Opinion
West Nile @ 100: Some West Nilers are lost Bagungu
Publish Date: Apr 24, 2014
newvision
  • mail
  • img

By Herbert Munyomo

Do all West Nilers know their roots? Historical records indicate that some of them were Bagungu. Provincial papers available at the Uganda National Archives indicate that the Bagungu were, by the time of first European contact with Bunyoro, a bigger fishing community occupying a vast territory stretching from the east to west of Lake Albert in the present day DR Congo.

The Bagungu also settled along the banks of River Nile in Gulu and the West Nile.

The 1914 Anglo-Belgian boundary agreement which shows West Nile became part of Uganda on April 21 1914, split the Bagungu into two: The Bagungu in Uganda and those in Congo. In fact, the Bagungu were torn into three, if not four, as those in Uganda were further split into the Bagungu in Bunyoro, those in West Nile and the ones in Gulu, now Nwoya district. It happened that for some administrative reasons, somehow related to the enforcement of the boundary agreement, the Bagungu resident in West Nile and Gulu were barred from coming back to Bunyoro. In short, four divisions of Bagungu were created as follows: Bagungu Congo, Bagungu West Nile, Bagungu Gulu and Bagungu Bunyoro.

According to this boundary agreement, the south eastern part of the Mahagi strip was (in exchange for the West Nile) transferred to the Belgian Congo, which provided the town of Mahagi in Congo, access to Lake Albert. In effect, the Bagungu who lived on the western side of Lake Albert became the Bagungu Congo as Lake Albert came to be shared between Congo and Uganda. These ‘lost Bagungu’ in the Congo, West Nile, and Gulu have since been assimilated to Alur, Lugbara, Junam, Acholi and other tribes native to West Nile and the DR Congo.

Arguably, the 1914 Anglo-Belgian boundary agreement is thus one of the historical injuries that the Bagungu will leave to remember. The treaty is one of the factors responsible for their vulnerability, especially the minority status and the associated suppression, dispossession, discrimination and marginalisation, which have gone on to the present day.

Further to the issue of “lost Bagungu”, historical records also indicate that by 1917, the Bagungu Question (as Arthur Evelyn Weatherhead, the then West Nile commissioner termed it) had become a bone of contention between colonial powers. In fact in 1919, Weather had described the Bagungu Question as a source of the greatest trouble between West Nile district and Mahagi. By March 1919, the issue of lost Bagungu was triggering a series of diplomatic correspondences on the subject among the British and Belgian governments and Bunyoro Kitara Kingdom.

To cite a few excerpts, in a letter (dated March 12, 1919) to the Provincial Commissioner, Northern Province, H.A Mackenzie, the then District Commissioner Bunyoro writes: “… I have been asked by the Mukama and Lukiko of Bunyoro to approach you with a view to permission being granted for Bagungu … resident in West Nile districts to come back and reside in Bunyoro …. [However] the return of the Bagungu may be affected by Article 4 of the treaty with the Belgian government, as if the Bagungu in the West Nile come across here, those from the Congo may follow.…”

Reacting on Mackenzie’s letter, Commissioner Weatherhead, writes on April 4, 1919. She tells off Mackenzie and the Mukama that neither the Bagungu in the Congo nor those in West Nile were about to return to Bunyoro. In her six point letter entitled: “Native Affairs Junam, Panyamur: Bagungu”, Weatherhead thus writes inter alia: “...I most emphatically protest against further claims by the Mukama…”

The writer is the president of Lake Albert Indigenous Peoples Survival Movement

The statements, comments, or opinions expressed through the use of New Vision Online are those of their respective authors, who are solely responsible for them, and do not necessarily represent the views held by the staff and management of New Vision Online.

New Vision Online reserves the right to moderate, publish or delete a post without warning or consultation with the author.Find out why we moderate comments. For any questions please contact digital@newvision.co.ug

  • mail
  • img
blog comments powered by Disqus
Also In This Section
Objectively, Uganda has no kings
History has known five types of human societies: Communalistic, slave – owning, feudal, capitalist and socialist....
Ugandans in arrears of rational voting
Come 2016, Uganda voters should flash ‘Red Cards’ to the MPs who have merely acted as rubber stamps and those who just oppose everything and propose nothing....
The trouble with universal education
With the deadline for the United Nations Millennium Development Goals fast approaching, the world is gearing up to establish a new set of goals for the next 15 years....
Put on hold taxes on agro inputs and equipment
I find the government’s proposed tax on agro inputs and equipment inconsistent with its policy position to modernise agriculture and fight rural poverty....
Ministry of health needs to re-visit its policy decision on Health Centre IIs
The Government of Uganda through the Ministry of Health has recently issued a policy statement which stops the establishment of more Health Centre IIs in the country....
Uganda Foreign Missions websites a disaster
Whenever I travel outside Uganda, people always ask me three questions; how is President Idi Amin? How is HIV/AIDs infection rate in Uganda?...
Will strict traffic laws reduce road accidents?
Yes
No
Can't Say
follow us
subscribe to our news letter