been decimated by state repression and media agitation in the preceding months. The U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement at the beginning of this year made it clear that defenders of the fossil fuel status quo have gained momentum and intend to achieve their goals without compromise. However, as global greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise and the material world follows its own rules, the problem of global warming will likely resurface in the collective consciousness in the foreseeable future. Whether through heat waves, extreme weather events, water shortages, or forest fires. The question is whether and what new answers and approaches a reinvigorated climate movement will develop if it does not limit itself to ‘solidarity prepping’ and actually wants to influence the course of events.

Central to this is not only resolute resistance against fossil inertia forces, but also testing the actions of liberal actors. Although they acknowledge the problem of climate change and claim to want to solve it, the measures they take are inadequate at best or, at worst, create new profit opportunities for the industries that must be phased out. This is far from a comprehensive solution to the ecological crisis, which encompasses more than just climate change. Emission trading and the associated offset mechanisms that are part of the international climate negotiations are one example that illustrates this well.

‘Climate math’ of flexible mechanisms

Emission trading is based on the idea that greenhouse gas emissions are still possible but must be justified with corresponding ‘pollution rights.’ The number of certificates is limited and should decrease over time to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Emission trading provides fundamental flexibility by allowing certificates to be bought and sold. Ultimately, this is intended to achieve the most cost-efficient climate protection possible because emission-reducing measures are expected to be implemented first where they can be done quickly and cheaply. This allows one to profit from selling unused emission allowances to other actors who initially shy away from such measures. These actors must buy the allowances until the increased prices resulting from the shortage make emission-reducing measures unavoidable. At least, that’s the theory.

Emission trading is closely linked to the concept of climate neutrality, which plays a central role in climate policy. Greenhouse gas emissions are offset by preventing emissions, using natural carbon sinks, or removing CO2 from the atmosphere. The trick to this ‘climate math’ is that, as long as emissions are compensated for, they do not count, even if greenhouse gases continue to be released into the air. These compensation measures are called ‘offsets.’

The idea that not all emissions must be reduced but can, in principle, be bought out of this obligation is based on the global inequalities that have developed historically and that fundamentally structured the first global climate agreement, the Kyoto Protocol of 1997. In line with the ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’ approach, the protocol only required industrialized countries to reduce emissions because they were mainly responsible for the high concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. However, under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), industrialized countries could partially buy their way out of this responsibility by financing emissions-reduction measures in developing and emerging countries. The CDM has therefore been described as a modern “indulgence trade” (Altvater & Brunnengräber, 2008). This allowed industrialized countries to reconcile their energy production methods with the need for climate protection while outsourcing conflicts over the energy transition, such as land use, to the Global South (Bauriedl, 2016).

Social and environmental shortcomings of the CDM

From a climate protection perspective, however, it only makes sense to include emission reductions in developing and emerging countries in the emissions balance of industrialized countries if the investments actually help reduce emissions – that is, if the projects would not have been realized without investments from the Global North. Conversely, if projects under the CDM are not additional, such as if a dam would have been built without investments from the Global North, companies in industrialized countries can claim emission credits without actually helping to reduce emissions. This is because the emissions would have been avoided anyway. This would result in an overall increase in emissions.

In fact, the additionality of many projects financed under the CDM has been questioned over the years (Öko-Institut, 2016). However, less attention has been paid to the fact that CDM projects have repeatedly led to the displacement of local people and land grabbing. For example, a reforestation project in the Kachung Central Forest Reserve in Uganda displaced many neighboring villagers who used to farm and graze their cattle there. Plagued by food insecurity, hunger, and poverty, the population was denied access to the land when CDM-approved plantations were established, further worsening their situation. The monoculture plantations also had negative ecological consequences (Carbon Market Watch, 2018). Thus, the CDM perpetuated colonial conditions on several levels. The mechanism ended with the expiration of the Kyoto Protocol in 2020. However, credits issued beforehand can still be used under the Paris Climate Agreement.

Price incentives instead of bans

A critical review of emission trading is also urgently needed. It is failing as a suitable means of climate protection on several levels. For example, in the case of the European Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), the continued generous allocation of free certificates, particularly to energy-intensive industries, protects those responsible for high CO₂ emissions from strict requirements. Additionally, the emission trading approach suffers from the fact that it is unclear whether, or to what extent, the price of emissions certificates influences investment decisions in favor of climate protection. According to various studies, the price would need to be between EUR 140 and 6,000 per ton of CO₂ to achieve the 1.5-degree target (IPCC, 2018).

However, local industry is already complaining about excessively high electricity prices (the average certificate price in 2024 was €65 per ton of CO₂), causing the government to worry about the location’s attractiveness. Given this, can we really expect politicians to force energy-intensive industries to do more to protect the climate with much higher certificate prices? Ultimately, this reveals a fundamental flaw in emission trading: its indirect effect. Instead of using targets and bans, the idea is to persuade companies to cut emissions through price incentives. However, this approach puts climate protection in the hands of actors who primarily follow the profit motive and do not necessarily translate the price signal into climate protection measures. This explains why companies enrich themselves from emission trading and the Clean Development Mechanism wherever possible (CE Delft, 2021).

For those who design and control emission trading systems, the aforementioned criticisms are merely one reason to continue supporting and refining the chosen method. This is also true for the EU, which, after a period during which emission trading was considered ineffective due to low prices, reinvigorated the system at the end of the 2010s. For instance, the EU introduced the market stability reserve. The goal is to maintain public confidence in the effectiveness of this instrument because it is the global climate protection tool. However, evaluations of its effectiveness are rare and provide little cause for optimism. According to an evaluation of various studies, the EU ETS achieves only 0 to 1.5% emission reductions per year (Green, 2021).

