Acoli people, not state, own their land 28.10.2013 By David Okun The Minister of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries, Honourable Tress Bucyanayandi, recently erred in fact, while blundering on land policy, when he reportedly said: “There is plenty of land in northern Uganda and most of it is idle, Chinese are welcome.” His cavalier remark reported in the Pig Site, a Chinese News Site, comes amid reports in Standard Chattered, a research paper, which predicted China will need to import 100 tons of food a year, between 20 and 30 years, to avoid shortage. That may be a legitimate concern for the Chinese, and Acoli and northern Uganda, along with government and country, can only do so much to help. That though does not justify government of Uganda to talk about ‘plenty of lands’ in the north; as if no none owns that land. As for the minister, treating local Africans, particularly Acoli and northerners, as if they were some second class citizens of the global community will not sit well with any peace loving society. No one walks to the minister and say, ‘hey, there is plenty of cash in your pocket and much of it is lying idle, thieves are welcome’. The minister will certainly object to this criminal insinuation and provocative threat. The State of Uganda do not own land in Acoliland or in northern Uganda, never mind the rest of the country; that is a constitutional fact. It is up to Acoli people and the people of northern Uganda, along with land owners throughout Uganda, to use their lands the way they see fit. Solving famine problems in China, when hunger kills tens of thousands in Uganda, let alone Acoli and the north, seems only to make sense to the minister. In its structural adjustment agenda, Uganda has embarked on wholesale privatisation of the economy. This model spreads across the developing and emerging economies, but Uganda’s has surpassed the rest. There has been widespread privatisation without any real regulation or control. Even though high levels of corruption prevail in the public sector, the private sector, especially big corporations are having a fill day. A recent Regus Business Confidence Index survey shows “Uganda businesses will stop hiring full-time employees (27%) and start focusing on staff retentions (53%). Businesses will also start finding cost-effective services providers (46%) over the next twelve months to optimise business processes and gain maximum advantage from existing assets without compromising on expansion plans.” Businesses focusing on efficiency savings while maximising profits may or may not create jobs or implement other poverty reduction approaches. Indeed, experimenting with capitalism elsewhere has proved full employment is a myth under the system. Unemployment is the main cause of poverty and famine, especially in Uganda; being one of the poorest nations on earth – in spite of a fairly descent economic growth. Even big companies aim to maximise profits; wealth too does not trickle down the economies under these circumstances. That is for the government to fill that gap through a robust public and social policy programmes. Relying exclusively on the private sector to run the economy is a shortcut to manufacturing poverty and famine in Uganda – especially in the north. A recent report on famine in Acoli, in Acoli Times, says: “hundreds of families living in the areas bordering Kidedo National Games Park in the districts of Agago, Kitgum and Lamwo are staring at a looming famine following an incursion of elephants in their gardens.” It further says, “at least 250 acres of maize, cassava, simsim and sweet potatoes have consistently been destroyed by elephants in Kitgum Matidi and parts of Agago Sub-County, since last year.” Straying animals creating famine is only one factor among numerous others such as draughts and diseases, along with poverty and lack. Another report in the Acoli Times additionally indicated lack of development and poverty as critical in exacerbating poor livelihood in conflict-battered Acoli region: “In Acoli Sub-region infrastructure and delivery systems were severely damaged during the conflict that they constitute very real, immediate need for local people.” As to land and its usage, various and often conflicting interest groups and individuals increasingly converge on Acoli Sub-region with a view to dealing in land matters. Government is using land dispute and corruptions, to its political advantage, to deepen divisions already prevalent in the North – especially following long and bitter history of brutal and devastating wars. Big corporations are looking to grab land for free in the name of any obscure development. These powerful corporations, with their allies in government and elsewhere, cannot impose development on Acoli – especially if these developments involve forceful takings of lands. Foreign NGOs such as Great Britain’s Oxfam, along with others, are honing in to control processes and agenda of land reforms and related disputes. Acoli do not need confusion at this stage of its crisis and needs for reforms. Land dispute is less about indigenous legal or social disputes than disgruntlement on government and foreign big powers seeking to grab land through corporations and irrelevant investments. Clearly many issues exist, including lack of education among the public about contracts and dealing with land issues. Government and any other interested party need to work together with land owners