RE: [Ugnet] The concept of Federo: A case study - Monitor - October17-23, 2004
In "The concept of Federo : A case study" Kajabago-ka-Rusoke talks about everything else - colonisation, land, et cetera - except about federo. Even then, his understanding of mailo land and its origin leaves a lot to be desired. He thinks that the Kabaka and his chiefs didn't own land until some Europeans arrived and dished out some as a gift. Nothing can be further from the truth. Even before the arrival of the colonialists, the Kabaka was (infact he still is) the largest landowner in what is now known as Uganda, in that he held in trust most of the land in Buganda. What the 1900 Agreement did was to reorganize the distribution of land in Buganda. The colonial authority awarded itself 10550 sq. miles (1500 forests, 9000 uncultivated land and 50 for govt. stations); 350 sq. miles went to the Kabaka; 8000 sq. miles went to one thousand private landowners who had given great service for Buganda and who were actually already in possession of these estates (calculated at an average of 8 sq. miles per individual); 320 sq. miles went to Ssaza chiefs and their official estates; the rest went to Mbogo the moslem chief, Kamuswaga the chief of Kooki, the Kabaka's relatives, the 3 regents at the time and to missionary societies. Altogether 19600 sq. miles. Therefore, for Kajabago to say that the objective of a federal structure is for the Kabaka to extract money from individuals for personal use, is preposterous and an insult to our King. The land in contention is the afore-mentioned 9000 sq. miles of Buganda land which was transferred from the colonial authority to the Buganda Land Board in 1962 and then grabbed by Obote, who declared that it belonged to the Central Government and moved it to the Uganda Land Commission. What Buganda is saying is that it should revert to the Buganda Land Board where it rightly belongs. On the other hand, this government is saying that they don't know where this land is, although Kiwanuka Ssemakula at the same time is saying that there are people with leases on it. Instead of questioning the King's motive, Mr Kajabago should ask the NRM government to explain to the public, exactly who sold leases to these people and where this land is, since it is still in the hands of the Central Government. The Baganda already had a sophisticated and well-organized system of land tenure and ownership even before the arrival of the Europeans. The majority of Buganda land was held as 'bibanja' under customary tenancy. All the bibanja holders had security of tenure and their payment of 'busuulu' to the landlord tantamounted to proof of ownership. That meant that a kibanja owner could sell, transfer or inherit the said land. The bibanja holders were not thrown off the land and were quite happy to keep things as they were. In any case, one had the option to buy the land outright, thereby turning it into freehold. Mailo land was therefore not a problem for the Baganda, that is, until Amin came in with the 1975 Land Decree which took away bibanja holders' rights. That said, the obsession of this government, especially its leader, with Buganda land has not been lost to the keen observer. This government has tried to grab Buganda land using all sorts of dubious means and justifications. Instead of revoking Amin's decree, the NRM government aggravated the problem by legitimizing illegal settlement and unlawful occupancy by a minority that had used guns and their positions of influence to occupy the said land. The 1998 Land Act was directed at Buganda land and was intended to give illegal squatters the right to attain titles and registrable interests on this land. Incidentally, the time limit, 12 years, which was specified in the Act for legitimizing occupancy was exactly the number of years the NRM had been in power. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out who profited from this law. All in all, Kajabago-ka-Rusoke's state of mind is very typical of so-called cadres who can't imagine that a person can do something for the good of his people and not just for personal gain. His standpoint is very telling of NRM ideologues - their driving motive to join politics is to assert themselves economically. I strongly doubt that the NRM reflects "the social and economic will of the majority" as he wants to make us believe, rather the aim, we are told, is to create a middle class (made up mainly of one ethnic group and through embezzlement and robbing of state coffers). It is not Uganda they are thinking about, it is about filling their stomachs. Kasangwawo From: Omar Kezimbira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Ugnet] The concept of Federo: A case study - Monitor - October17-23, 2004 Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:54:21 -0700 (PDT) The concept of Federo: A case study By Kajabago-ka-Rusoke Oct 17 - 23, 2004 Federo is a concocted term from the word Federal by politicians from Buganda.
