Go slow on changing Mailo land tenure
Mar 01, 2007
UGANDA'S draft National Land Policy recommends that Mailo land tenure be phased out by converting it to Freehold, and that Mailo and Freehold in urban areas be converted into Leasehold.
By Rose Nakayi
UGANDA'S draft National Land Policy recommends that Mailo land tenure be phased out by converting it to Freehold, and that Mailo and Freehold in urban areas be converted into Leasehold.
Whether or not the above recommendations are favourable to sections of the population does not seem to be the issue; but it must be presumed that there are substantial economic reasons behind them.
Converting Mailo land and Freehold into Leasehold in the urban areas might lead to more efficient land use, and free marketability of land rights.
However, we should remember that the current land tenure systems were borne by particular events in our history and evolved through various legislative enactments and a diversity of political regimes to acquire their current shape. Tampering with the Mailo system is tantamount to tampering with the heritage of the Baganda, especially since the Kabaka is the Ssabataka. Caution should therefore be taken in attempting to tamper with the land holding systems.
In practical terms, converting Mailo land into Freehold might not change much, save for the nomenclature. A close look at the incidents of both Mailo and Freehold tenure reveals that they are in essence the same. A freehold system involves the holding of registered land in perpetuity or for a period less than perpetuity, which might be fixed by a condition. The Mailo system allows for the same, in addition to subjecting the rights of the land owner to those of a lawful or bonafide occupant on the land or their successors in title. On the other hand, a leasehold tenure is a product of contract or law and gives the tenant exclusive rights on the land for a certain period of time. Nevertheless, we shouldn’t forget that there are loyalties attached to Mailo land in Buganda.
This means any attempt at changing it (even if it leaves the incidents intact but gives it another name) might be misinterpreted. There is therefore a need to sensitise the public about the draft policy and its likely effects. Otherwise any proposals that appear to be tampering with the status quo might incite some people to make hasty pronouncements and fight tooth and nail for what they believe belongs to them. It is my hope that we shall not nip the proposed policy in the bud, before thoroughly understanding what it offers to Ugandans.
The writer is a lecturer in the Faculty of Law,
Makerere University
UGANDA'S draft National Land Policy recommends that Mailo land tenure be phased out by converting it to Freehold, and that Mailo and Freehold in urban areas be converted into Leasehold.
Whether or not the above recommendations are favourable to sections of the population does not seem to be the issue; but it must be presumed that there are substantial economic reasons behind them.
Converting Mailo land and Freehold into Leasehold in the urban areas might lead to more efficient land use, and free marketability of land rights.
However, we should remember that the current land tenure systems were borne by particular events in our history and evolved through various legislative enactments and a diversity of political regimes to acquire their current shape. Tampering with the Mailo system is tantamount to tampering with the heritage of the Baganda, especially since the Kabaka is the Ssabataka. Caution should therefore be taken in attempting to tamper with the land holding systems.
In practical terms, converting Mailo land into Freehold might not change much, save for the nomenclature. A close look at the incidents of both Mailo and Freehold tenure reveals that they are in essence the same. A freehold system involves the holding of registered land in perpetuity or for a period less than perpetuity, which might be fixed by a condition. The Mailo system allows for the same, in addition to subjecting the rights of the land owner to those of a lawful or bonafide occupant on the land or their successors in title. On the other hand, a leasehold tenure is a product of contract or law and gives the tenant exclusive rights on the land for a certain period of time. Nevertheless, we shouldn’t forget that there are loyalties attached to Mailo land in Buganda.
This means any attempt at changing it (even if it leaves the incidents intact but gives it another name) might be misinterpreted. There is therefore a need to sensitise the public about the draft policy and its likely effects. Otherwise any proposals that appear to be tampering with the status quo might incite some people to make hasty pronouncements and fight tooth and nail for what they believe belongs to them. It is my hope that we shall not nip the proposed policy in the bud, before thoroughly understanding what it offers to Ugandans.
The writer is a lecturer in the Faculty of Law,
Makerere University