The development means that the clubs are set to receive their first-quarter funding of Sh152.77 million each, following the release of 50% of the annual subvention by the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development.

In a letter dated September 18, 2026, addressed to the chairman of the Uganda Premier League Board, NCS said it had completed the onboarding of bank details for all 18 clubs into the Government Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS), paving the way for processing of the payments.

Uganda Premier League chairman Arinaitwe Rugyendo welcomed the development, saying the release would enable clubs to access the money earmarked for their operations.

The NCS communication, however, indicates that the money is not an unrestricted cash payment for clubs to spend as they wish. Instead, the council has prescribed how the annual allocation and quarterly releases should be distributed across four specific areas.

Sh5.5bn for 18 clubs

According to the document, NCS has allocated Sh5.5 billion for the 18 UPL clubs during the 2026/27 financial year.

The arithmetic gives every club an equal annual allocation of approximately Sh305,555,556.

With the Ministry of Finance releasing 50% of the total annual subvention in the first quarter, every club is entitled to Sh152,777,778 for the first quarter.

Across the 18 clubs, the first-quarter allocation translates into approximately Sh2.75 billion, representing half of the Sh5.5 billion annual allocation.

The remaining approximately Sh2.75 billion is expected to form the balance of the annual allocation, subject to subsequent quarterly releases and the applicable Government processes.

The letter follows correspondence between NCS and the UPL Board over the clubs’ bank details and funding arrangements.

NCS says the process of onboarding bank details for all the 18 clubs into IFMS has been finalised and the system is ready to process the payments.

The development is therefore significant because it moves the Government support from the allocation stage towards actual processing through the public financial management system.

Where the money will go

The NCS has divided each club’s annual allocation into four broad categories.

The largest component, 60%, is earmarked for the welfare of players and the technical team.

For each club, this translates into an annual amount of approximately Sh183.33 million.

In the first quarter, the same category accounts for approximately Sh91.67 million per club.

The second component is 20%, described as special consideration for national team players in the club, if any. The document says that where applicable, this money is to be allocated to Item No. 3 — TID.

This component amounts to approximately Sh61.11 million annually per club, or Sh30.56 million for the first quarter.

The third component is 10% for talent identification and development.

Each club has an annual allocation of approximately Sh30.56 million under this category, translating into about Sh15.28 million during the first quarter.

The remaining 10% is for general administrative support for the club secretariat.

This also amounts to approximately Sh30.56 million annually, with Sh15.28 million available for the first quarter.

Breakdown per club

The NCS figures provide the following picture for each club:

Funding area                                                            Annual allocation                 Q1 allocation

Welfare for players & technical team – 60%                Sh183,333,333                     Sh91,666,667

Special consideration/national team players – 20% Sh61,111,111                   Sh30,555,556

Talent identification & development – 10%              Sh30,555,556                        Sh15,277,778

General administration – 10%                                    Sh30,555,556                 Sh15,277,778

Total                                                                               Sh305,555,556              Sh152,777,778

The figures show that the welfare of players and technical staff is by far the largest expenditure line, taking three-fifths of the allocation.

For the 18 clubs collectively, the annual welfare component amounts to about Sh3.3 billion, while the first-quarter welfare component is approximately Sh1.65 billion.

The 20% special consideration component accounts for roughly Sh1.1 billion annually across the league, while talent development and administrative support each account for approximately Sh550 million annually.

Not yet simply a free cash transfer

An important detail in the NCS letter is that the council’s communication is not confirmation that all the money had already reached the clubs’ bank accounts.

Instead, NCS states that it is ready to process payment after completion of the IFMS onboarding process.

The council also asks the 18 clubs to submit detailed work plans and budgets to the General Secretary to enable NCS to process the funds.

This means clubs have a financial obligation to demonstrate how they intend to use the money under the prescribed funding categories.

The requirement could also provide a framework for monitoring how Government funding is utilised, particularly the largest portion directed towards players and technical staff.

Government support to top-flight football

The Sh5.5 billion allocation represents a substantial Government commitment to the country’s top-flight football clubs.

Divided equally, the annual allocation works out at slightly more than Sh25 million per club per month on average, although the money is not structured as a monthly payment and is instead released through the Government’s quarterly funding framework.

