Ugandan land rights civil society organizations

• Land and Equity Movement in Uganda (LEMU) - Uganda-CAN partner
  contact: Judy Adoko: Programme Co-ordinator for LEMU
  website: landinuganda.org
  email: LEMU@utlonline.co.ug
  telephone: 256 - 41 - 57 68 18 and 256 - 772 - 85 62 12
  address: Plot 93/95 Bukasa Road,
  Namuwongo Estate,
  P. O. Box 23722,
  Kampala, Uganda, East Africa.



• Uganda Land Alliance:
  Block 213, Plot 538
  Makonzo Zone Bukoto, off Kisasi Road
  PO Box 26990
  Kampala
  contact: Oscar Oceh Kanyarangareng
  email: ula@africaonline.co.ug

Resources

Uganda-CAN Team Top Recommended

• Land Matters in Displacement: The Importance of Land Rights in Acholiland and What Threatens Them. Judy Adoko and Simon Levine. Civil Society Organizations for Peace in Northern Uganda. December 2004. (scroll to bottom of page).


• LEMU Policy Briefs - these briefs examine land rights, displacement, landlessness and other land issues in northern and eastern Uganda.


• LEMU Information Documents - these information documents explain the complex customary tenure system and government land laws in northern and eastern Uganda, with attention to how women, children, and others vulnerable to land dispossession can protect their rights.


• Uganda-CAN Interview with Judy Adoko of the Land and Equity Movement in Uganda, March 02, 2006.

Articles

• Army kills two women in Pader. Moses Odokonyero. The New Vision (online). 6 April 2005.


• Land will cause another war in northern Uganda after Kony's. Joseph Bossa. The New Vision (online). 25 March 2005.


• Women gain inch in push for land rights in Uganda. Nicole Leistikow. Women's Enews. July 20, 2003.

Reports

• Behind the Violence: Causes, Consequences and the Search for Solutions to the War in Northern Uganda [PDF]. Zachary Lomo and Lucy Hovil. Refugee Law Project Working Paper No. 11. June 2004. Pgs. 27-29.


• Civil society and the struggle for land rights for marginalized groups: the contribution of the Uganda Land Alliance to the Land Act 1998. Dr N. Bazaara. Civil Society and Governance Programme, IDS. 2000.


• Displacement exacerbates consequences of the Land Act of 1998 for women's access to land. Global IDP Database. March 2004.


• Oxfam land rights reports.

• "Kony says that Museveni stood by as the Karamajong stole our cattle and now he wants to sell our Acholi land. That is why they are removing people and putting them into camps." IDP man, Kitgum*


• "The government, if they find you farming their lands, they beat you. But then they don't feed you. " Gulu Human Rights Worker*


• -"We can't complain [about soldiers taking our land]. We remember how they handled us when we were brought into camps. If you start talking, you are called a rebel collaborator…Landlords don't like it but they can't object. What can people do?" IDPs, Gulu^


• -"If people own land individually, they will end up landless, because they will sell it. They will get money but how long will it last? What will the children do? It will take many decades for there to be a modern urban economy which can provide jobs for the people." Retired Bishop Ochola^


• -" When we sneak home to get food, we are exposed to greater risks from the soldiers than from rebels. The rebels move in groups, and you can see their tracks, so once they have passed, you know they are gone. The Army comes and goes, so they are harder to avoid. If they catch you, they accuse you of being a rebel." Elders, Gulu^


• -" As soon as this war ends, the next one will begin. It will be a land war, and it will be between brothers in the same clan." (Several interviewees in northern Ugandan land insecurity study)^

Quote from Behind the Violence: Causes, Consequences and the Search for Solutions to the War in Northern Uganda. Zachary Lomo and Lucy Hovil. Refugee Law Project Working Paper No. 11. June 2004. Pgs. 26-29.

* Quote is from: Behind the Violence: Causes, Consequences and the Search for Solutions to the War in Northern Uganda. Zachary Lomo and Lucy Hovil. Refugee Law Project Working Paper No. 11. June 2004. Pgs. 26-29.
















