Uganda must enact a transitional justice framework for war debt claimants

______________

OPINION

By Francis Nono

When President Yoweri Museveni recently announced renewed government commitment to compensate individuals who lost cattle during the insurgencies in Northern Uganda and Teso, the statement was met with mixed feelings across post post-conflict region of Acholi, Lango and Teso. For many survivors and war debt claimants, the promise sounded familiar, as another cycle of political assurance, one that has resurfaced every election season since the guns went silent.

For nearly two decades, post-conflict communities in northern and eastern Uganda have yearned for justice in the form of restitution and compensation for the massive losses they endured during the insurgencies. Cattle, property, and livelihoods were wiped out in the brutal conflict between the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and the Government of Uganda, and in the Teso region’s insurgency. These losses devastated entire families, leaving many trapped in cycles of poverty that persist to this day.

The problem is not the idea of restitution or Compensation itself, but the absence of a comprehensive, transparent, and legally backed framework to guide the process. Without such a system, cattle compensation exercises will continue to reappear every five years, tied to political expediency rather than justice.

Having worked extensively in recovery and reconstruction in post-conflict northern Uganda, I have interacted with and documented countless testimonies from victims and survivors who lost everything. For them, reparations are not merely financial relief; they represent recognition of their suffering, dignity, and the right to rebuild their lives with justice at the centre.

Yet, every electoral cycle, they see a familiar pattern: ad hoc promises of compensation for lost cattle. These exercises, though politically expedient, have been marred by allegations of corruption, favouritism, and wrongful beneficiaries. Instead of closure, they breed resentment, deepen divisions, and erode trust in the state. Cattle Compensation is reduced to a campaign talking point, stripped of its true meaning as a tool of justice and reconciliation.

This partial approach highlights the urgent need for an overarching framework rooted in Uganda’s Transitional Justice Policy. Reparations should not be left to political whim but anchored in law, implemented transparently, and delivered fairly. The establishment of a Transitional Justice Commission, as envisioned in the policy, would provide a credible mechanism to comprehensively address restitution and compensation.

To make compensation meaningful, Uganda needs a structured and credible process. This begins with verification and documentation by an independent body that can accurately establish records of those who lost cattle and property. Such a mechanism would reduce fraud, limit political interference, and ensure that genuine victims are recognised.

Equally important is fairness and equity; all affected regions and communities must be treated equally to avoid the perception that one region is favoured over another. A sustainable framework should go beyond one-off payments, integrating compensation into broader aspects of recovery, livelihood support, and reconciliation.

Only then can the process serve as a pathway to trust building, where transparency restores faith in state institutions and contributes to lasting national healing.

President Museveni’s recent announcement on compensation for those who lost cattle is a welcome recognition of the issue, but without a clear framework, it risks repeating the same cycle of ad hoc payouts. Victims deserve more than short-term relief. They deserve a comprehensive reparations program that acknowledges their suffering, rebuilds livelihoods, and restores their dignity.

Other post-conflict societies offer lessons. In Sierra Leone and South Africa, reparations programs were designed not merely as cash payments but as part of broader transitional justice processes that included truth-telling, memorialization, and community rehabilitation. Uganda, too, must take a holistic approach. Reparations should be linked to psychosocial support, livelihood programs, and community reconciliation efforts, ensuring that compensation is part of rebuilding fractured societies.

Individual payments alone, while important, will never suffice without credible verification. The outright complexity of documenting decades-old losses, coupled with population displacement and the passage of time, requires independent oversight and community-driven processes. Without this, compensation will continue to resurface every five years as a political tool rather than a path to closure for past violations.

The Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs must therefore fast-track the enactment of the Transitional Justice Policy into law. The establishment of a Transitional Justice Commission is no longer optional; it is urgent. Such a body would not only handle compensation claims but also promote truth-telling, accountability, and reconciliation, addressing the broader legacies of conflict in Uganda.

Uganda’s citizens, particularly in conflict-affected regions, have waited too long for reparative justice. Ad hoc compensation may ease immediate frustrations, but it does not heal the wounds of war. Only a transparent, fair, and sustainable framework for restitution and compensation will restore dignity to victims and build trust between citizens and the state.

The time for partial solutions has passed. Uganda must rise to the challenge of comprehensive reparations, anchored in a structured framework, if it is to move from cycles of unfulfilled promises to genuine peace, reconciliation, and national healing.

The writer is a Transitional Justice and Peacebuilding Practitioner with extensive experience in post-conflict Uganda. He has worked directly with communities affected by war, documenting victims’ stories, facilitating reparations and reconciliation processes, and advising on policy frameworks to promote justice, peace, and social cohesion.