For the first quarter, each club’s Sh152.77 million allocation represents approximately Sh50.9 million per month when averaged across three months.

However, the document makes clear that this is a quarterly allocation and not a direct monthly entitlement.

The funding also places emphasis on developing football beyond immediate match-day requirements.

The 10% talent identification and development component provides a dedicated allocation for clubs to identify and nurture emerging players.

Similarly, the administrative component is intended to support club secretariats, potentially helping clubs meet some of the organisational costs associated with running professional football institutions.

Clubs asked to prepare budgets

NCS concludes the letter by setting out three purposes for the communication.

First, it says the clubs are being informed of their allocations.

Second, the clubs are required to submit detailed work plans and budgets to the General Secretary so that the council can process the funds.

Third, NCS reaffirms its commitment to supporting the clubs in line with the approved allocations.

For the UPL, the immediate issue will therefore be ensuring that all 18 clubs comply with the financial documentation requirements so that the money can move through the Government payment system.

The allocation comes as the 2026/27 Premier League season gets underway, placing the Government subsidy at the centre of clubs’ financial planning.

Rugyendo’s message that “Clubs get their money” captures the immediate significance of the development: Government has provided the funding framework, the first-quarter money has been released to the sector, and NCS says the administrative process is now ready for payment.

The document, however, distinguishes between allocation and actual disbursement. The Sh5.5 billion is the approved annual allocation, while the first-quarter entitlement is Sh152.77 million per club and NCS says it is ready to process the payments after receiving the required work plans and budgets.

That distinction will be important as the clubs begin accessing the funds and accounting for how the money is spent.

The regrouping comes amid what community leaders describe as a worrying increase in attacks targeting civilians in parts of Teso.

The former fighters, who operated alongside the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) during the LRA insurgency, said they would use their knowledge of the local terrain and communities to support police and other security agencies in identifying and confronting criminal elements.

Musa Ecweru, who coordinated the Arrow Boys during the height of the LRA insurgency and is now a government minister, said the group’s involvement could help strengthen community security.

Ecweru made the remarks in Amuria District during the distribution of maize and soybean seed to Arrow Boys commanders. The seed was donated by Gen Muhoozi Kainerugaba, the Chief of Defence Forces (CDF).

“There is an urgent need for the Arrow Boys to participate in restoring security in Teso. We know this region, we know our people and we understand the threats that can emerge from within the communities,” Ecweru said.

He said the former fighters should not act outside the law but should cooperate with the police and other recognised security agencies.

The proposal marks a new phase for a group whose origins are closely associated with one of the most violent periods in Teso’s recent history.

Born Out Of LRA War

The Arrow Boys emerged in 2003 after the LRA intensified attacks in Teso. The insurgents attacked villages and camps for internally displaced persons, killed civilians, abducted children and destroyed property.

The intensity of the attacks prompted local leaders and residents to organise a community defence force.

Historical accounts identify Ecweru and Captain Mike Mukula among the key Teso leaders involved in mobilising and organising the Arrow Boys. Mukula served as chairman, while Ecweru became the group’s operational coordinator.

The group was made up largely of local men, including former combatants and people with military experience. They were later supported by the government and worked alongside the UPDF in operations against the LRA.

The Arrow Boys initially relied on traditional weapons, including bows and arrows, before receiving firearms and other support.

A 2017 International Crisis Group account, based partly on interviews with Ecweru and other former commanders, says the group was mobilised in June 2003 after senior Teso leaders met to organise a response to the LRA attacks. The first Arrow Boys operation was launched later that month.

The group eventually expanded considerably. Crisis Group reported that the government distributed thousands of rifles to the Arrow Boys, who were organised into battalions and operated as an auxiliary force alongside the regular army.

Fight Against Kony

The formation of the Arrow Boys followed the spread of LRA violence into Teso, particularly after the attacks on Obalanga in Amuria District in 2003.

The Obalanga attacks became one of the darkest chapters of the insurgency in the region.

The Refugee Law Project’s documentation of conflicts in Uganda records that the LRA attack on Obalanga resulted in killings, abductions, displacement and destruction of property, prompting the formation of the Arrow Boys under the leadership of Ecweru and Mukula.

Contemporary reports also described the Arrow Boys as having considerable local knowledge, which allowed them to track LRA fighters and respond quickly to attacks.