^ Quote is from: Land Matters in Displacement: The Importance of Land Rights in Acholiland and What Threatens Them. Judy Adoko and Simon Levine. Civil Society Organizations for Peace in Northern Uganda. December 2004. pgs 33-54.

Uganda-CAN recognizes that land insecurity in northern Uganda, a forgotten issue in a forgotten war, is essential to the prospects for peace and development in the region.

Beyond the LRA rebellion, continued land insecurity threatens widespread landlessness, poverty, and further bloodshed. Without land security for all northern Ugandans, especially IDPs, peace, trust-building, and rehabilitation will remain elusive. In light of this, Uganda-CAN recommends that the US government take the following actions to ensure that land insecurity in northern Uganda does not remain an obstacle to peace.

• 1. Provide funding- for resettlement kits and monitoring of resettlement once IDPs begin returning to their land. Monitoring should ensure that women (especially widows) and children are not deprived of their land and that all land disputes are peacefully resolved.



• 2. Encourage Ugandan government- to take concrete, visible steps to ensure land security of all northern Ugandans. These should include circulating, publicizing, and backing up important aspects of the 2004 National Policy for Internally Displaced Persons- right of voluntary return to homes, improving channels of communication between government and IDPs, IDPs' protection of property rights. The US should also pressure the Ugandan government to adequately fund and staff District Land Boards and local government branches involved in land resettlement and conflict resolution.



• 3. Ensure- that the US Africa Growth and Opportunity Act does not inadvertently threaten land security in northern Uganda by encouraging permanent displacement for commercial farming. Ensure that US investors are not involved in land purchases in which northern Ugandans are not able to fully exercise their land rights.



• 4. Provide funding- for research on customary tenure to move towards a better understanding of it and its important role in development in northern Uganda.

IDPs' ownership rights and right to return to the land they have been displaced from is being threatened by negligent central government actions, encroachment by local actors, and changes in the customary land tenure system. In light of the long separation from their land, for some over a decade, many IDPs are afraid that the government has plans prevent them from returning to their land in order to pursue their own interests with it. Despite an official Ugandan government National IDP Policy asserting the right of IDPs to return to their land once the LRA rebellion ends, the government has in many cases fueled suspicions that it does not prioritize IDP land rights, and even has plans to subvert them. Additionally, local encroachment of land rights and subtle changes in land tenure caused by central government land laws pose a grave long-term threat to land security in northern Uganda.

• Length of the war and permanent displacement- Many IDPs, because of the longevity of the war, fear that the central government is purposely prolonging the war in order to pursue its own interests in IDP land. These fears are exacerbated by high-level government debates about making IDP camps permanent settlements, which would discourage (or prevent) IDPs from returning to their land.



• Military Strategy- In many places in northern Uganda, the UPDF has enforced a strict policy of preventing IDPs from leaving camps and visiting their land, nominally to prevent farmers from growing crops that the LRA might steal. However, the policy has had very harsh consequences by preventing already-desperate IDPs from augmenting their meager food aid by farming. Some IDPs have been shot and killed by the UPDF while trying to farm their land. Also, in some places army officers or larger landowners have been able to farm supposedly insecure areas IDPs are prevented from accessing. Consequently, many IDPs believe that the policy is not designed to help them (by ending the rebellion), but to deprive smaller land owners of their land while allowing more powerful land owners to continue to profit from farming.