and solve this. Local people need independent representations, but this seems currently to lean in favour of government and its many agents and allies in imposing representations on people. Recently a group called, Northern Uganda land platform have been holding several meetings trying to deal with land rights and disputes in northern Uganda. Minutes of a meeting Oxfam GB Funded said, “The whole question of customary tenure system was looked at in terms of the status of cultural institutions, culture, historical factors, the system in crisis following the war, levels of trust in local leaders, status/perceptions of the informal system”. One of the issues they looked at regarded land rights and borrowings, along with lending on land titles or ownerships: “The key finding was that out of 23 banks, 3 credit institutions, 4 micro finance deposits taking institutions, only 3 banks, 1 micro finance and 1 trust give loans on customary land.” Rampant credit facilities on land to locals who know virtually nothing about how the systems work will only lead to defaults in repayments. If these borrowings were on lands as securities then there are risks of land owners losing lands to lenders. This is where government is failing land owners in relations to business and investment in Acoli. Other issues this group found was such as: “Some of the findings were that – corruption on both sides – bankers request for transport money; retention of funds, request for loans from the loan taker; Corruption of loan taker – forging the same agreement to look original for multiple loans; Bankers believed that “women do not own land” so reported reluctance to entertain them.” Corruption in Uganda is in itself a major disincentive to any genuine investment and development. Government needs to address this particular issue before moving in with big businesses to try and acquire lands in Acoli. Here is another issue the same organisation raised: “There are a number of issues that the Research has given rise to. These are: Loan Process: very long, needing consent of families, clans, many forms filled in piecemeal. Consent is sought from the ‘clan’ who are managers and not owners of land, and not from the family. Banks do not understand customary land rights correctly. Banks need stamps on their letters – families do not have stamps but clans do. CCOs are needed by the Banks if the government assures the banks of their integrity. Sometimes land not mortgaged sought after for sale on default, even family land. The cost of loans can be as high as 1/3 of the loan taken.” This is a problem of state authorities and their agents imposing their systems on indigenous groups without any comprehensive studies or consultations. Properly funded public education and training programmes should precede any process of land acquisitions and credit facilitations of such undertakings. Blanket applying of complex systems and processes in the region with acute poverty and widespread illiteracies are a recipe for disaster. The Chinese can come to Acoli to do business, including assisting Acoli to use its land for agriculture and other purposes. The first policy is for government or private investors to support Acoli people to use their land. Partnership is essential; as between Acoli people and the private sector. Government and interested parties should facilitate contracts and help develop markets for Acoli land products. Private or state support should provide the needed infrastructure for the local farmers and entrepreneurs to work the land and operate businesses. That is a policy of priority - set local people on the stage to run their own projects on their own land, not to let the Chinese or any other investor to just walk into Acoli and do whatever they like. The minister may be correct in saying ‘Uganda operates an open door policy’, but certainly wrong to suggest land surplus exist in northern Uganda; certainly not in Acoli. This ‘open door’ policy the minister bleats about proves reckless if government allows just about anyone to walk into Uganda and take land without recourse to any just policy and process of regulation. Privatisation without government control and supervision is a foolhardy adventure; Uganda or anyone else must guard against it. Moreover, the government of Uganda has proved to be a risky pair of hand in supervising commerce and economic development. Corruption and lack of tackling it is a universal risk while dealing with government of Uganda. To have any voice in guiding rule and wealth of the nation, government should now concentrate on reforming the democratic system. Electoral reforms and curbing corruption in the country should be the focus of state; not whether or not the Chinese can come and take land in the north. The minister reportedly said ‘Uganda runs a liberal economy, hence the Chinese can freely enter into partnership with land owners in the north, produce food and do business there, and send food produced and profits made back to China without any problems.’ That sounds very nice and sensible indeed, but the minister also fails to say what he will do about the serious risks of the crippling corruption in public and private sectors in Uganda. He should state what the government is doing in empowering the local people in dealing with mega powered multi-nationals.
Posted on: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 03:05:43 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015