A 2003 report by the Mail & Guardian described the group as having helped restore a measure of order in some parts of Teso as it pursued LRA fighters. The force, however, was never intended to become a permanent parallel security structure.

As the LRA threat diminished and the insurgency moved away from Uganda, the Arrow Boys’ activities declined.

New Security Role

More than 20 years later, Ecweru says the experience accumulated during the insurgency can be put to use again, this time through cooperation with formal security institutions.

He said the current situation should not be allowed to deteriorate to the levels witnessed during the LRA insurgency.

The former commanders are expected to work with police and other security agencies by sharing information about suspicious activities, identifying emerging threats and encouraging residents to cooperate with authorities. Ecweru stressed the importance of community involvement in preventing crime.

“The security of Teso cannot be left to the police and the army alone. Communities have a role to play in identifying bad elements and giving information to the security agencies,” he said.

He urged the former fighters to remain disciplined and ensure that their activities complement, rather than undermine, the work of the established security agencies.

Seeds For Former Fighters

The regrouping was announced during the distribution of maize and soybean seed donated by Gen Muhoozi to Arrow Boys commanders in Amuria.

The agricultural support is intended to help former fighters engage in farming and strengthen household livelihoods.

Ecweru said the welfare of former Arrow Boys remained an important issue, particularly because many of those who participated in the insurgency returned to civilian life without adequate support.

Historical records show that welfare and compensation have long been contentious issues among former Arrow Boys. In an earlier government programme, families of fallen members received financial assistance through the army.

The group also faced challenges associated with demobilisation and reintegration after the LRA threat declined.

Crisis Group has previously noted that many former Arrow Boys returned to civilian life without sustained support after the conflict, contributing to grievances among some former members.

Muhoozi Endorsement

During the Amuria meeting, Arrow Boys commanders also endorsed Gen Muhoozi for the 2031 presidential election.

The endorsement was made in the presence of Ecweru during the seed distribution exercise. The political development adds a new dimension to the activities of a group historically associated with the Teso security crisis.

Muhoozi is the serving Chief of Defence Forces, while the Arrow Boys are a former community defence force that operated alongside the national army during the LRA insurgency.

The commanders’ endorsement therefore came against the background of the group’s renewed discussions on security, community mobilisation and welfare.

Ecweru, however, focused his remarks on security and community participation, urging the former fighters to work within the country’s security framework.

Security Agencies To Take Lead

The renewed activities also raise questions about the appropriate role of former community fighters in modern security operations.

The original Arrow Boys operated in a very different environment, when the LRA was carrying out armed attacks and communities faced an active insurgency.

Today, any involvement of former fighters in security matters would have to be coordinated through the recognised security institutions.

The historical experience also demonstrates both the potential and challenges of community-based security initiatives.

The Arrow Boys provided local intelligence and rapid responses during the LRA conflict, but they also depended heavily on government support and military command structures.

Ecweru said the lesson from the past was the importance of communities and security agencies working together.

He called on residents to provide information to police and other authorities rather than confronting suspected criminals independently.

“The Arrow Boys must work with security, not outside security,” he said.

For Teso, the revival of the Arrow Boys name evokes memories of a period when residents faced attacks from one of Uganda’s most notorious insurgent groups.

But Ecweru said the current initiative was about preventing insecurity from escalating and ensuring that communities remain vigilant.

The former fighters now face a very different task from the one that brought them together in 2003: supporting civilian safety through cooperation with the formal security system while helping their communities build more secure and economically stable livelihoods.

The reported fallout has emerged against the backdrop of the arrest and subsequent charging of Matthew Bagonza, a close aide to Rwabwogo and head of the secretariat of the Presidential Advisory Committee on Exports and Industrial Development (PACEID).

Bagonza was on Thursday charged before the Anti-Corruption Court in Kampala with abuse of office and money laundering and remanded to Luzira Prison until October 5. He did not enter a plea after his lawyers challenged the jurisdiction of the lower court to receive it.

Bishop Patience and her husband, Rwabwogo, were in court as Bagonza appeared in the dock.

According to family sources, the development has deepened tensions between Patience and Muhoozi, who had previously enjoyed a close relationship as siblings.

“The God I serve will give us justice, otherwise me and Muhoozi we are done,” Patience is reported to have told a close family confidant.

