The suspension of activities on a contested 23-acre parcel in Lubowa, Wakiso District, by Brig. Gen. Moses Lukyamuzi, head of Uganda’s Presidential Special Task Force on Land Matters and Environment, has sparked significant public attention. The parcel, linked to allegations of illegal acquisition and subdivision by Philip Munduni and Dr. Bernard Muyaya, became a point of intervention after the Kamanya Simbwa family petitioned the Minister of Internal Affairs. Lukyamuzi ordered a halt to construction, demarcation, and the removal of unauthorized structures to prevent further escalation of the dispute.
However, this intervention has raised broader questions about the task force’s operational scope and practices. Critics, including Lands Minister Sam Mayanja, have accused Lukyamuzi of overstepping his authority, engaging in violent evictions, and supporting land grabbers. In one high-profile case, his unit allegedly facilitated forced evictions in Kyengera and Namugongo, where victims claimed their crops were destroyed, and properties vandalized. These actions have led to investigations by the State House Anti-Corruption Unit, underscoring allegations of misconduct that tarnish the task force’s image.
State House has clarified that the task force’s mandate is strictly to prevent encroachments on protected areas, such as wetlands and forests, and to offer security in cases of land disputes. It does not have the authority to detain suspects or bypass judicial processes. This clarification highlights gaps in coordination between the task force, police, and judiciary, complicating efforts to address Uganda’s endemic land disputes.
The Lubowa case is emblematic of Uganda’s broader land governance challenges. Overlapping land tenure systems, weak enforcement of property rights, and accusations of corruption within public institutions create fertile ground for disputes. While Lukyamuzi’s suspension of activities in Lubowa signals a commitment to addressing grievances, allegations of his involvement in prior abuses have fueled skepticism about the impartiality and efficacy of Uganda’s land dispute mechanisms. Addressing these systemic issues will require institutional reforms, enhanced oversight, and strengthened collaboration across government agencies.
