See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/307631527

Changing Face of Land Tenure in Uganda: Period Before 1900 to date

Article · January 2014

CITATIONS READS
8 4,957

1 author:

Lillian Mono Wabineno Oryema

Makerere University
7 PUBLICATIONS   12 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Lillian Mono Wabineno Oryema on 22 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 CHANGING FACE OF LAND TENURE IN UGANDA: PERIOD
BEFORE 1900 TO DATE

Lilian Mono W Oryema

ABSTRACT
Land is the ultimate resource, for without it life on earth cannot be sustained (UNECE, 1996). It
is a basic element to every country since all activities of man takes place on it. Land tenure and
property rights exist concurrently. Well defined property rights and institutions in land are
prerequisite for proper land management. When land rights are well laid out, there is sustainable
management on land which culminates to improved welfare of individuals and economic growth
of a nation. The terms property rights and land rights will be used concurrently for this paper.
Uganda as a country has gone through different land reforms in terms of land tenure from before
the colonial era to date. The origin of the existing land tenure systems dates way back in 1900
when the British made their first attempt to formalise the means of holding land in Uganda. The
colonial administration thought that customary land holding was not a good system of land rights
ownership. The British, when signing the agreement, thought that they would be able to introduce
freehold1 as a unified system of land holding in Uganda as it was in Britain at that time. But that
did not happen as firstly, they faced some resistance from some communities most especially in
the northern part of the country. Secondly, the freehold concept that was introduced in Uganda
was far different from what it was taken to be in Britain. As land tenure reforms were taking
place, property rights were being transformed. This paper seeks to give a historical perspective
of property rights and land tenure systems that are in existence in Uganda today by examining
the different land tenure reforms Uganda as a country has passed through. The paper is part of
an ongoing PhD thesis compilation by the author titled ‘Modeling of Land Rights in the Property
Register to Support the Property and Credit Market in Uganda’

Key words: Land tenure, land reforms, land right, Uganda

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Land is an important resource to all human activities; it is considered to be limited in nature,
unmovable and permanent thus a public good (Doebele, 1987). Toulmin and Quan (2000a: 1-2)
(as cited by Ubink (2008)) points out that, in African economies land is of great importance as
food, income, employment, export earnings as well as social value and symbolic and ritual
associations are generated from it. Land is a resource of which life on earth will not continue to
exist in its absence (UNECE, 1996). It is a basic element to every country since all activities of
man takes place on it.
Land tenure and property rights exist concurrently. Property rights are a component of land
tenure as land tenure can never be discussed without talking and thinking about property rights.

1 Freehold is a system of land tenure where land is held in perpetuity subject to statutory and common law qualifications.

1
Land tenure defines a system in which individuals or a group, can access land or property, stay
with it or even use it and later depose it off. Various definitions have been given by different
scholars to define land tenure (FAO, 2002; Nkwae, 2006; Payne, 2004; USAID, 2013). Land
tenure according to FAO (2002)

“is the relationship, whether legally or customarily defined, among people, as individuals or groups,
with respect to land. (For convenience, “land” is used here to include other natural resources such as
water and trees.) Land tenure is an institution, i.e., rules invented by societies to regulate behaviour.
Rules of tenure define how property rights to land are to be allocated within societies. They define how
access is granted to rights to use, control, and transfer land, as well as associated responsibilities and
restraints. In simple terms, land tenure systems determine who can use what resources for how long,
and under what conditions.”

From the above definitions, it can be pointed out that land tenure is the relationship between man
and land. It defines how land can be used by the different parties who have interests in it. In other
wards it gives a guideline of the different rights that can exist in a particular piece of land and
how the rights are to be executed. The guidelines are normally established by the state or customs
while the rights may accrue to individuals, families, communities, or organizations. It is also seen
that land tenure systems regulate who uses land, for what duration of time and under what terms
and condition. A land tenure system is said to be sustainable if it shows the actual relationship
between the different parties who have interest in the land and that particular land (FAO, 2002;
UNECA, 2003). Stronger land tenure security does not only ease access of land, improve land
productivity and promote investments in land (Besley, 1995; Deininger & Ayalew, 2008) it also
reduces poverty levels as the poor and landless have the opportunity to easily access land to
improve on their livelihood (Deininger, 2003, 2005; Finan, et al., 2005).

2.0 OBJECTIVES
This paper has got the following intent: to explain the historical perspective of property rights
and land tenure systems that currently exist in Uganda. This will be achieved by examining the
different land tenure reforms that Uganda as a country has passed through.
3.0 METHODOLOGY
The methods used to gather data and information for this paper was mainly literature review and
interviews. Literature used was obtained mainly from mostly peer reviewed journal papers,
books, research reports, conference working papers and proceedings. Literature review guides the
overall historical reforms of the land tenure. Interviews were also used to collect information.
The interviews were conducted with officials from Ministry of Lands and Urban Development
and a few individuals who are experts in land tenure matters. The interviews supplement on the
literature review and also highlight more on the current situation concerning land tenure reforms.