• Compulsorily acquisition of land and large-scale farming- In 2003 Pres. Museveni's Cabinet advocated a Constitutional amendment that would have allowed the government to compulsorily acquire private land and give it to private investors. The compulsorily acquisition proposal, later withdrawn, magnified fears that the central government intended to "steal" IDP land in northern Uganda and give it to entrepreneurs for use in profitable large-scale mechanized farming. The US Africa Growth and Opportunity Act, which encourages certain African agricultural exports to the US, may be inadvertently fostering a push for large-scale, mechanized farming of northern Uganda, which would force some farmers – most likely poorer and weaker families – to sell their landholdings

• Local encroachment- There are many fears that local governments, greedy family members, and opposing clans will try to encroach on the land of families or clans weakened by the cultural upheaval and displacement. Those especially at risk are those women or children who are poorly protected by national and customary land laws and physically unable to secure land claims. Also, instances of local officials illegally allocating land claimed by clans have been reported in Uganda's leading newspapers as recent as April 2005.



• Changes in customary tenure- Under northern Uganda's customary land tenure, land sales were regulated by clan elders, helping to protect against landlessness and ensuring land would be available to future generations. However, the massive displacement in northern Uganda has severely weakened the clan system, lessened feelings of social obligations to clans and given more individuals the ability to sell land. Also, the Ugandan government has created an official body of land laws that further undermine their customary counterparts. The government is also pushing for a stronger land market to boost development.
  
  However, many fear that combined with weakened clan checks on land selling, a stronger land market could cause many already impoverished northern Ugandans to sell their land, causing extensive landlessness and long-term poverty. The government laws also place more power to sell land in the hands of male heads of households, reducing the livelihood options for women and children.

Over 1.5 million northern Ugandans have been moved into IDP camps since 1996, wrenched from the land that has traditionally occupied a central economic, cultural, and spiritual role in their lives. Before 1996, most northern Ugandans lived directly off the land as small-scale farmers under a complex customary tenure system in which land rights were divided between clan elders and individual families. In the midst of the cultural and economic meltdown in the camps land has taken on increased value, becoming for many the only link to a threatened culture and hope for a brighter economic future.

Displacement has also greatly weakened land security in northern Uganda, especially for those longest displaced in Acholiland. Land ownership has traditionally been established by communal/elder memory and physical presence on the land and most people do not have titles or officially surveyed boundaries. The death of elders, long-term displacement, and destruction of unofficial boundary markers (bushes, trees, etc.) during fighting will make re-establishing land claims difficult. Those most vulnerable to losing land claims will be households headed by women and children. Ongoing peace talks between the LRA and the Ugandan government in Juba, Sudan have allowed many IDPs to return home, and the potential for land conflicts may soon become a reality.

The land issue both reflects and contributes to larger themes that have hindered peace efforts in northern Uganda. Travel restrictions placed on many IDP camps (preventing them from visiting their land) and poor channels of communication between IDP camps and government offices have caused widespread fears of land insecurity that hinder cooperation and trust-building amongst northern Ugandans and the central government. Furthermore, the political marginalization and voicelessness of IDPs, preventing their input on central government land policies, raises the possibility that even well-intentioned central government policies may weaken IDPs' land security. More importantly, there is a great threat of future conflicts if IDPs are prevented from returning to their lands, even if the Juba talks lead to an end of the LRA rebellion. Until the central government ensures IDPs' land security in northern Uganda, land insecurity will continue to be an obstacle to peace efforts and a potential flashpoint for future bloodshed.

Over 1.5 million northern Ugandans have been moved into internally displaced persons' (IDP) camps since 1996, wrenched from the land that has traditionally occupied a central economic, cultural, and spiritual role in their societies. Before 1996, most northern Ugandans lived directly off the land as small-scale farmers, which is owned under a complex customary system in which land rights are divided between the clan elders and individual families. In the midst of the cultural and economic crises in the camps, land has taken on increased importance. For some, it is the only link to a threatened culture and hope for a brighter economic future.

Judy Adoko is a land rights activist with the Land and Equity Movement in Uganda (LEMU). She has studied issues concerning the land rights and land security of IDPs and other peoples affected by the war in northern Uganda, and has written extensively on the subject. She addressed some of these contentious issues in a recent interview with Uganda-CAN.

Uganda-CAN: What role does land play in the lives of northern Ugandans? Why is the issue of land security so important to the people of northern Uganda, especially IDPs?

