Objectives of the Land Act were not fulfilled

Mar 24, 2008

THE Land (Amendment) Bill 2007 has caused a storm. Some people suspect the new law may not be implemented as was the case with the Land Act 1998. The objectives of the Land Act were to provide security of tenure to lawful and bonafide occupants on registered land.

Mahdi Ssenkabirwa

THE Land (Amendment) Bill 2007 has caused a storm. Some people suspect the new law may not be implemented as was the case with the Land Act 1998. The objectives of the Land Act were to provide security of tenure to lawful and bonafide occupants on registered land.

It was also meant to allow utilisation of the land in the event of a disagreement between the registered owner and the occupant.

Ten years later, such problems still exist. These are the same issues the Government is basing the amendments on. The Act requires tenants to get certificates of occupancy and none has received one.

The pre-1998 Land Act Bill was also received with apathy, suspicion, fear and outright rejection by Buganda Kingdom and opposition legislators of the Sixth Parliament. It even prompted the kingdom to call off Kabaka Mutebi’s fifth coronation anniversary and Baganda started months of mourning.

The then Katikkiro, Joseph Ssemwogere, accused President Museveni of forgetting the role Buganda played in bringing him to power. The critics argued that the Bill had not been given enough time to be scrutinised and debated.

A similar scenario is being replayed.
The Act provided for establishment of district land boards by January 1999 and the Land Fund by July 1999. But by January 1999, only 18 districts out of 45 had set up land boards. The districts had a big role to play in implementing the Act, but they lacked capacity.

They were unable to recruit qualified technical staff for land offices and were, therefore, unable to carry out activities necessary for envisaged land reforms. With the increase of districts to over 80 and shrinking revenues to the local governments, the situation is worse.

The Land Act requires each district to recruit five professional staff including a surveyor, a land officer, a valuer, a physical planner and a registrar of titles. But only 16 districts out of 45 had land offices by 2000; only one had a physical planner, none had a valuer and only a few had registrars of titles. Even today, the personnel lack tools and a reasonable pay.

These factors are hindering delivery of services and if not addressed, the problems of land use will remain regardless of any law reforms. Failure to implement the Land Act 1998 was mainly because of resource constraints. If it had been implemented fully, probably there would be no need to reform the law.

The writer is a journalist

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});