4.0 LAND TENURE REFORMS AND THEIR RESULTANT LAND TENURE

SYSTEMS
Uganda has gone through various land tenure reforms since the colonial era to date. As land
tenure reforms were taking place, property rights were being transformed. These series of land
tenure reforms have always led to a new relationship between owners and users of the land.
According to Batty (2005) land reform involves the changing of rules regulations, customs and
2
laws regarding land ownership. It is normally government initiated with the aim of improving the
use and possession of land. Land reforms are of two types: The redistributive reform, which
changes the patterns of land distribution and occupation; and the land tenure reform which
changes the tenure relations between land owners and users without necessarily altering the land
distribution. For the case of Uganda, only the latter has been applicable since the colonial era.
The main objective of the various land tenure reforms in Uganda was to unite people and to
integrate all their property into a unified legal system that is accessible to all the citizens of the
country (Batungi, 2010). As the discussion below about the changing land tenure and property
rights system follow, it will be noted that not at any time did a reform result into a single tenure
system, instead various land tenure systems have emerged. The discussion will analyse the
different bundle of rights that exist(ed) in each tenure regime.

4.1 Pre-colonial traditional land tenure systems for the period before 1900
Before 1900, the land tenure system available in the entire country was customary. According to
literature, customary land tenure was predominant in all the regions of the country (Batungi &
Rüther, 2008; Mugambwa, 2000). There were three broad customary land tenure systems
(Mugambwa, 2000): Communal or tribal2, clan tenure3 and the nomadic tenure4. Customary rules
governed access and usage of land. As would be expected, the organization of the different
communities differed due to variations in customs and norms. It differed by way of organisation
and operation. There were three distinct categories in which people related to land as shown in
Table 2-1.

2 The ownership of land was vested in the ruler as owner or trustee of the land for members of the tribe. This tenure system was
prevalent in Buganda, Bunyoro, Toro and Ankole.
3 This was common in Acholi and kigezi. Here tenure ownership was according to clan or as opposed to tribe. Within the clan and

tribal umbrella, specific individual of family rights were recognized to fields, agriculture products and homesteads
4 Grazing rights were vested in the entire members of the tribe with no specific rights vested in individuals. This is mainly found

in the Karamoja region

3
 Table 4-1: The human-land relationship in the tribal communities of Uganda before the colonial
era
1. First category was a 2. Second category was based on 3. Third category was
traditional tenure based on territorial control based on access to land
feudalism. through a network of social
relations and on the
specific uses to which
parcels of land were put.

- Access to land was - Access to land resources was - This type of land
controlled by an oligarchy governed by a complex network of relations recognized
in which political power reciprocal bonds within families, individual rights as well
was exclusively vested. lineages and larger social units. as community obligation
- Security of tenure for land - The primary function of those entities by virtue of access to
users was, based on was to protect and guarantee such rights
continuous loyalty to that individual and community rights as - It was prevalent in the
oligarchy. prescribed by custom. As long as those non-feudal sedentary
- The payment of tribute in bonds remained, any individual or communities.
the form of produce and group of individuals could secure - This type of traditional
services was normal and, access to the resources of the tenure was predominant
indeed, a requirement as community. in the Western, Eastern
evidence of that loyalty. - This system was predominant in and Northern territories
- This type of traditional Karamoja, some parts of the cattle of Uganda.
tenure was predominant in corridor running from Karamoja in the
Buganda Kingdom. North East to Rukungiri in the South
West.
Source: Adopted from Uganda Government (2004)

Common to all three systems of land relations was the fact that land was held in allodial title
whereby the land was independent of any superior land lord but vested in the community as a
corporate entity. Every person and household had the right to access land through the three
customary system. However, land was transferred through inheritance and not other means
(Lastarria-Cornhiel, 2003).
In 1899 when Sir Harry Johnston arrived in Uganda, the land tenure system in Buganda had
started changing. Buganda kingdom had established a government operating on a semi-feudal
system (Batungi, 2010). Even with the changing tenure system, the land still belonged to the
community (James, 1971). Only the Kabaka5 was allowed to deposit off land. The customary
tenure in Buganda had evolved into:
 Rights of the Kabaka to grant land to chiefs who occupied political offices as a reward for the
service being rendered. Such estates were known as “Obutongole”. According to West
(1965), the chiefs who were in charge of “obutongole” estates ‘owned’ the peasants who
occupied those estates but not the land itself. The chiefs got free labour and tributes inform of
5 Kabaka was/is a name in a local language (luganda) meaning a King. He was/is the cultural head of a tribe known as Buganda.
4
 food crops from the peasants. Inheritance and transferability of the estates was impossible as
they were politically attached. Being political offices, the Obtongole system had, no right to
transfer or alienate land in any any form, as one only held the land as long as they were in
office.
 Rights of clans over land which was occupied by clan members. It was known as “obutaka”.
According to Mukwaya (1953), a clan could claim an estate if they had stayed on the estate
undisturbed for more than one generation, or the estates were granted to the clan by the
Kabaka. The land could only be transferred through inheritance and not other forms of
alienation like selling and mortgaging. Occupiers of such estates paid tribute and rent to the
clan heads.
 Individual hereditary rights which were granted to any individual by the Kabaka inform of
private estates known as “obwesengeze”. Since the estates granted were private and
permanent property, the grantees had the full bundle of rights of access, transfer and control.
The estates were inheritable and alienable thus full ownership of land.
 Rights of peasants which constituted occupancy and use rights on the above three types of
estates were known as “Kibanja”. According to Batungi and Rüther (2008), the peasants
were obliged to give free labour, tribute of beer, and food crops to the head of the estate they
were staying on as well as military service if they were to remain in possession of their land
(Kibanja). Kibanja holders could not sale, mortgage and lease but inheritance was allowed
thus partial rights of transfer.

