Buganda land board, royals fight over land

Jan 14, 2010

FOUR Buganda royals are up-in-arms with Mengo officials, whom they accuse of grabbing and selling their land. The four descendants of Kabaka Daudi Chwa are Edith Nabweteme, Elizabeth Nakabiri, Beatrice Muggale and David Ssimbwa.

By Josephine Maseruka

FOUR Buganda royals are up-in-arms with Mengo officials, whom they accuse of grabbing and selling their land.

The four descendants of Kabaka Daudi Chwa are Edith Nabweteme, Elizabeth Nakabiri, Beatrice Muggale and David Ssimbwa.

They accuse the Buganda land board of selling 18 square miles left to them by Chwa.
Chwa was Kabaka Ronald Mutebi’s grandfather.
The land is in Najjanankumbi, Masajja, Lufuuka, Namasuba, Zzana, Kyamula, Salaama, Munyonyo and Buziga in Kampala district. The area currently under contention is the 3.7 acres on Block 273, Plot 30 in Namasuba, which, until recently, was used by the works and transport ministry.

Mengo has, however, denied the allegation.

According to the land board, the land in question was not Daudi Chwa’s private estate but part of the 350 square miles of Kabaka’s official land. Records from Mengo show that Chwa had 100 square miles as his private estate.

The records also detail Kabaka’s 350 square miles.
In the records, the contentious land is recorded as FC 14231 under His Highness the Kabaka’s land.

Mengo officials said FC 14231 is now what is known as Block 273, Plot 30 in Kyaddondo county.

A copy of the land title seen by The New Vision showed that the disputed land was registered on July 28, 1971, with the Kabaka of Buganda as the proprietor and not Chwa.

Mengo officials have asked the aggrieved royals to present genuine land titles to prove their claim. They noted that Chwa’s private estate was left to various relatives, who have authentic titles.

Several royals have in the past attempted to place caveats on land registered under the proprietorship of the Kabaka of Buganda.

Sarah Basangwa, the acting commissioner for land registration, has in various communications rejected their application, arguing that the land is not personal property.

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