Re: [Ugnet] The concept of Federo: A case study - Monitor -October17-23, 2004
Kasangwawo Even if you are right about the land, but this is 2004 and not 1300. So a whole lot of things in Uganda have changed, the only problem is that Buganda kingdom still think it is leaving in 1300. And that is what many Ugandans are trying to explain very hard to Mengo. Secondly can you kindly tell us where that 9000 miles of land is located? Em Toronto The Mulindwas Communication Group "With Yoweri Museveni, Uganda is in anarchy" Groupe de communication Mulindwas "avec Yoweri Museveni, l'Ouganda est dans l'anarchie" - Original Message - From: "jonah kasangwawo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 8:02 AM Subject: RE: [Ugnet] The concept of Federo: A case study - Monitor -October17-23, 2004 > In "The concept of Federo : A case study" Kajabago-ka-Rusoke talks about > everything else - colonisation, land, et cetera - except about federo. Even > then, his understanding of mailo land and its origin leaves a lot to be > desired. He thinks that the Kabaka and his chiefs didn't own land until some > Europeans arrived and dished out some as a gift. Nothing can be further from > the truth. Even before the arrival of the colonialists, the Kabaka was > (infact he still is) the largest landowner in what is now known as Uganda, > in that he held in trust most of the land in Buganda. What the 1900 > Agreement did was to reorganize the distribution of land in Buganda. The > colonial authority awarded itself 10550 sq. miles (1500 forests, 9000 > uncultivated land and 50 for govt. stations); 350 sq. miles went to the > Kabaka; 8000 sq. miles went to one thousand private landowners who had given > great service for Buganda and who were actually already in possession of > these estates (calculated at an average of 8 sq. miles per individual); 320 > sq. miles went to Ssaza chiefs and their official estates; the rest went to > Mbogo the moslem chief, Kamuswaga the chief of Kooki, the Kabaka's > relatives, the 3 regents at the time and to missionary societies. Altogether > 19600 sq. miles. Therefore, for Kajabago to say that the objective of a > federal structure is for the Kabaka to extract money from individuals for > personal use, is preposterous and an insult to our King. > > The land in contention is the afore-mentioned 9000 sq. miles of Buganda land > which was transferred from the colonial authority to the Buganda Land Board > in 1962 and then grabbed by Obote, who declared that it belonged to the > Central Government and moved it to the Uganda Land Commission. What Buganda > is saying is that it should revert to the Buganda Land Board where it > rightly belongs. On the other hand, this government is saying that they > don't know where this land is, although Kiwanuka Ssemakula at the same time > is saying that there are people with leases on it. Instead of questioning > the King's motive, Mr Kajabago should ask the NRM government to explain to > the public, exactly who sold leases to these people and where this land is, > since it is still in the hands of the Central Government. > > The Baganda already had a sophisticated and well-organized system of land > tenure and ownership even before the arrival of the Europeans. The majority > of Buganda land was held as 'bibanja' under customary tenancy. All the > bibanja holders had security of tenure and their payment of 'busuulu' to the > landlord tantamounted to proof of ownership. That meant that a kibanja owner > could sell, transfer or inherit the said land. The bibanja holders were not > thrown off the land and were quite happy to keep things as they were. In any > case, one had the option to buy the land outright, thereby turning it into > freehold. Mailo land was therefore not a problem for the Baganda, that is, > until Amin came in with the 1975 Land Decree which took away bibanja > holders' rights. > > That said, the obsession of this government, especially its leader, with > Buganda land has not been lost to the keen observer. This government has > tried to grab Buganda land using all sorts of dubious means and > justifications. Instead of revoking Amin's decree, the NRM government > aggravated the problem by legitimizing illegal settlement and unlawful > occupancy by a minority that had used guns and their positions of influence > to occupy the said land. The 1998 Land Act was directed at Buganda land and > was intended to give illegal squatters the right to attain titles and > registrable interests on this land. Incidentally, the time limit, 12 years, > which was specified in the Act for legitimizing occupancy was exactly the > number of years the NRM had been
RE: [Ugnet] The concept of Federo: A case study - Monitor - October17-23, 2004