In the rest of the country, each community had varied customary practices. In the semi-arid
regions of the country, it was a common practice to move animals from one grazing ground to
another basing on the season of availability of water and pasture. Access to land was based on
negotiations and agreements between the different parties (who could be clan heads, households,
etc) involved (Lastarria-Cornhiel, 2003). Whatever the case in which the different ethnic groups
where organised and operated, there was one common aspect regarding tenure: no individual
ownership of land. Use rights existed for different individuals in the communities with ownership
rights vested in the clan, family and communities thus there existed full use rights but alienation
was restricted to inheritance.

4.2 Emergent land tenure systems in the colonial period: Between 1900 to 1962
When Sir Harry Johnston came to Uganda, he had special instructions from the Queen of
England to grant freehold estates which were the largest estates in Britain (to the Kabaka, regents
and principal chiefs), gain rights over unused and unoccupied lands for the crown and establish
boards of trustees which would administer and protect peasants in rent-free rights to the land they
occupied (West, 1965). To achieve this, the British signed agreements with different kingdoms
causing a transition from customary to other systems of land holding.
The first agreement which was a negotiation between the British and Buganda kingdom was
signed in 1900. At that time, the kingdom had attained a semi-feudal system with a firm
government. Buganda kingdom was organised and one of most powerful in all the African
dependences and this made the reason for the British to enter into agreement first (West, 1972).
The British knew that if the strongest territory would fall to their demand, so would the rest
considering the fact that they were weaker. The agreement known as Buganda agreement resulted

5
into the redistribution and formalisation of customary land into individual ownership. Buganda’s
land was designated as being 19,600 square miles6.
The agreement no doubt transformed the relations of rights on land. Land lords acquired full
ownership rights as land could privately be owned while peasants attained occupancy rights on
land. The agreement resulted into crown and mailo7 land. Crown land was administered by the
government on behalf of the British and government had the mandate to alienate this type of land
under freehold or leasehold grants (Deininger & Ayalew, 2008). Customary land owners who
lived on land that was converted to crown land became tenants at sufferance or illegal tenants.
They had use rights and were prone to evictions as freehold and leaseholds could be granted
having occupiers on land and without asking for their permission. Mailo land was a resultant
formal customary tenure which ended up as a western form of landlord/tenant system with
absolute individual ownership. Mailo land was held in both private and official estates. Private
mailo estates were those given to individuals as private property while official mailo estates was
land one held by virtual of holding an office in the kingdom. The obutongole and obwesengeze
were turned into official and private mailo estates respectively, of which they were held by the
beneficiaries in absolute ownership as landlords (Mukwaya, 1953). The peasants8 who had
previously settled on those estates/lands as tenants or customary usufructory holders became
tenants on private property (Lastarria-Cornhiel, 2003) and had to pay ground rent (busuulu) and
tribute on produce (envujjo) for the crops like cotton or coffee they grew (Rugadya, 1999).
Similar agreements were signed in Tooro and Ankole kingdoms. These agreements resulted into
crown land which was the same concept as that in Buganda and freehold estates. The freehold
estates were called native and adjudicated freehold. The word Native was used to convey the fact
that the estates were specifically granted to native chiefs and adjudicated because the land was
demarcated, surveyed and land titles were issued. Leases could be granted on freehold and mailo
land. Just like there existed Busuulu and Envujjo law in Buganda, Landlord and Tenant Law of
1937 and 1947 were introduced in Tooro and Ankole kingdom respectively. The provisions in the
three laws were similar. Despite the fact that the three laws existed, tenants in the three kingdoms
were still being oppressed and exploited by the land owners.
In the other parts of Uganda9 where the tribal forms of government were not so pronounced,
customary land was turned into freehold tenure without consulting the indigenous leadership
(Batungi and Rüther, 2008). The historic achievement witnessed in Buganda suggests that
customary leaders in areas other than Buganda might also have been able to adapt to the western
forms of individual land ownership had they been exposed to a process similar to the Buganda
experience. In 1922, the Crown Lands Declaration Ordinance came into place and this resulted
into the conversion of all customary land outside Buganda into crown land. Freehold and
leasehold titles were granted out of customary land of which the occupiers had to move off the
land or remain as tenants at will. The agreement recognized mailo and crown land thereby

6 The 19,600 square mile was apportioned in such a way that the King/kabaka of Buganda got 958 square miles, 8,000 square
miles was distributed equally amongst 1,000 chiefs and private land owners and the rest was crown land vested in the colonial
government (West, 1972)
7 The term ‘Mailo’ is a “Luganda” language corruption of the English word ‘mile’ derived from the fact that in the new system,

the land allocations were expressed in multiples or fractions of square miles (Batungi & Rüther, 2008).
8 Peasants were mostly cultivators
9 The extension of British rule to other kingdoms and districts, which later comprised Uganda protectorate, started with the

Buganda kingdom as the nucleus in 1894 and ended with Karamoja district in the northeast of Uganda in 1926
6
leaving out customary tenants. The Crown Land Ordinance of 1903 made it clear that persons
occupying land under customary tenure were never regarded as owning the land (McAuslan,
2003). This was the same for the rest of the country where customary land was in existence.
Okuku (2006) made two observations about land during this period; first, land could be
transferred by way of sale by individuals who had no legal obligation to the king or people settled
on their land. Second, land had become an investment. These observations are further confirmed
by Batungi (2010) who points out that the advantages of mailo tenure system were realized much
later when peasants who had acquired enough money would also become landlords after buying
out the rights of the landlords from their own bibanja at open market value. He continues that the
landlords would then process formal land titles for the peasants ‘converted to landlords’ and
therefore it is quite logical to say that in the Buganda kingdom, land acquired economic value
with effect from 10 March 1900 when the Uganda Agreement was signed.