Judy Adoko: The north and east of Uganda used to heavily rely on cattle. Cattle were sold for cash in emergencies, paid school fees and dowries, and oxen were used for ploughing. Owning a lot of cattle gave one social prestige and social security. The cattle in East and Northern Uganda were rustled in 1988 and almost immediately, people had to take refuge in camps because of the war. In the absence of cattle, land now takes a central position in lives of people and in meeting their livelihood. It is now the only source of livelihood and security and the source of cash for dowry, school fees, medicine and emergencies. Being displaced from the only remaining asset makes people very insecure and suspicious of government intention towards the land. This suspicion is kept alive by politicians constantly talking about investment and the land in the north lying “idle” and being communally owned (implying no one really owns it).

U-CAN: What are the gravest threats to the land security of IDPs and other northern Ugandans?

JA: There is no certificate or title to land to show ownership of land under customary tenure. Proof of ownership is by use and occupation and by knowledge of people. Boundaries are usually natural landmarks such as rivers, mountains, and grass left uncut on the boundaries over a long period of time on the borders of land. It is now almost 20 years since people vacated their land and started living in camps. Meanwhile, the army has gone around burning grass and cutting trees in search of rebels, destroying some of the natural boundaries and making it more difficult to identify individual plots (although in our research work in 2003, the people felt they can always remember their land).

Many adult have died in camps. Their death means some knowledge concerning who has rights to what land has died with them. Likewise, many children are born in the camps and have no idea what land they hailed from. They would need the information of other good willed family members to show them their land. The greatest threat to people’s land is therefore the continuous stay in camps, the death of the people with information on land rights.

At a broader level, the threat to people’s land rights stems from the fact that the laws governing customary tenure remain unwritten and so changes taking place are not recognized, debated and changed. For example, the clan’s role in protecting land from sale and protecting the rights of women and children is weakening and has not been effectively replaced by state laws. Those most vulnerable to the changes are women and children.

JA: The Ugandan law states that land “not owned” may be allocated to others by the District Land Board. There is risk of someone’s land appearing to be not owned being allocated to a third party while the people with the land rights are in camps and not aware of what is going on. There is no law against allocating land belonging to an IDP.

Vulnerability of peoples’ rights will stem from the attitude of policy makers wishing to convert customary tenure from a system of land rights and responsibility shared within the household to that of an individual owner of land. This is proposed through the acquisition or the issuing of a title to “the head of the family”. The risk is for the male head of the family taking the land as his sole property and selling it. There is also a risk from internally displaced persons occupying other people’s land and assuming ownership and selling it when the people with the land rights are away in other camps.

U-CAN: A 2004 LEMU report commented that many IDPs perceive the primary threat to their land security as government sponsored foreign investment, when other trends – such as weakening of the clan-based tenure system – may be a more of a threat to their land security. Why does this discrepancy exist?

JA: The fear that government wants the land of displaced persons is brought about by President Museveni's constant talk of the need for land for investors and the attitude that the north has idle land. The people strongly suspect that the reason for the war not ending is because the government wants to take their land and give it away to investors.

LEMU's assertion that inter-family threats will be more of a problem in future was arrived at during research about what customary tenure, levels of poverty in the north, and the changes brought about by displacement. Since they have not as yet started happening, it is difficult for people to mention them. They tend to focus on what is current rather than what is likely to come.

Since laws under customary tenure are unwritten, there is a tendency for people to relate to it “as it used to be” and the changes are not recognized and their impact unknown. It is only through facilitation that some of the threats may be recognized.

U-CAN: How has the government of Uganda attempted to deal with threats to land security in northern Uganda? Has the government adequately addressed the issue?

JA: The government has one policy for the whole country and to my knowledge does not have any policy specifically for displaced persons. Their only "land policy" concerning displaced persons deals with resettlement of the IDPs on their land when peace returns and a resettlement package. There is no policy on compensation to the host communities for the damage to their land or acknowledgement of their contribution; there is no systematic policy on access to land for all IDPs while they are in camps. In some camps, the government is has attempted to provide security while people work in the fields surrounding the camps. Unfortunately this policy makes people even more suspicious of the government's intentions and is not sustainable.