The statement could not independently be verified, but it reflects the depth of the family tensions now surrounding the Bagonza case.

Muhoozi’s warning

The latest crisis follows a public confrontation between Muhoozi and Rwabwogo that has played out unusually openly, with the two relatives exchanging accusations over PACEID and the treatment of Bagonza.

On August 25, Muhoozi publicly declared PACEID illegal and said members implicated in corruption would be arrested. He subsequently confirmed that Bagonza had been arrested.

The arrest immediately placed Rwabwogo and Muhoozi on opposite sides of an increasingly public dispute.

Rwabwogo questioned the circumstances of Bagonza’s detention and said that if his aide had committed an offence, he should be brought before a competent court and allowed to defend himself.

He also said President Yoweri Museveni had told him that he was not aware of Bagonza’s arrest and had not ordered it.

The disagreement became even more serious after Muhoozi used social media to attack PACEID and its officials, while Rwabwogo defended the institution and insisted that government institutions should operate according to established procedures.

The media has previously reported that Muhoozi had previously described Rwabwogo in highly critical terms and that the two men had clashed over Rwabwogo’s activities and views on Uganda’s political direction.

Patience caught in the middle

For Patience, the dispute has placed her in an uncomfortable position between her husband and her brother. She is the daughter of President Museveni and First Lady Janet Museveni and is married to Rwabwogo.

Sources familiar with the family dynamics say the arrest of Bagonza has transformed what was previously an argument between two powerful members of the extended First Family into a wider family crisis.

Patience’s appearance in court alongside her husband on Thursday was interpreted by observers as a sign of solidarity with Rwabwogo and Bagonza.

However, the court appearance itself does not establish her position on the allegations against Bagonza.

The prosecution alleges that Bagonza abused his office by incorporating a private company with objectives similar to those of PACEID and that about Sh171.7m was transferred from an account associated with the organisation to his personal account.

The prosecution alleges that the transactions were intended to conceal or disguise the illicit origin of the funds. Bagonza has not pleaded to the charges, and the allegations remain unproven.

Janet enters the picture

The growing dispute has reportedly alarmed First Lady Janet Museveni, who sources say has become concerned that the disagreement could permanently damage relations between her children and son-in-law.

Sources claim that Janet has summoned Muhoozi as she attempts to calm the situation and prevent the disagreement from spreading further within the family.

“She is trying all her best to mend the ties between Odrek and her son,” a source familiar with the discussions reportedly said.

The First Lady has not publicly commented on the alleged family intervention.

According to people familiar with the dispute, one of the most difficult issues is the political disagreement between Muhoozi and Rwabwogo.

Rwabwogo has publicly called for dialogue and reforms within the ruling establishment, positions that have at times put him at odds with Muhoozi’s political project.

Muhoozi has increasingly positioned himself at the centre of Uganda’s political conversation, while Rwabwogo has continued to speak publicly on economic policy, exports, governance and political reforms.

Political activists have described their dispute as an unusually public confrontation within President Museveni’s extended family.

The succession question

Behind the immediate dispute lies a broader political question that has increasingly shaped the relationship between the two men: the future direction of the National Resistance Movement and Muhoozi’s political ambitions.

Muhoozi has publicly spoken about his political future, while Rwabwogo has advocated dialogue and institutional reforms. Their differences have therefore not remained purely personal.

The confrontation over PACEID has provided a new platform for those disagreements, with Muhoozi attacking the organisation and Rwabwogo insisting that it was formally established and has a legitimate government mandate.

PACEID says it was established to support Uganda’s export and industrial-development agenda, while Rwabwogo has defended its record and mandate.

Council of elders prepare intervention

With the disagreement now threatening to deepen divisions within the First Family, the council of elders from Ankole are reportedly preparing to intervene.

Sources say the elders are expected to engage members of the family in an effort to restore dialogue between Muhoozi and Rwabwogo before the dispute causes further damage.

Their intervention would follow a long-standing tradition in which senior family members and community elders are called upon to mediate disputes involving prominent families.

The elders are expected to appeal for restraint and discourage the continued public exchange of accusations.

Their immediate challenge, however, will be to separate the family disagreement from the criminal proceedings against Bagonza.

The case is now before court, and the allegations against him will have to be determined through the judicial process.