4.3 Post colonial period: From 1962 to date

When Uganda gained independence in 1962 the land tenure systems that existed before continued
to operate. However, customary land was introduced as a new tenure system. Two reforms took
place during this period. It is against this that the post-colonial period is subdivided into two;
period 1962-1995 and 1995-date.
4.3.1 Period 1962- 1995
When Uganda gained independence in 1962 crown land was renamed as public land under the
Public Land Act of 1962. In this act, indigenous Ugandans still had a right of occupancy over
public land. However, leaseholds and freeholds could be granted by the government on any
public land even that in occupancy by the indigenous Ugandans. This meant that even where the
customary rights existed, they could be overridden by government to grant public land as
leasehold and freehold. Permission from the customary owners was not required. The act also
recognised private mailo owners as owners in perpetuity while official mailo was vested in the
Buganda Land Board (BLB). Because of the massive conversions of public land to leasehold
which left customary occupiers landless as they were evicted, the Public Land Act of 1969 was
enacted. The Act stopped issuance of freehold and leasehold on any public land occupied by the
customary tenants without any proof of consent from the customary occupiers.
In 1975 the Land Reform Decree (LRD) Decree No. 3 of 1975 was passed by then the president
of the Republic of Uganda Idi Amin. The objectives of the decree were to: establish a law which
would enable the government to put in place good agricultural practices; and to solve the
problems of landlord-tenant relationship on mailo land. This is because as the mailo landlord
found it difficult to invest in their land because tenants holding occupancy rights lived on the
land, even though they had no mandate to develop the land (Batungi & Rüther, 2008).
The decree came with changes that altered the land tenure systems and rights that were in
existence. The changes were:
- All land in Uganda be held by the state in trust for the people to facilitate its use for economic
and social development
- All land in Uganda was declared public land to be administered by Uganda land commission
and vested in the government of Uganda

7
- All mailo ownership which existed immediately before the enactment of the 1962 decree was
converted into leasehold for a period of 199 years for public bodies and 99 years for
individuals
- Freehold interest in land was abolished except those where this interest was vested in the
State through the Uganda Land Commission
- It was unlawful for one to acquire or transfer customary land without permission and giving
notice to what was termed as the ‘prescribed authority’ respectively; customary land owners
became tenants at sufferance.
These changes meant that no individual would hold land in any interest apart from or even
greater than leasehold and that consent need to be sought from the commission before transfer of
a lease. The decree created a more complex situation regarding overlapping interests on land
(Deininger & Ayawel, 2007) that existed since the 1900 agreement. All land tenures were
converted to leasehold without making any attempt to solve the existing overlapping rights
problem (Baland, et al., 2007). That also meant that two land tenures existed at that time which
was leasehold and public land.
The decree existed for the next 20 years in theory until 1995 when the Constitution of Uganda
came into existence. The Constitution introduced changes on how land was owned and governed
in Uganda. It abolished the Land Reform Decree of 1975 which was theoretically in place. It
restored mailo and freehold land tenure systems in addition to the leasehold tenure that existed.
Customary tenure system was also recognized.

4.3.2 Period between 1995 to date

This period saw the Constitution of Uganda 1995 and Land Act 1998 come into place. The 1998
Land Act of Uganda was required by the Constitution of Uganda to be enacted into law on or
before July 2, 1998. It is, in many respects, a revolutionary law, overturning a century of land
relations and laying the groundwork for the possible evolution of a market in land based on
individual ownership (McAuslan, 2003).
The coming of the Constitution of Uganda in 1995 saw some changes on how land was owned
and governed in Uganda. It abolished the Land Reform Decree of 1975 which was theoretically
in place. It restored mailo and freehold land tenure systems in addition to the leasehold tenure
that existed. Customary tenure system was also recognized and the Uganda land commission was
re-established. It declared that land belonged to the citizens of Uganda and that they could hold it
in any of the four land tenure systems. This provision was reaffirmed by the land act 1998. Other
changes included setting up a new system of land administration consisting of Land Boards in
every district; Parliament would provide for the establishment of land tribunals, whose duty was
to solve disputes on land; District Land Boards were to operate independently of any person and
authority taking account of the national and district council policies in land; it reaffirmed the
authority of the State to make laws regulating the use of land; land under customary tenure may
be converted into freehold ownership by registration; conversion of leases held by citizens on
public land to freehold was permitted in accordance to the law made by parliament; Parliament
was mandated within two years to enact a law regulating the relationship between the lawful or
bonafide occupants of mailo, freehold or leasehold and the owners of the land
The 1995 Constitution brought about the last major land tenure reform Uganda has ever had.
However after the Constitution, there was the 1998 Land Act and Land (Amendment) Act of
8
2010. The amendments had no major impact on land tenure as they dealt with enhancing the
security of occupancy of lawful and bona fide occupants on registered land. But the amendments
helped in the implementation of some provisions of the Constitution. There have also been
regulations and policies on land that have been implemented but these have not had an impact
towards change in the land tenure systems of Uganda.
The land tenure systems currently existing In Uganda are four and are recognised by Constitution
of Uganda. Article 237 of the Constitution of Uganda states that, land belongs to the people10
and it will be held according to the land tenure systems as explained below.
i. Customary
Is a system of land ownership based on customary rules formed from norms and cultures of clans,
families or communities of which these rules are applicable to. Customary land tenure is wide
spread throughout the country and covers more than half of the country (MoLHUD, 2010). Most
of it is found in the east and northern parts of the country with some traces found in part of
western Uganda. According to land and equity Movement in Uganda (LEMU), land in Uganda is
privately owned either by individuals, families or by clans. Most farming land is owned by
households or families, while clans usually own grazing and hunting land. People on customary
land do not have or own land titles. But a Certificate of Customary Ownership (CCO) can be
issued and a freehold title obtained if the land is converted to freehold tenure.

