Akisim Estate stirs up

LAND wrangles in Soroti town have hit a record high. Since 1999, most of the cases filed in the courts of law are land issues. Those complaining have waited in vain for justice.
Among the villains, sources say, are some top officials of the municipality who are deeply involved in multiple allocations of plots and sales.
It is also alleged that law enforcement officers harass and beat up tenants during impromptu evictions and demolition of structures without any compensation.
About 300 cases reported between 2003 to date remain pending in the District Land Tribunal. Since its inception in 2001, the tribunal has disposed of only 21 cases, majority of which, sources say, were mere miscellaneous applications.
Meanwhile, statistics from the Human Rights Commission, the Chief Magistrate’s and the High Courts could not be easily got.
Augustine Oluka, a resident of Soroti, does not see eye-to-eye with John Ekwangu of Cell F of Central Ward in the Eastern Division. The two men were allocated and sold plot 20 on Ejoku Road over five years ago.
Under the sale offer of February 5, 1999, Soroti Municipal Council wrote to Oluka saying, “You’re hereby informed that your application to purchase the council house No.20 on Ejoku Road has been considered and accepted.”
The value of the house was sh3.7m payable to the Municipal Council account No. 10937 in the defunct Co-operative Bank Soroti Branch, he was informed.
“If you accept this offer, come and sign the sale agreement so that you can start paying for the house."
Copies of the offer were sent to the mayor/chairman LC5, the municipal chief finance officer and the chairman finance.
The offer, the letter warned was valid up to April 5, 1999. Commencement of the lease was intended for March 1, 1999 but only after a 30% down payment equivalent to sh1,110, 000.
Oluka was the sitting tenant and when the Council resolved to sell the building, priority was given to him to bid. Although Oluka paid up, he was surprised on February 23, 2000 when the law enforcement officers in the company of Ekwangu approached him with an eviction notice.
During this encounter, Oluka was disappointed to learn that Mackay Opolot Odele, the Town Clerk, had entered an agreement with Ekwangu over the same property on February 5, 1999, the same day.
According to the agreement, Odele sold to Ekwangu the house and its plot including all fixtures and developments before F. Kakembo of Kakembo and Co Advocates who witnessed. Odele assured Ekwangu that, “the house was free of any encumbrance such as mortgage or other charges.”
He further told Ekwangu, “The expression shall, where the context permits, include Ekwangu's successor in title and personal representative.”
Unlike Oluka, Ekwangu paid sh5,100,000. He was further told to pay the 30% down payment, equivalent of sh1,530, 000 within 60 days after the agreement, with full payment by June 30, 2000.
A year later, February 22, 2000 Odele, under minute CR/1258/4 handed the property to Ekwangu following full payment. He instructed the acting housing manager and enforcement officer to hand the keys to Ekwangu as the successful buyer.
Meanwhile, Oluka and other complainants on April 2, 1999 instituted a court case No. 103/2 in the chief magistrate’s court. Unfortunately he has waited for justice to be done in vain and now appears frustrated.
The Uganda Human Rights Commission, Soroti Regional Office, December 4, 2001 in minute UHRC/S/LOG31/2001 wrote to the town clerk. But it seems the action was not decisive.
The 1995 constitution renders Oluka a permanent tenant given the period he has occupied the house, which is more than 10 years. But that argument is invalid to the Council.
The Inspectorate of Government’s report TS.106/99, May 2000, indicates Odele, rendering Oluka’s tenancy agreement expired between 1985 and 1989. The report also shows imposed rent arrears required of Oluka since expiry date. He must also pay sh75,000 as debt collection charges before vacating; failure to comply means his property must be attached.
Henry Onaba, the owner of Soko Motel, also bitterly complained that ever since he wrote to the Inspectorate of Government for redress nothing has been done. Onaba has locked horns with an official of the Soroti Aviation School.

Inspectorate of Government in Soroti acknowledges receipt of land disputes but officials say an avalanche of cases overwhelms them.
“We refer them to the District Land Tribunal,” says the deputy regional inspectorate officer, Willingstone Opinira. “The Tribunal is the one vested with that prerogative.”
But insiders, preferring anonymity, said the Tribunal has no operational funds. “Staff are willing to work but there is no money. The funds we’re using were released in April.”
They also allege, the Treasury has never allocated them funds since inception save for this financial year. “We were lawyers misplaced with surveyors.” Their inclusion in this year's budget follows their relocation from Lands to Judiciary.
Land tribunals are not regular courts of law. When one member of the quorum, which is three, is absent, nothing goes on. Matters get worse when respondents ignore court orders.
“Most chairpersons,” the insiders say, “have resigned and gone back to their Chambers due to pressure.” Countrywide, there are only 14 chairpersons and 56 members yet the circuit centres are too wide for one chairperson to preside over.
The Soroti circuit centre includes, Kumi, Katakwi, Kaberamaido and Soroti districts. The former Judge Hensley Okalebo rotates daily chairing the proceedings. The tribunals sit in each district five days a month.
Progress of cases depends on the will of applicants to keenly pursue the case and the respondents to respond. Insiders say, they are able handle at least 50 cases during the weeklong sitting in the district.
But the 50 are mainly hearings, further hearings, mentions, bringing witnesses and cross-examinations. “It takes some cases more than two years to be disposed off,” add the sources.
The lack of advocates in the region cause further delays in the disposal of the cases. Several of the experienced lawyers are too old to handle the bulk. Senior ones like F. Kakembo of Kakembo and Company Advocates have died without resolving cases.
His peer, Elayu of Elayu and Company Advocates is less than two months old in the grave.
Though the mandate is vested in the land tribunal, the bulk of disputes lie in regular courts as well. Surprisingly the regular courts also face the challenge of respondents ignoring orders and the Council is one of the culprits.

A vivid example is the case between the Council and Moses Omiat Amolo of Plot 47, Engulu Road. The Council evicted Omiat from the house six years ago. Omiat applied to the Chief Magistrate’s Court for restoration of status quo.
On December 21, 1999, Chief Magistrate Isaac Muwata ordered the Council to reinstate Omiat but to date, the Council has never honoured the order. It is alleged, Omiat was evicted in favour of a senior police officer who does not reside in Soroti. The said officer has erected a storeyed building on the land.
Seven years ago, urban councils, lost control over land within their jurisdiction. Article 285 of the 1995 Constitution abolished statutory leases that gave them authority.
The Land Act of July 1998, created new land administration structures, the land boards. Surprisingly, Soroti Municipal Council has continued evicting tenants. Cornelius Ademson was evicted in 2001.
People holding similar land titles have often clashed in the Municipal Council Offices. Social workers blame change in lifestyles from a cattle-keeping community to cash driven community.
“There were no such issues in Teso before the Karimojong rustlers stole all the cattle. Iteso preferred living in the rural, herding their cattle. Today, however, everybody’s attention is focussed on building as an alternative to keeping cows,” says a social worker.
However they do not rule out the possibility of corruption, population explosion and rural-urban upsurge.
Ends