Museveni’s difficult position

Just like the tale of the cunning and witty fox, President Museveni has so far remained publicly restrained about the confrontation. That silence has fuelled speculation about whether he will personally intervene or allow the legal and institutional processes to take their course.

Rwabwogo has said that when he met the President after Bagonza’s arrest, Museveni told him he had not ordered the arrest and was unaware of it.

The President’s reported position has added another layer to the dispute because Muhoozi’s public confirmation of Bagonza’s detention came before the eventual court proceedings.

For now, the family crisis is unfolding alongside a criminal case that has yet to reach its substantive hearing.

Bagonza remains presumed innocent unless proven guilty, while the allegations exchanged between Muhoozi and Rwabwogo remain part of a wider public dispute.

What began as a confrontation over PACEID has consequently developed into a difficult test for family relations at the centre of Uganda’s political establishment.

With Janet Museveni reportedly attempting to bring the sides together and Ankole elders preparing to intervene, attention is now turning to whether the family can restore dialogue before the dispute becomes even more entrenched.

The demonstration, led by PLU Secretary General Fadil Twalla, came at a time President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni was holding discussions with Türkiye’s Ambassador to Uganda, Mehmet Fatih Ak, on matters of bilateral interest.

The two developments placed Uganda-Türkiye relations under an unusual spotlight, with PLU supporters taking their grievances to the diplomatic mission while the President engaged the Turkish envoy on official relations.

Muhoozi Orders ‘Full Force’ Protest

The PLU demonstration was ordered by Gen Muhoozi Kainerugaba, the PLU chairman and Chief of Defence Forces, who had directed the movement to stage a “full force” demonstration at the Turkish Embassy on September 18.

Twalla was tasked with mobilising PLU structures and supporters for the protest. According to the PLU, the demonstration was centred on Lumbuye, a Ugandan government critic who has lived in Türkiye for several years.

Twalla told journalists after the demonstration that the protesters wanted Turkish authorities to extradite Lumbuye to Uganda.

“Today, as instructed by our chairman, we held a successful and peaceful demonstration at the Turkish embassy,” Twalla said.

He said the protesters had asked Türkiye to hand over Lumbuye if it wanted to maintain good relations with Uganda.

“We asked them to extradite Lumbuye as soon as possible if they truly value our bilateral relations with them and respect our sovereignty,” he said.

PLU Raises Lumbuye Case

Ugandan authorities have previously accused Lumbuye of offences including harmful propaganda, incitement and cyber-related crimes.

His supporters and other critics of the Government have, however, continued to portray the matter as part of a wider political dispute.

The legal and diplomatic status of Lumbuye in Türkiye remained an important part of the disagreement surrounding the demonstration.

The PLU has accused Türkiye of allowing its territory to be used by people it regards as hostile to Uganda’s leadership.

Twalla said the protesters were not demonstrating against Turkish people but were raising concerns they considered important to Uganda’s sovereignty and national interests.

Mobilisation Begins In Naguru

The demonstration had been planned for several days. On September 10, the PLU announced that Twalla had convened regional and sub-regional coordinators at the organisation’s National Secretariat in Naguru to prepare for the September 18 action.

The meeting discussed mobilisation, organisation and logistical arrangements for the demonstration, according to the PLU.

Twalla later called upon PLU supporters and well-wishers to assemble at Lugogo Cricket Oval before proceeding to the embassy. He urged participants to keep time and maintain discipline during the procession.

Turkish Embassy Closes

The Turkish Embassy had anticipated the demonstration and announced that its offices would close as a precaution.

In a notice issued on Thursday, the embassy said it would suspend operations because of the planned demonstration near its premises and advised Turkish citizens about the temporary closure.

Police provided security during the protest, which ended without reported major disruption.

Twalla said Turkish embassy officials had indicated that they would respond to the protesters’ concerns.

The embassy had not issued a public response to the protesters’ demands by the time of reporting.

Twalla Threatens Fresh Action

The PLU secretary general warned that the movement could organise another demonstration if it did not receive a satisfactory response.

The confrontation between the PLU and Türkiye has been building for months. Gen Muhoozi has repeatedly criticised Turkish authorities over their handling of Lumbuye’s case and other issues involving Uganda’s relations with Türkiye.

