• 13,446 Abibisika (Black Gold) Points

      LAND GRABBING IN MUBENDE, UGANDA:
      Guns, Money and Power Grabbed Over 1,975,834 Hectares of Land; Broke Families

      This report presents findings of a one-year monitoring and documentation study
      with the objective of understanding the magnitude of land forcefully taken through
      evictions and its impact on the indigenous peoples’ livelihoods. We monitored
      and investigated land evictions, a combination of research and data collection
      methodologies including conducting interviews with both victims and perpetrators,
      document reviews of both courts and newspaper articles on the same; as well as
      medical records and other documents from partners working on the issues of land
      grabbing in Mubende district.

      Over that period, Witnessradio.org has been able to document cases of land
      grabbing and forceful eviction of sitting tenants and bonafide occupants from land
      totaling up to 1,975,834 hectares. The findings indicate that majority (60%) of the
      evictors/perpetrators were local business persons followed by foreign investors
      with 6 cases (24%) and government with (12%) cases.

      More than 70% of the grabbed land has been acquired through “title on the table”
      process. Unfortunately, this process sidelined lawful procedures as prescribed in the
      1998 Land Act. The new process introduced by officials in Mubende Land Board
      issues minutes for the titles from their offices before physically visiting the land and
      consulting established structures including area land committees.

      The findings also show that Freehold land had the highest cases of disputes and
      evictions with 13 (52%) out of the 25 cases followed by Mailo land with 6 cases. In
      terms of land size, still Freehold land was the largest at almost 99%, equivalent to
      1,945,539 hectares.

      Additionally, from the findings, 24 out of the 25 cases were forceful evictions,
      affecting over 186,000 households. The only case which was not forceful was
      because the occupants hadn’t been evicted yet.