Rights to control, use and ownership of customary land are derived from being a member of a
clan, family, tribe or a given community. Membership is retained by fulfilling certain obligations
in accordance to the clan, family tribe or community one is affiliated to. The system does not rely
on the exercise of force, nor on the evidence of rights guaranteed by statute, but on the fact that
they are recognized as legitimate by the community, enforced in the customary courts, or even
merely by social pressure and generally known though not normally recorded in writing (Ahene,
2009).
In Uganda today, two general customary systems can be distinguished11
- The communal land system where land is owned by the community where user rights are
guaranteed for farming and seasonal grazing, access to water, pasture, burial grounds,
firewood gathering, and other community activities. No specific ownership rights of control
are conferred on users. Control and ownership are through the family, clan, or community.
The system is predominant in Northern Uganda.
- Under individual/family or clan customary tenure where the family and clan rather than the
whole community has control over land. In this system, land is normally allocated to the
male children apart from a few cases where the girl child also benefits. In Uganda today,
customary land has tended to become more individualized and though not initially
acceptable, incidents of sale are very high. In many ethnic groups, before a sale is made clan
members and family have to be consulted. However the institution of customary land is
weakening in many places, people are poorer, and sales, mostly distress sales, have
increased.

10 By the word “people” it is meant citizens

11 This description of contemporary customary tenure is based on Busingye (2002)
9
Generalization can be made about principles of customary land basing on Yudelman (1964)
assumptions: There is no private ownership of land; Security of tenure is guaranteed as long as
the laws and customs are obeyed; and every member is guaranteed the right to the use of land.
Most literature (East African Royal Commission, 1955; Kiapi, 1975; Makubuya, 1981) to
mention but a few, have pointed that customary land tenure system is a hindrance to
development. This conclusion is drawn on the basis that customary land is collectively owned,
misused and decisions made are based on collective basis rather than individual. Nsamba-Gayiiya
(1999) says that people are ignorant about customary land tenure to regard it as being informal
and communal. However, there have been changes in customary land holding under which these
arguments are inaccurate and may not hold. There have been various forms of transactions taking
place on customary land (Bruce & Dorner, 1982; Feldman, 1974; Ike, 1977). In Uganda today,
customary land held by a family has tended to become more individualized and though not
initially acceptable, incidents of sale are very high. In many ethnic groups, before a sale is made
clan members and family have to be consulted. However this is not the case anymore as people
are poorer and therefore sales of customary land held by a father who is the leader of the family
are made without any consultations. Rather the clan, family members and friends are witnesses to
the sale agreement. This has made such type of customary land have a freehold nature. The Land
Act mandates that a certificate of customary ownership may be acquired by customary
landholders on former public land regardless of how the land is held (family, community,
association or individual). Also holders of customary land on former public land may convert the
land to freehold tenure in accordance with section 10(1) of the Land Act. With these provisions,
individuals can get ownership rights out of customary land. With this provision, it is assumed
that with time, customary land tenure will be no more since everyone will have converted their
land to freeholds. However studies show that since the adoption of the Land Act in 1998, very
few people have applied for the certificate of customary ownership. This could be attributed
firstly to high levels of illiteracy and ignorance amongst the customary land holders. Secondly
since most people who own land under this tenure system are peasants, they may not be able to
afford the fees and costs involved. The conversion procedure is bound to be complicated and
confusing, as public education around the Land Act has largely been ineffective (Okuku, 2006).
ii. Freehold
Freehold is the land tenure that grants absolute right of ownership which is the greatest interest in
land for an indefinite period of time. It is the most preferred mode of holding land in Uganda
because it is assumed that it provides increased tenure security being that there are full ownership
rights. Garvelink (2012) observes that for property rights alone have a minimal effect on tenure
security unless coupled with measures such as a good judicial system, affordability to access
legal services, trustworthy land administration system. Freehold can be said to be holding
registered land for unlimited time frame subject to statutory and common law qualifications. In
Uganda, freehold tenure system can traced back in 1900 and 1901 when the Toro and Ankole
kingdom respectively signed agreements with the British government. Currently, freehold titles
can be alienated from public and customary land. The portion of land under this type of tenure is
very small (18.6%) as compared to the customary land tenure systems (68.6%). Land registration
regarding freehold is governed by the Registration of Title’s Act (RTA).
iii. Mailo
Mailo land tenure means the holding of registered land in perpetuity and having roots in the
allotment of land pursuant to the 1900 Uganda Agreement between Buganda kingdom and the
10
British. It is subject to statutory qualifications. Mailo Land is distributed in the central region of
Uganda. This tenure system has majority of the occupiers being tenants rather than land lords.
Mailo land tenure can be said to be freehold but the legal significant difference between freehold
and mailo tenure is that mailo is subject to customary and statutory rights of lawful or bonafide
occupants of the land (Mugambwa, 2000). It can be said to be a hybrid system of the traditional
customary and the modern freehold system. It is also one tenure system that permits the
separation of ownership of land from the developments on the land made by a lawful and
bonafide occupant of land (Land Act, 1998). In other words it has some characteristics of
freehold and others of customary According to Mabogunje (1992) mailo land tenure system is
considered to be an officially adoptive system. This type of tenure is found in the central
(Buganda) region of the country and some parts of Bunyoro and Ankole Kingdoms.
There have been various problems associated with this type of tenure system. The tenure is
subject to occupiers known as “Kibanja” (plural: Bibanja) holders or owners12 and there exists
dual interests on the land where by neither parties (the owner and the occupier who may be
bonafide or legal occupants) can make decision on land without consulting the other. According
to Section 4 of the Land Act, the mailo land owner holds the land in perpetuity and has all the
powers of a freeholder but on the other hand the land is subject to customary and statutory rights
of lawful or bona fide occupants. According to (Coldham, 2000) this shows severe restrictions of
the powers of a mailo land owner. It also sends a signal that full ownership rights of a land owner
are being interfered with which is contrary to the constitution about land ownership (Nsamba-
Gayiiya, 1999). This problem between land lord and tenant is so intense that it has caused some
amendments in the Land Act to ensure the two parties leave in harmony without having a sour
relationship which have caused massive evictions of the tenants by the landlords. As proof of
ownership, the owner of mailo land is issued a certificate of title while the occupant is given a
certificate of Occupancy (CO).
iv. Leasehold.
Leasehold can be defined as holding land for a known time frame based on conditions in an
agreement between the registered owner and the tenant. Leasehold tenure is mostly evident on
public land of which they are granted by the District Land Boards (DLB) and Uganda Land
Commission on behalf of Government (ULC). It can also be granted on customary, mailo and
freehold. Leases granted on public land are called public leases while those granted on private
land by private persons are known as private leases. A lease granted for 3 or more years is
entitled to a certificate of title. Non-citizens of Uganda can acquire leases on land for a period not
exceeding 99 years but not hold a as freehold and mailo.
Private leases can be converted to freehold with the consent of the land owners. Any lease (public
lease) that was granted to a Ugandan citizen out of former public lands13 might be converted into
a freehold. Figure 2-1 below shows the distribution of the various land tenure systems in Uganda

