Fund land tribunals/committees

By Alex Ndeezi

Recently, the media reported that junior lands Minister Aidha Nantaba had suspended the operations of her committee which was appointed by the president a few months ago.

 The Nantaba Committee was appointed following the reported failure of another land unit/ committee that existed in the President’s Office to deal with the problem of eviction of tenants and related land issues. With all due respect for the Nantaba committee and the appointing authority, it is my submission that the committee will go down in history as another failed attempt to handle the complex land question in Uganda, if its mandate and modus operandi are not reviewed immediately.

First of all, it is admitted that the Nantaba committee is not illegal as the President has the power to appoint committees of this nature to assist him in the execution of his Constitutional mandate as head of state. However, when it comes to handling land matters, there is no specific Constitutional or legal provision recognising the committee, its powers and its functions.

For this reason, any state official of average Education and intelligence will think twice when directed to implement an order or decision of the committee. Clearly, the official directed is not at all protected in the execution of the order or the directive and assuming something unfortunate happens in the execution of the order, the officer is personally held responsible and accountable.

Therefore, as the media recently reported,  a scenario in which Police officers refused or failed to implement Nantaba’s orders should be understandable in this context and the officers should not be blamed because they should only a bide by proper lawful orders coming from the right authority  as recognised by law.

Needless to say, the members of the Nantaba committee itself are not immune from legal proceedings or even arrest, if they are found on the wrong side of the law.

Secondly, the statutory institutional frame work for handling these issues are the courts of law, the land boards and land tribunals, land committee etc. which are enshrined in the Constitution and the Land Act. The land boards/ tribunals etc. are decentralised hence bringing services nearer to the people.

Even if the Nantaba Committee was allocated billions of shillings, it would simply have no time to traverse the whole country settling land disputes and resettling evicted people in a country, the size of Uganda.

Unfortunately, the Government has been unable to fund these organs especially the land Boards, committees and tribunals. The Nantaba committee cannot be an alternative to these statutory organs. There is no alternative but to have these statutory bodies funded and operational.

Lastly, there is nothing to guarantee that the decisions and actions being made by the committee will not be challenged at a heavy cost to the Government /tax payer. For instance, if the resettlement is done when there is a court order restraining such an action, the resettled landlords can through the court get billions of tax payer’s money in damages and compensation for property illegally seized.

The same applies in case the tenants were in the first place evicted genuinely and lawfully as authorised by court/law. There is also no guarantee that the people already settled by the Nantabba committee are safe as the law does not provide for this form of resettlement.

The best the government can do is to fund the operations of the land committee/ boards etc.  The Nantaba Committee should focus on overseeing the work of these committees to ensure that they deliver.

The committee can also serve as a think tank by identifying the gaps and laws and policies and proposing practical and useful changes that will usher in a fundamental change in the management of land related issues in the country.

The writer is the MP for PWD for central region