U-CAN: If the LRA rebellion ended tomorrow and people began returning to their homes, it would be the first time many had seen their lands in years. What would be the biggest challenges to a peaceful and equitable resettlement process? Who would be the most vulnerable to losing land claims?

JA: When people run into camps they did so “sequentially” with people from the more rural areas moving and settling on land nearer urban centres. Some of these people now misinterpret a section of the current land law to say that if they live on someone else land for more than 12 years, they become the owners of the land. This is likely to lead to conflict.

Children born in camps and are orphans will rely on the good will of their older relatives to show them their father’s land. With the level of poverty and the weakening of the clan, it is possible that the very people to protect the orphans will be the people to grab their land.

Widows who are not “inherited” by husbands’ relative or who have no children or male children will be vulnerable to land grabs especially now that clan protection has weakened.

IDPs will return home with very little or no assets and yet the needs for cash are greater now. We should expect an increase in distress land sales for families to provide education fees, dowry, etc. Some will also sell land for consumption needs such as drinking. This might lead to landlessness and the creation of “an awkward class”.

Some people will find their land taken over by others or fear mines or grenades on the land if their land was once occupied by the army. It is also not clear if the government will compensate hosts communities whose land has been degraded. It is not clear as well if all people will want to return o the villages and if the government has plans and land to resettle these people.

U-CAN: How have the traditional conflict resolution mechanisms of the Acholi and other peoples affected by a years of confinement in IDP camps? In light of this, what challenges will the Acholi and others face when dealing with post-conflict land disputes?

JA: Although the Land Act 1998 recognises customary tenure, it goes ahead to establish state institutions to manage customary land thereby undermining the clan institution to hear cases of land conflict. The Land Tribunals are under funded and not very effective. There will therefore be a vacuum within which conflict and land rights abuse will very likely flourish. Together with cultural institutions in Lango and Teso Regions, LEMU has facilitated the drafting of an ordinance proposing to set up traditional courts to hear land cases but this cannot be passed into law unless the land act is amended.

U-CAN: In February 2006 Yoweri Museveni was elected to begin his third decade of rule in Uganda. What challenges will he face when addressing the issue of land security in the north in the next five years?

JA: All governments in Uganda have followed a policy of transforming customary tenure into a freehold and individual system. This wish to transform customary tenure is based on the wrong belief that customary tenure is an open access system that does not allow security of tenure for people to invest in agriculture. We know that the belief is false and customary tenure does not give insecurity of tenure. The second challenge will be in the implementation of the land market policy in a way that leads to economic growth and not to landlessness and destitution. The government also be challenged to legalise family titles to be held in the names both husbands and wives.

U-CAN: What advise would you give him to ensure the land security of all northern Ugandans affected by the war is protected?

JA: 80% of Ugandans hold land under customary tenure. It does not make sense to try and push the majority (80%) towards a system of the minority (freehold for 20%). The government should also support the institutionalization of rights under customary tenure. The greatest challenge for the next government is therefore to recognize customary tenure in its own right and to spend time and resources understanding land rights in order to protect it.

Peace should return and people go back to their land to plant agreed trees species on the boundaries.

U-CAN: What role can the international community play in helping ensure land security in northern Uganda?

JA: They may do the following:
-Ensure that multinationals do not take the land of national and turn the national into cheap labourers.
-Call on our government to bring peace so people may return home.
-Call on our government to support customary tenure and invest in understanding land rights under it.
-Support research in finding out if the assumptions made by the land market policies are being realized worldwide and lobby for the land market policy to change to land rights protection policy.
-Find a way to monitor and avoid landlessness brought about by distress land sales and responsible land sales.

Visit Uganda-CAN's Land Insecurity resource page, which includes LEMU's contact information.