12“Kibanja” (plural: Bibanja) holders or owners are occupiers on land who could be lawful or bonafide occupiers
13These are leases which were granted by a former controlling authority (either ULC or any statutory body such as the urban
council) and had been current when the Land Act came into effect in 1998.
11
 Figure 4-1: Map of Uganda showing distribution of the different land tenure systems wide
Source: Geo-Information Communication Ltd (2007)
In addition to the four tenure systems, the sub-tenure of occupancy is recognized under specific
legal conditions. Two other sub-tenures, known as renting and borrowing, operate widely but
without legal recognition ("Land Sector Strategic Plan," 2001-2011)14 as shown in Table 2-3
below

14 Land Sector Strategic Plan (LSSP) 2001-2011 under the theme “Utilizing Uganda’s Land Resources for Sustainable
Development” was developed by the Government of Uganda. The mission of the land sector is to create a platform for the
participation of all stakeholders in effective use and management of Uganda’s land resources”
12
 Table 4-2: Land tenure categories
Tenure Key features Geographical Availability by
Incidence percentage
Customary “Traditional” land tenure, Country wide but 68.6%
varying in different areas. predominantly in
More individualised in south Northern, North East
and west, more communal in and West Nile
north and east
Freehold Registered ownership in Predominantly in south 18.6%
perpetuity. Freehold title and west
issued
Mailo Limited form of freehold Central rand Mid- 9.2%
which recognizes both tenants’ western regions
(occupancy) and landlord
rights. Mailo title issued.
Leasehold 49 or 99 year leases, with Country wide, especially 3.6%
development conditions, in urban areas.
Ground rent and premium
payable, Leasehold title issued.
Occupancy Right to occupy land under Country wide on any
specific conditions based on registered land
occupation prior to 1983
Renting Use rights to land for a defined Varies country wide
period subject to payment of
rent. The land is normally used
for farming purposes.
Borrowing Use rights to land for a defined Various country wide
period subject to payment of
part of harvest
Source: Adopted from Land Sector Strategic Plan (2001-2011) and MoLHUD (2010)

The resultant tenure systems at the different times of land tenure reforms have been summarized
in Table 2-4 below

Table 4-3: Summary of the history of land tenure systems in Uganda

Period Land Tenure and Land right System Remarks
Before 1900 - Semi feudal system in Buganda - There existed traditional
- Non feudal system in the rest of the rulers.