Jonah Kasangwawo, You got some points. But, as long as you stick to the traditional system, that only cocoon people and put them to a state of slumber, when in fact people should be engaging, with ferocity, in economic and political hassles of today's world to have themselves mass awoken, in order to be able to fend off the growing threats to their land and livelihood, like the turks of the movement government now pushing off baganda from their land, you are bound to lose hands down. Politically and economically astute people are the ones who can secure, and protect whats theirs by birth for posterity. The Kabaka is in no position to save the baganda; only the baganda can save themselves. And as long as they, the baganda like you, still continue to traverse the outdated traditional path of "our King", and look at the world around them from the spectacles of the Kabaka and his chiefs, because that is fundamental traditional values to hold religiously, then only waking up one day and finding your/themselves holder/s of these traditions, but merely squatters on the land, will make them learn; but, that will be just too late. The NRA/M put the Kabaka back in his so called chair for god sakes! What make you think the Kabaka can now turn around and tell the NRA/M what it can or can not do in Buganda? It is only woken people of Buganda, and Uganda in general who can stop these turks from the vision of creating a middle class in Uganda out of an ethnic group, in order to re-engineer the political direction of the country. Not the Kabaka; not traditions; not even any ineffective systems, be it a political party or not, in whatever nuances they may be. Stick to this ineffective " our King", and you sure are going to learn the hard way when Uganda finally becomes too small for you to live in. Good luck my fellow country man. jonah kasangwawo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In "The concept of Federo : A case study" Kajabago-ka-Rusoke talks about everything else - colonisation, land, et cetera - except about federo. Even then, his understanding of mailo land and its origin leaves a lot to be desired. He thinks that the Kabaka and his chiefs didn't own land until some Europeans arrived and dished out some as a gift. Nothing can be further from the truth. Even before the arrival of the colonialists, the Kabaka was (infact he still is) the largest landowner in what is now known as Uganda, in that he held in trust most of the land in Buganda. What the 1900 Agreement did was to reorganize the distribution of land in Buganda. The colonial authority awarded itself 10550 sq. miles (1500 forests, 9000 uncultivated land and 50 for govt. stations); 350 sq. miles went to the Kabaka; 8000 sq. miles went to one thousa nd private landowners who had given great service for Buganda and who were actually already in possession of these estates (calculated at an average of 8 sq. miles per individual); 320 sq. miles went to Ssaza chiefs and their official estates; the rest went to Mbogo the moslem chief, Kamuswaga the chief of Kooki, the Kabaka's relatives, the 3 regents at the time and to missionary societies. Altogether 19600 sq. miles. Therefore, for Kajabago to say that the objective of a federal structure is for the Kabaka to extract money from individuals for personal use, is preposterous and an insult to our King.The land in contention is the afore-mentioned 9000 sq. miles of Buganda land which was transferred from the colonial authority to the Buganda Land Board in 1962 and then grabbed by Obote, who declared that it belonged to the Central Government and moved it to the Uganda Land Commission. What Buganda is saying is that it should revert to the Buganda Land Board where it rightly belongs. On the other hand, this government is saying that they don't know where this land is, although Kiwanuka Ssemakula at the same time is saying that there are people with leases on it. Instead of questioning the King's motive, Mr Kajabago should ask the NRM government to explain to the public, exactly who sold leases to these people and where this land is, since it is still in the hands of the Central Government.The Baganda already had a sophisticated and well-organized system of land tenure and ownership even before the arrival of the Europeans. The majority of Buganda land was held as 'bibanja' under customary tenancy. All the bibanja holders had security of tenure and their payment of 'busuulu' to the landlord tantamounted to proof of ownership. That meant that a kibanja owner could sell, transfer or inherit the said land. The bibanja holders were not thrown off the la nd and were quite happy to keep things as they were. In any case, one had the option to buy the land outright, thereby turning it into freehold. Mailo land was therefore not a problem for the Baganda, that is, until Amin came in with the 1975 Land Decree which took away bibanja holders' rights.That said, the obsession of this government, especially its leader, with B