The dispute has also extended beyond Lumbuye, with disagreements reported over Türkiye’s role and interests in the region, Uganda’s military involvement in Somalia and other areas of bilateral cooperation.

Museveni Meets Turkish Envoy

Yet, as PLU supporters were marching to the Turkish Embassy in Kampala, President Museveni was engaging the Turkish ambassador in an official meeting.

Museveni met Ambassador Mehmet Fatih Ak on the sidelines of the groundbreaking ceremony for the Kampala Storage Terminal in Mpigi District. The meeting focused on bilateral matters between Uganda and Türkiye.

The meeting was consistent with earlier engagements between Museveni and Ambassador Ak.

In July, Museveni met the Turkish envoy at his Kisozi Farm in Gomba District, where they discussed the longstanding bilateral relationship and ways of strengthening cooperation in areas of mutual interest.

Uganda-Türkiye Ties

Ambassador Ak has served as Türkiye’s envoy to Uganda since 2023. The Turkish Embassy says its diplomatic mission covers political, military, trade and cultural relations between the two countries.

The President’s meeting with Ak came against the background of a broader relationship that has included Turkish involvement in Ugandan infrastructure, construction, trade and other sectors.

The timing of the meeting also highlighted the distinction between official state-to-state relations and the activities of PLU, a political organisation chaired by Gen Muhoozi.

$310m Storage Terminal

The Kampala Storage Terminal, which provided the venue for Museveni’s meeting with the ambassador, is itself a major infrastructure project involving international commercial interests.

The $310m facility being developed by the Uganda National Oil Company will have capacity to store up to 320 million litres of refined petroleum products.

The terminal, located at Namwabula in Mpigi District, is expected to increase Uganda’s strategic petroleum storage capacity and cushion the country against disruptions in fuel supply.

Diplomacy And Political Pressure

The contrast between the two events has raised attention to how Uganda’s domestic political mobilisation can intersect with diplomatic relations.

While PLU leaders are demanding action against Lumbuye, the Government continues to engage Türkiye through established diplomatic channels.

The Turkish Embassy has not publicly indicated that the PLU demonstration has altered its diplomatic engagement with the Ugandan Government.

Lumbuye Row Remains

The immediate issue for the protesters, however, remains Lumbuye.

Twalla said the PLU considered the blogger’s continued presence in Türkiye unacceptable and called upon Ankara to return him to Uganda.

The PLU also opposed reports that Lumbuye had sought asylum in Türkiye, arguing that such an application should not prevent Ugandan authorities from pursuing the charges they have raised against him.

For the movement, the demonstration was therefore presented as a question of national sovereignty and accountability.

For Türkiye, the matter involves a Ugandan national residing on Turkish territory and the country’s own legal and diplomatic processes.

What Next?

The outcome of the protest will depend partly on how Turkish authorities respond to the demands delivered by the PLU.

The embassy had closed its premises for the day, while President Museveni’s engagement with Ambassador Ak provided a separate channel through which Uganda-Türkiye relations continued at government level.

The events therefore placed two different approaches to the same bilateral relationship side by side — PLU supporters taking their grievances to the Turkish mission and the Ugandan President maintaining direct diplomatic engagement with Türkiye’s representative.

For now, the Lumbuye dispute remains unresolved, while the two countries continue their formal bilateral engagements.

Leku made the appeal after he was declared the winner of the September 17 parliamentary by-election, in which he represented the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM).

He defeated independent candidate Gasper Draga in a contest that followed the death of long-serving legislator and former First Deputy Prime Minister, Gen. Moses Ali, who died in July 2026.

Leku said the conclusion of the election should mark the beginning of a new phase in which political differences are set aside and leaders work together to address the problems facing residents.

“I want all of them to remain united because this was an election, but we are people of Madi and we must remain united to guard our place,” Leku said in his victory remarks.

He specifically invited his fellow contestants and their supporters to join him in serving the constituency, saying the challenges confronting Adjumani West require cooperation beyond political affiliations.

The appeal comes after a competitive NRM primary in which Leku narrowly defeated former Adjumani district chairperson Ben Anyama.

Leku secured 9,336 votes in the NRM primary, while Anyama obtained 9,152 votes, a difference of only 184 votes. The contest subsequently generated divisions within the party as the various aspirants sought the party flag.