13
 country - Customary land holding
was predominant
1900-8th- - Mailo -1900 - Crown land was vested in
Oct-1962 - Leasehold - 1903 the British but controlled
- Freehold by Uganda Government.
 Native freehold- 1900 - Customary land was non-
 Adjudicated freehold- 1958 existent as it was turned
- Crown lands to freehold

9th-Oct-1962 - Public land-1962 All land was declared public

to 7th-Oct- - Leasehold and vested in state and only
1995 leases could be issued.
8th-Oct-1995 - Mailo Land was vested in the
to date - leasehold Citizens of Uganda and
- Freehold customary land was officially
 Native freehold recognized for the first time
 Adjudicated freehold since 1900.
- Customary
- Public land

5.0 CONCLUSIONS
Despite the fact that various land tenure reforms took place in Uganda, it is evident that existing
current land tenure are not different from those that existed between 1900 to 1994. The most
interesting thing is that these land tenure systems have exhibited the same characteristics all
through. For example, mailo land tenure has had sitting tenants since it was created to date.
Customary land ownership is also still in the same state. Even if the Land Act and the
constitution recognize customary land tenure, the challenge is that it is not fully absorbed into the
legislation of Uganda. The cultures on customary land that existed before haven’t changed. The
clan, community and family leaders still have the upper say on how the land is managed.
Community leaders still determine the procedures and conditions of operation therefore the law
does not develop its operations to the level of regulating rights and obligations. Freehold and
leasehold still exhibit the same characteristics. This means that the land tenure reforms that took
place failed to meet their common objective which was to introduce a unified land tenure system.
The failure to these reforms can be attributed to various reasons but the main one is the political
and legal framework. All the tenure reforms were politically motivated with no legal framework.
Whenever a land reform took place, the legal perspective was considered after the political
satisfaction had been earned. For example the envujjo and Busuulu law, the Land Act, the
national land policy, all came years later when the reforms were already on ground but not seem
to be working as expected. But it should be noted that the legal and political perspective move
hand in hand or more so the legal institutions should be put in place before the reforms are
enacted. De Soto (2000) points out that in a property revolution, a leader has to do at least three
specific things: take the perspective of the poor, co-opt the elite, and deal with the legal and
technical bureaucracies. Most often efficient utilisation of property right as an input for economic
growth requires considerable resources and appropriate institutional setup and legal backup
14
(Tefera & Holden, 2008). McAuslan (2003) also makes the same observation that without the
appropriate political environment and support for land law, reform and/or an aid project to
support such reform in the key parts of the government machinery, reform will not take place. He
continues that a land reform program is first and foremost a governance reform program and
failure to grasp that fundamental point will render land reform programs promoted either
internally or externally as wasted effort or resources. Because of this mistake, land reforms in
Uganda have not fully been a success. This is evident from the land act 1998 whose objectives
have never been fully attained15 after 12 years of its enactment.

6.0 REFERENCE
Ahene, R. A. (2009). Measures to Improve Access to Land Resources and Related Benefits in
Uganda Paper presented at the FIG-World Bank Conference on Land Governance in
Support of Millenium Development Goals: Responding to New Challenges. Retrieved
from http://www.fig.net/pub/fig_wb_2009/
Baland, J.-M., Gaspart, F., Place, F., & Platteau, J.-P. (2007). The distributive impact of land
markets in Central Uganda. Economic Development and Cultural Change, Vol. 55(2), pp.
283-311.
Batty, F. J. (2005). Pressure from Above, Below and Both Directions: The Politics of Land
Reform in South Africa, Brazil and Zimbabwe. Paper presented at the Paper presented at
the annual meeting of the Southern Political Science Association. Retrieved from
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p66856_index.html
Batungi, N. (2010). A Historical Account of Mailo Land Reforms. Retrieved 21th October,
2010, from http://ugandalandowners.com/
Batungi, N., & Rüther, H. (2008). Land Tenure Reform in Uganda some reflections on the
Formalisation of Customary Tenure. Survey Review Journal, 40(308), pp 116-128.
Besley, T. (1995). Property Rights and Investment Incentives: Theory and Evidence from Ghana.
Journal of Political Education, Vol. 103(5), pp.903-937.
Bruce, J. W., & Dorner, P. P. (1982). Agriculturel Land Tenure in Zambia: Perspectives,
Problems and Opportunities: LTC Research Paper 76. Land Tenure Center, University of
Wisconsin-Madison.
Busingye, H. (2002). Customary Land Tenure Reform in Uganda; Lessons for South Africa.
Paper presented at the International Symposium on Communal Tenure Reform. Land
Reform in Africa: Lessons for South Africa. Retrieved from http://www.oxfam.org.uk
Coldham, S. (2000). Land Reform and Customary Rights: The Case of Uganda. Journal of
African Law, 44(1), pp. 65-77.
De Soto, H. (2000). The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails
Everywhere Else Basic Books.

15Some of the objectives not attained by the Land Act include; to resolve the land use impasse between the registered owners and
the lawful and bonafide occupants of this land, to provide security of tenure to all land users including customary tenants and
lawful or bonafide occupants on registered land, to provide an institutional framework for the control and management of land
under a decentralized system amongst others.

