I read with dismay the commentary by Sam Mayanja published in the New Vision of Thursday (May 11, 2017) titled ‘How actions of Buganda Land Board are tainting Kabaka’s image!’

Dismay because the distinguished counsel seems so intent on reflecting a good image of the Kabaka, but only in the heading! With due respect, Mayanja also clearly disconnects the much-worded piece from its heading.

In the piece, the writer uses half of the article to reflect a “historical mistake” occasioned at the signing of the 1900 Buganda Agreement, painting a picture, just like many have attempted, that the setup of Buganda kingdom started at the signing of that agreement – a bit like even the allottees were appointed on that day and land was bestowed upon them on the same day!

Mayanja should read back tens of years before the 1900 era to appreciate the historical foundation of the kingdom of Buganda. With a clear setup of chiefs appointed by the Kabaka, hereditary clan heads and a known hierarchical establishment that was only cemented at the signing of the agreement, the kingdom of Buganda had a grounded system that preexisted the agreement.

In this setup, the Kabaka superintended all aspects of administration in the kingdom and, yes, including distribution of land rights, laws on land administration and many more.

The colonial laws that codified ownership of land, as Mayanja rightly says, were only part of a sweeping wave of land economics that interplayed the colonial period and the advent of a monetary economy.

And since then, it can only be right that we all propose progressive systems of land administration – including laws, but not to suppose a rendition of colonial assumptions, 70 years after them.

It is very dishonest for Mayanja to seem to suggest that people are better off staying on unregistered land in the era of the economic revolution that requires everyone to look at land as a resource rather than a subject of “simply settlement”; in an era where house-holds need to interact with the market forces, while engaging in commercial agrarian practices; in an era of the widening housing deficit and, hence, a need for planned real estate investments, etc.

Registered land, in whatever tenure, is value and, being a lawyer, Mayanja knows that a title is the most recognized proof of owner- ship of land.

Surely, Mayanja cannot fail to realize the need to permit erstwhile bibanja holders the opportunity to enjoy the mentioned benefits and more!

To paraphrase Hernando de Soto from his book The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else, the cause of the existence of a less-developed world is that the representational process for assets is widely not under-taken.

Houses are being built on land whose ownership rights are not properly recorded and businesses are not incorporated. Because the rights to these possessions are not adequately documented, these assets cannot be traded outside the narrow local circles where people know each other or optimally used as collateral for loans.

I herewith reiterate the critical need for registering ownership of land as provided for by the laws of the country and promulgated by Buganda Land Board; not forgetting that the board’s land ownership registration process is largely owned by the baami ba Kabaka who witness on all transactional forms.

This surely shows that the Kabaka respects and promotes the law and kingdom institutions. I am sure Mayanja wants it written that Buganda Land Board, as established in 1994, is very different from the statutory old one of 1962; that this new board is an incorporated company, with a mandate to manage the returned estate and facilitate effective regularization of tenancy on land vested under the Kabaka.

To that end, it is a private company, undeserving of any nuances relating to district land boards or even regional boards. Mayanja may also want it written that Buganda Land Board is a well-managed entity, with a governing board and sound management team boasting immense technical and professional individuals, not in any way tainting the image of the Kabaka.

It is true, just like Mayanja puts it, that land is the source of all material wealth and is the key to human existence, with issues, whose failure to resolve could lead to instability.

Mayanja and his ilk just don’t recognize that Buganda Land Board manages less than eight per cent of land in Buganda; it surely can’t be the cause of the bigger problem.

Such an entity should only be supported in this effort, perhaps with necessary laws to customize a land leasing arrangement fitting for Uganda.

mgaga.evarist@gmail.com

The author is a concerned citizen and a registered tenant on Kabaka’s land.