History and responsibility are being erased

This makes the ongoing negotiations at UN climate conferences concerning the implementation of global emission trading and a new Clean Development Mechanism all the more critical. In addition to the question of how financially weak countries will be compensated for climate-related damage and losses, the annual COPs primarily address Article 6 of the Paris Climate Agreement. Article 6 regulates international cooperation, i.e., the extent to which a country can count mitigation measures or emission avoidance elsewhere in its climate balance. Last year’s COP29 in Baku further advanced the operationalization of this article. Based on this, old CDM projects can now be transferred to the new Sustainable Development Mechanism under certain conditions. However, the first project to clear this hurdle reportedly reported emission reductions up to 26 times higher than expected based on scientific evaluation (Mulder, 2025).

Despite urgent warnings, world climate conferences seem determined to repeat past mistakes. The focus is on profit. As Tamra Gilbertson summed up in an interview with Chris Lang, the climate is the last priority. After all, trade processes will incur deductions in the future that will flow into the international adaptation fund. However, according to Gilbertson, this is also due to the fact that the climate conferences have failed to reach viable agreements on financing climate damage and adaptation measures in poorer countries thus far. Instead, emission trading is expected to deliver the necessary funds. “This is where common but differentiated responsibilities are eradicated. History and responsibility are erased, and capitalism in the form of carbon markets takes its place” (Lang, 2024).

While these processes are difficult for the public to understand, the escalating climate crisis requires critical attention more than ever. The problems associated with emission trading and the Clean Development Mechanism urgently need to be exposed as distractions from the real task at hand: rapidly phasing out fossil fuels.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Govt launches Central Account for Busuulu to protect tenants from evictions

Published

on

In a bid to shield lawful tenants from arbitrary evictions and resolve long-standing land conflicts, Lands Minister Judith Nabakooba has announced the establishment of a centralized government account where tenants can deposit nominal ground rent, locally known as busuulu.

The move, she said, is a direct response to complaints raised by tenants during President Yoweri Museveni’s recent tour of the Buganda region, where multiple communities voiced frustration over landlords who are either absent, untraceable, or outright refuse to accept rent payments.

Speaking to the press on Saturday, Nabakooba said the government account now offers tenants a legal channel to fulfill their obligations—effectively eliminating the loophole used by some landlords to accuse tenants of non-payment and justify evictions.

“Government remains committed to securing the rights of bibanja holders through lawful means,” Nabakooba said. “The public should not be misled by political messages that discourage participation in these programs.”

She stressed that lawful and bona fide occupants, commonly referred to as bibanja holders, are protected under Uganda’s Constitution and Land Act, and cannot be legally evicted as long as they pay their annual ground rent.

New Legal Backing and Clear Fee Structure

The new system is backed by an amendment to Statutory Instrument No. 55 of 2011, now updated as Statutory Instrument No. 2 of 2025, which outlines the fixed ground rent rates tenants must pay based on location:

  • Cities – Shs 50,000

  • Municipalities – Shs 40,000

  • Town Councils – Shs 30,000

  • Town Boards – Shs 20,000

  • Rural Areas – Shs 5,000

Nabakooba clarified that these rates are standardized and non-negotiable, emphasizing that busuulu is not subject to arbitrary pricing by landlords. The fees have remained unchanged since their introduction in 2011.

See also  Canada Launches New Selection Categories For Express Entry

Certificates of Occupancy and Digital Access

To strengthen tenant security and provide legal recognition, the minister encouraged bibanja holders to apply for Certificates of Occupancy, documents that officially confirm their right to occupy and use the land.

So far, the ministry has mapped more than 96,000 bibanja across several districts, and over 500 certificates have already been issued in Mubende, Mityana, Kassanda, Kiboga, and Gomba.

“This effort is not just about securing tenure,” Nabakooba noted. “It’s about giving rural tenants the confidence to invest, farm, and participate meaningfully in the market economy.”

To enhance transparency and public access, the Ministry of Lands has also launched an online portal and mobile app, where tenants can:

  • Verify the status of their Certificate of Occupancy

  • Check the identity and details of the registered landowner

  • Confirm whether the land they occupy is formally registered

The digital system is part of a broader government strategy to curb land fraud, prevent illegal sales, and guard against evictions—especially in cases where land is sold without the knowledge of long-standing tenants.

Bridging the Landlord-Tenant Divide

Nabakooba also called on landlords to work with government efforts rather than resist them. She acknowledged the strained relationship between landlords and tenants in many parts of Uganda but urged both parties to see these reforms as a path toward harmony and fairness.

“This is not about taking land away from landlords,” she explained. “It is about creating a transparent system where both landlords and tenants benefit, and land-related violence is minimized.”

The centralized busuulu collection initiative aims to deter unscrupulous evictions, encourage documentation of land relationships, and reduce tensions—particularly with newer landlords unfamiliar with traditional land use agreements.

See also  Lil Uzi Vert Teases Release Of Eternal Atake 2 With Album Trailer Shoot

As land remains a sensitive and politically charged issue in Uganda, especially in the Buganda region, government efforts like this one are seen as key to reducing conflict and promoting economic security for millions of rural families.

The Ministry says more sensitization campaigns will follow to help both tenants and landlords understand the new system, how to access the digital platforms, and the legal safeguards now in place.

Source: pressug.com

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter