Conflicts within any society, if not properly managed, can lead to societal disorder. Cultural institutions are no exception. I recall with nostalgia how Busoga was embroiled in conflict for nearly five years over the legitimate Kyabazinga.
Bugisu, until recently, was also caught in a leadership dispute regarding the rightful, gazetted cultural leader, until the government invoked Section 16(1) and Section 6 of the Institution of Traditional or Cultural Leaders Act, 2011, to resolve the impasse.
Secondly, are Ugandan communities empowered to enact their own laws to regulate cultural institutions? Currently, the answer is unequivocally no. The Cultural Leaders Act, 2011, does not provide for community participation in lawmaking. The law, as it stands, restricts cultural institutions and anyone outside the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development from making laws.
The Constitution of Uganda and the Institution of Traditional or Cultural Leaders Act, 2011, are the primary statutes that guide the process of establishing cultural leaders in Uganda. These laws apply to all Ugandans, from Toro to Bunyoro Kingdom to Bugisu region and beyond, regarding the gazetting of cultural leaders.
The most crucial provision regarding the accession of a cultural leader is Article 246 of the Ugandan Constitution, which outlines the roles of a cultural leader within their community.
How, then, is the gazetting of a cultural leader conducted in Uganda? The law stipulates that once a community has determined its cultural leader, and there is a dispute among claimants, the Minister of Gender, Labour and Social Development (MGLSD) will invoke Section 15(1) of the Institution of Traditional or Cultural Leaders Act. This involves assembling elders to mediate and resolve the impasse.
For example, the case of Umukuka III of the Bamasaba people demonstrates a successful outcome. After the 2020 cultural elections, several defeated claimants challenged the results. In response, the Minister of Gender, Labour and Social Development, Hon. Betty Amongi Ongom, and her team invoked relevant provisions of the Ugandan Constitution and the Cultural Leaders Act to resolve the dispute.
Article 246(2) of the Ugandan Constitution provides a framework for resolving such disputes, which is implemented through Section 15(1) of the Institution of Traditional or Cultural Leaders Act, 2011. The Minister then invoked Section 16(1) (before its amendment) and authorized the late Umukuka Emeritus Wilson Weasa Wamimbi to manage the process and report back.
As mandated by law, Umukuka Emeritus Wilson Weasa Wamimbi assembled a team of 26 clan heads from Masabaland, who convened in the Mbale District hall. After 12 hours of deliberation, with all claimants present, the mediators concluded that the current Umukuka III, His Highness Jude Mike Mudoma, was elected and gazetted in accordance with the laws establishing and recognizing the Umukuka in Uganda. This included the Constitution of Uganda (National Objective XXIV and Article 246), the Local Government Act, the Institution of Traditional or Cultural Leaders Act, 2011 (Sections 16(1) and 6, as amended), and relevant international protocols.
This model of dispute resolution is the most effective for clans, as the elders are legally empowered to address such disputes within their communities.
This dispute resolution mechanism is procedural, and courts of law should not override it. If Ugandan courts encounter situations that hinder the timely gazetting of a cultural leader, they must analyze the legal provisions and directives within our municipal laws. They must adhere to the intentions of the lawmakers.
Steven Masiga is the spokesperson for the Bamasaba Cultural Institution and a Master of Laws student.