Re: [Ugnet] The concept of Federo: A case study - Monitor -October17-23, 2004
I would not have put it any better, thank God there are the Okello's who can put what many of us think on a screen in writing. It is a public knowledge that we as Baganda must transform our kingdom from the 1300 era to the 2004 era, many kingdoms have done that and have survived, many have resisted change and have surely perished. The question we as Baganda must face, what way do we have to go? Yes the Okellos will continue to developed and make such passionate calls of understanding the situation in our country and in our kingdom, but as long as we have the Kasangwaawo's the Ssenyange's, the Kibuuka's and kijomanyi's, the people who think that the only thing we all must do to support Mengo is to kneel to great Ssabasaja. And the Katikiro's as Mulwanyamuli, who pleads to all Baganda women to go abroad and marry white men so that they can pump dollars into Buganda, our children and grand children will ask what happened to their kingdom, and no one will be able to answer. The days are very strange indeed. Em Toronto The Mulindwas Communication Group"With Yoweri Museveni, Uganda is in anarchy" Groupe de communication Mulindwas "avec Yoweri Museveni, l'Ouganda est dans l'anarchie" - Original Message - From: okello To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 11:34 AM Subject: RE: [Ugnet] The concept of Federo: A case study - Monitor -October17-23, 2004 Jonah Kasangwawo, You got some points. But, as long as you stick to the traditional system, that only cocoon people and put them to a state of slumber, when in fact people should be engaging, with ferocity, in economic and political hassles of today's world to have themselves mass awoken, in order to be able to fend off the growing threats to their land and livelihood, like the turks of the movement government now pushing off baganda from their land, you are bound to lose hands down. Politically and economically astute people are the ones who can secure, and protect whats theirs by birth for posterity. The Kabaka is in no position to save the baganda; only the baganda can save themselves. And as long as they, the baganda like you, still continue to traverse the outdated traditional path of "our King", and look at the world around them from the spectacles of the Kabaka and his chiefs, because that is fundamental traditional values to hold religiously, then only waking up one day and finding your/themselves holder/s of these traditions, but merely squatters on the land, will make them learn; but, that will be just too late. The NRA/M put the Kabaka back in his so called chair for god sakes! What make you think the Kabaka can now turn around and tell the NRA/M what it can or can not do in Buganda? It is only woken people of Buganda, and Uganda in general who can stop these turks from the vision of creating a middle class in Uganda out of an ethnic group, in order to re-engineer the political direction of the country. Not the Kabaka; not traditions; not even any ineffective systems, be it a political party or not, in whatever nuances they may be. Stick to this ineffective " our King", and you sure are going to learn the hard way when Uganda finally becomes too small for you to live in. Good luck my fellow country man. jonah kasangwawo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In "The concept of Federo : A case study" Kajabago-ka-Rusoke talks about everything else - colonisation, land, et cetera - except about federo. Even then, his understanding of mailo land and its origin leaves a lot to be desired. He thinks that the Kabaka and his chiefs didn't own land until some Europeans arrived and dished out some as a gift. Nothing can be further from the truth. Even before the arrival of the colonialists, the Kabaka was (infact he still is) the largest landowner in what is now known as Uganda, in that he held in trust most of the land in Buganda. What the 1900 Agreement did was to reorganize the distribution of land in Buganda. The colonial authority awarded itself 10550 sq. miles (1500 forests, 9000 uncultivated land and 50 for govt. stations); 350 sq. miles went to the Kabaka; 8000 sq. miles went to one thousa nd private landowners who had given great service for Buganda and who were actually already in possession of these estates (calculated at an average of 8 sq. miles per individual); 320 sq. miles went to Ssaza chiefs and their official estates; the rest went to Mbogo the moslem chief, Kamuswaga the chief of Kooki, the Kabaka's relatives, the 3 regents at the time and to missionary societies. Altogether 19600 sq. miles. Therefore, for Kajabago to say that the objective of a federal structure is fo