15
Deininger, K. (2003). Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction: A copublication of the
World Bank and Oxford University Press.
Deininger, K. (2005). Land Policy Reforms. In A. Coudouel & S. Paternostro (Eds.), Analyzing
the Distributional Impact of Reforms: A Practitioner's Guide to Trade, Monetary and
Exchange Rate Policy, Utility Provision, Agricultural Markets, Land Policy, and
Education. (Vol. 1). Washington, DC: World Bank Publication.
Deininger, K., & Ayalew, D. A. (2008). Do Overlapping Land Rights Reduse Agricultural
Investment? Evidence from Uganda. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.
90(4), pp. 869-882.
Deininger, K., & Ayawel, D. A. (2007). Do Overlapping Land Rights Reduce Agricultural
Investment? Evidence from Uganda: The World Bank Research Group and Sustainable
Rural and Urban Development group.
Doebele, W. A. (1987). The Evolution of Concepts of Urban Land Tenure in Developing
Countries. Journal of Habitat International, 11(1), pp. 7-22.\
\

East African Royal Commission. (1955). East Africa Royal Commission 1953-1955 report
London: H.M.S.O.
FAO. (2002). Land Tenure and Rural Development. Rome, Italy: FAO-UN.
Feldman, R. (1974). Custom and capitalism: Changes in the basis of land tenure in Ismani,
Tanzania. Journal of Development Studies, 10(No.3-4), pp. 305-320.
Finan, F., Sadoulet, E., & de Janvry, A. (2005). Measuring the Poverty Reduction Potential of
Land in Rural Mexico. Journal of Development Economics, Vol 77, pp. 27-51.
Garvelink, W. J. (2012). Land Tenure, Property Rights and Rural Economic Development in
Africa. Retrieved 30th- April, 2013 at http://csis.org/publication/land-tenure-property-
rights-and-rural-economic-development-africa
Geo-Information Communication Ltd. (2007). Private Sector Competitiveness Project (PSCPII):
Securing and Upgrading the Land Registry and Implementation of a Land Information
System in Uganda: The Baseline Evaluation Report.
Ike, D. N. (1977). A Comparison of Communal, Freehold and Leasehold Land Tenure: A
Preliminary Study in Ibadan and Ife, Western Nigeria. American Journal of Economics
and Sociology., 36(2), pp. 187-195.
Kiapi, A. (1975). Legal obstacles to rural development in colonial Uganda. Mawazo 4(3), pp.101-
112.
Land Sector Strategic Plan (2001-2011).
Lastarria-Cornhiel, S. (2003). Uganda Country Brief: Property rights and Land Markets:
USAID.
Mabogunje, A. L. (1992) Perspective on Urban Land and Urban Management Policies in Sub-
Saharan Africa. World Bank Technical Paper 196 and African Technical Separtment
Series. Washington, D.C, U.S.A World Bank
Makubuya, K. (1981). Land Law Reform and Rural Development in Uganda: Faculty of Social
Science, Makerere University.
McAuslan, P. (2003). A Narrative on Land Law Reform in Uganda. Paper presented at the
Comparative Policy Perspectives on Urban Land Market Reform in Eastern Europe,
Southern Africa and Latin America.

16
 MoLHUD. (2010). The Statistical Abstract: VOL 1. Kampala: Ministry of Lands Housing and
Urban Development. Also Available at www.mlhud.go.ug.
Mugambwa, J. T. (2000). Principles of Land Law in Uganda: Fountain Publisher.
Mukwaya, A. B. (1953). Land Tenure in Buganda, present day tendencies (East African Studies):
Published for the East African Institute of Social Research by the Eagle Press.
Nkwae, B. (2006). Conceptual Framework for Modelling and Analysing Periurban Land
Problems in Sourthern African. University of New Brunswick.
Nsamba-Gayiiya, E. (1999). The Disentangling of Multiple Layering of Rights on the Same
Parcel: Which Way forward? Kampala, Uganda: Mk Publishers.
Okuku, J. A. (2006). The Land Act (1998) and Land Tenure Reform in Uganda. Africa
Development Journal XXXI(1), 1–26.
Payne, G. (2004). Land Tenure and Property rights: An introduction. Habitat International,
28(2), pg 167-179.
Rugadya, M. (1999). Land Reform: The Ugandan Experience Paper presented at the Land Use
and Villagisation Workshop.
Tefera, T., & Holden, S. (2008). Property right and land management in Eastern and Southern
Africa.
Ubink, J. M. (2008). In the Land of the Chiefs: Customary Law, Land Conflicts, and the Role of
the State in Peri-Urban Ghana. Amsterdam, NLD: Amsterdam University Press.
UNECA. (2003). Land Tenure Systems and Sustainable Development in Southern Africa. South
African Office, Lusaka Zambia. Also available at http://www.uneca.org/publications/.
UNECE. (1996). Land Administration Guidelines with Special Reference to Countries in
Transition. New York and Geneva: United Nations.
USAID. (2013). Securing Land Tenure and Resource Right. Environmental and Global Climate
Change. Retrieved 30th- May, 2013 from http://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/environment-
and-global-climate-change/securing-land-tenure-and-resource-rights
West, H. W. (1965). The Mailo system in Buganda: A preliminary case study in African land
tenure. Entebbe: Printed by the Government Printer.
West, H. W. (1972). Land Policy in Buganda: Cambridge University Press.
Yudelman, M. (1964). Africans on the Land: Economic Problems of African Agricultural
Development in Southern, Central and East Africa, with special reference to Southern
Rhodesia Harvard University Press.

17

View publication stats