RE: [Ugnet] The concept of Federo: A case study - Monitor -October17-23, 2004
Okello, I was only trying to put right the misinformation that the author was spreading around about our history, and this involved our King. I do not know exactly what you want from me. Do you expect me to give up my identity in order to save myself ? Isn't that a contradiction in terms ? Nowadays when you don't mention Gulu or Acholi, people like you assume that one is in slumber. No sir ! The Baganda can take care of themselves. I am also aware that the Buganda Kingdom is not static. If it was, the issue would have for example been whether all these non-Baganda putting up constructions in Buganda are on borrowed land or not, due to an old law that forbade non-Baganda from buying land in Buganda. As for who put who in the chair, the saying goes that one hand washes the other. It is public knowledge that during the war, without Kabaka's support the NRM/A was finding it increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to make any headway towards Kampala. Its only that some people tend to forget who got them there. BTW Okello, I don't know how you are able to live with yourself, since the country you reside in still pays allegiance to "the outdated traditional path of 'our Queen'" ! Kasangwawo From: okello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Ugnet] The concept of Federo: A case study - Monitor -October17-23, 2004 Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 11:34:11 -0500 (EST) Jonah Kasangwawo, You got some points. But, as long as you stick to the traditional system, that only cocoon people and put them to a state of slumber, when in fact people should be engaging, with ferocity, in economic and political hassles of today's world to have themselves mass awoken, in order to be able to fend off the growing threats to their land and livelihood, like the turks of the movement government now pushing off baganda from their land, you are bound to lose hands down. Politically and economically astute people are the ones who can secure, and protect whats theirs by birth for posterity. The Kabaka is in no position to save the baganda; only the baganda can save themselves. And as long as they, the baganda like you, still continue to traverse the outdated traditional path of "our King", and look at the world around them from the spectacles of the Kabaka and his chiefs, because that is fundamental traditional values to hold religiously, then only waking up one day and finding your/themselves holder/s of these traditions, but merely squatters on the land, will make them learn; but, that will be just too late. The NRA/M put the Kabaka back in his so called chair for god sakes! What make you think the Kabaka can now turn around and tell the NRA/M what it can or can not do in Buganda? It is only woken people of Buganda, and Uganda in general who can stop these turks from the vision of creating a middle class in Uganda out of an ethnic group, in order to re-engineer the political direction of the country. Not the Kabaka; not traditions; not even any ineffective systems, be it a political party or not, in whatever nuances they may be. Stick to this ineffective " our King", and you sure are going to learn the hard way when Uganda finally becomes too small for you to live in. Good luck my fellow country man. jonah kasangwawo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In "The concept of Federo : A case study" Kajabago-ka-Rusoke talks about everything else - colonisation, land, et cetera - except about federo. Even then, his understanding of mailo land and its origin leaves a lot to be desired. He thinks that the Kabaka and his chiefs didn't own land until some Europeans arrived and dished out some as a gift. Nothing can be further from the truth. Even before the arrival of the colonialists, the Kabaka was (infact he still is) the largest landowner in what is now known as Uganda, in that he held in trust most of the land in Buganda. What the 1900 Agreement did was to reorganize the distribution of land in Buganda. The colonial authority awarded itself 10550 sq. miles (1500 forests, 9000 uncultivated land and 50 for govt. stations); 350 sq. miles went to the Kabaka; 8000 sq. miles went to one thousand private landowners who had given great service for Buganda and who were actually already in possession of these estates (calculated at an average of 8 sq. miles per individual); 320 sq. miles went to Ssaza chiefs and their official estates; the rest went to Mbogo the moslem chief, Kamuswaga the chief of Kooki, the Kabaka's relatives, the 3 regents at the time and to missionary societies. Altogether 19600 sq. miles. Therefore, for Kajabago to say that the objective of a federal structure is for the Kabaka to extract money from individuals for personal use, is preposterous and an insult to our King. The land in contention is the afore-mentioned 9000 sq. miles of Buganda land which
Re: [Ugnet] The concept of Federo: A case study - Monitor-October17-23, 2004
Why don't you ask your friend in Lusaka ? Since he grabbed it and moved it to Uganda Land Commission, it has never been returned. What then is your 2004 view of land ? Is it the same as the NRM Land Act of 1998 ? From: "Edward Mulindwa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Ugnet] The concept of Federo: A case study - Monitor-October17-23, 2004 Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 08:27:13 -0500 Kasangwawo Even if you are right about the land, but this is 2004 and not 1300. So a whole lot of things in Uganda have changed, the only problem is that Buganda kingdom still think it is leaving in 1300. And that is what many Ugandans are trying to explain very hard to Mengo. Secondly can you kindly tell us where that 9000 miles of land is located? Em Toronto The Mulindwas Communication Group "With Yoweri Museveni, Uganda is in anarchy" Groupe de communication Mulindwas "avec Yoweri Museveni, l'Ouganda est dans l'anarchie" - Original Message - From: "jonah kasangwawo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 8:02 AM Subject: RE: [Ugnet] The concept of Federo: A case study - Monitor -October17-23, 2004 > In "The concept of Federo : A case study" Kajabago-ka-Rusoke talks about > everything else - colonisation, land, et cetera - except about federo. Even > then, his understanding of mailo land and its origin leaves a lot to be > desired. He thinks that the Kabaka and his chiefs didn't own land until some > Europeans arrived and dished out some as a gift. Nothing can be further from > the truth. Even before the arrival of the colonialists, the Kabaka was > (infact he still is) the largest landowner in what is now known as Uganda, > in that he held in trust most of the land in Buganda. What the 1900 > Agreement did was to reorganize the distribution of land in Buganda. The > colonial authority awarded itself 10550 sq. miles (1500 forests, 9000 > uncultivated land and 50 for govt. stations); 350 sq. miles went to the > Kabaka; 8000 sq. miles went to one thousand private landowners who had given > great service for Buganda and who were actually already in possession of > these estates (calculated at an average of 8 sq. miles per individual); 320 > sq. miles went to Ssaza chiefs and their official estates; the rest went to > Mbogo the moslem chief, Kamuswaga the chief of Kooki, the Kabaka's > relatives, the 3 regents at the time and to missionary societies. Altogether > 19600 sq. miles. Therefore, for Kajabago to say that the objective of a > federal structure is for the Kabaka to extract money from individuals for > personal use, is preposterous and an insult to our King. > > The land in contention is the afore-mentioned 9000 sq. miles of Buganda land > which was transferred from the colonial authority to the Buganda Land Board > in 1962 and then grabbed by Obote, who declared that it belonged to the > Central Government and moved it to the Uganda Land Commission. What Buganda > is saying is that it should revert to the Buganda Land Board where it > rightly belongs. On the other hand, this government is saying that they > don't know where this land is, although Kiwanuka Ssemakula at the same time > is saying that there are people with leases on it. Instead of questioning > the King's motive, Mr Kajabago should ask the NRM government to explain to > the public, exactly who sold leases to these people and where this land is, > since it is still in the hands of the Central Government. > > The Baganda already had a sophisticated and well-organized system of land > tenure and ownership even before the arrival of the Europeans. The majority > of Buganda land was held as 'bibanja' under customary tenancy. All the > bibanja holders had security of tenure and their payment of 'busuulu' to the > landlord tantamounted to proof of ownership. That meant that a kibanja owner > could sell, transfer or inherit the said land. The bibanja holders were not > thrown off the land and were quite happy to keep things as they were. In any > case, one had the option to buy the land outright, thereby turning it into > freehold. Mailo land was therefore not a problem for the Baganda, that is, > until Amin came in with the 1975 Land Decree which took away bibanja > holders' rights. > > That said, the obsession of this government, especially its leader, with > Buganda land has not been lost to the keen observer. This government has > tried to grab Buganda land using all sorts of dubious means and > justifications. Instead of revoking Amin's decree, the NRM government > aggravated