The parliamentary contest initially attracted several candidates. However, Anyama and former Forum for Democratic Change candidate Patrick Tandrupasi later withdrew from the race, leaving Leku and Draga to face voters.

The by-election was ultimately conducted on September 17, with the Electoral Commission declaring Leku the winner after tallying results from the constituency’s polling stations.

According to the results reported after the tally, Leku polled 12,432 votes against Draga’s 2,559.

The result gives Leku the responsibility of representing an area that had for decades been politically associated with Gen. Moses Ali.

Building on Gen Ali’s legacy

In his victory speech, Leku paid tribute to the late Gen. Ali, whose death created the vacancy that triggered the by-election.

He acknowledged the former legislator’s contribution to Adjumani West and said he would seek to address some of the challenges that remained unresolved during Gen. Ali’s tenure.

The new MP-elect had previously said his programme would seek to build on Gen. Ali’s development priorities, including infrastructure and connectivity.

One of the major issues raised during the campaign was the construction of the Laropi Bridge over the River Nile, which residents and leaders have described as important for movement, trade and connectivity between Adjumani and neighbouring areas.

Other demands raised during the campaign included improvement of roads, health facilities, schools and electricity infrastructure.

Residents have also called for the tarmacking of the Laropi-Moyo-Afoji road and improvements to the Arua-Kulikulinga-Obongi-Moyo-Adjumani corridor, as well as renovation of Adjumani General Hospital.

Leku now faces the task of translating the campaign promises and the concerns raised by residents into parliamentary advocacy.

Sseninde calls for unity

NRM Director for Mobilisation Dr Rosemary Sseninde also used the outcome to call for unity among political leaders and residents of Adjumani.

Sseninde said the NRM campaign had deliberately concentrated on bringing together party structures, local leaders, mobilisation teams and communities.

She said the same spirit should continue after the election because the constituency’s development needs would not disappear with the conclusion of polling.

“Now that they have a Member of Parliament, they need to all come together, work with him and be able to address the concerns and issues that affect Adjumani because life in Adjumani has to continue,” Sseninde said.

Her comments followed an election campaign in which senior NRM leaders moved through villages seeking to mobilise support for Leku.

Sseninde and other party officials had repeatedly stressed the importance of grassroots mobilisation, with the campaign taking the party leadership to communities across the constituency.

The NRM Electoral Commission chairperson, Dr Tanga Odoi, also praised Leku for maintaining his composure after the party primary and reaching out to other contestants.

Odoi said the campaign’s emphasis on local structures and community participation helped create ownership of the process.

“To me, as a scholar, I think that was the best we did in all the by-elections I have handled. Touching base and building synergies with the local content made the local people own the process,” Odoi said.

Peaceful election

Electoral Commission chairperson Justice Simon Byabakama commended the people of Adjumani West for the peaceful conduct of the by-election.

The election followed a campaign period in which political leaders urged supporters to avoid confrontation and maintain unity. Byabakama’s remarks were made after voting, counting and tallying had been completed.

The peaceful conduct of the election was significant because the NRM primary had exposed divisions among several aspirants competing for the party flag.

The primary attracted six other candidates, with Leku emerging as the flag bearer after the September 3 contest.

The subsequent withdrawal of some candidates narrowed the parliamentary race to Leku and Draga.

Despite the reduced field, the election remained important because it marked the first parliamentary contest in Adjumani West following the death of Gen. Ali, one of the most prominent political figures from the region.

Low voter turnout

The election also recorded relatively low participation. Adjumani West had 51,437 registered voters, but only a fraction turned up to vote. Reports from polling stations indicated that some residents were at workplaces and gardens when voting opened.

The Electoral Commission and observers reported a generally peaceful voting process, although the slow turnout in the morning delayed the opening of some polling stations.

The low turnout will form part of the political context in which Leku begins his parliamentary tenure.

For the MP-elect, however, the immediate message is reconciliation. He has urged those who competed against him, as well as their supporters, to join hands with him in serving the people.

Leku said the election was a contest that had ended, while the wider interests of the Madi people remained.

He pledged to work with the community to address the concerns affecting Adjumani West and to pursue some of the development priorities left behind by Gen. Ali.

His victory therefore ushers in a new political chapter for the constituency, with the focus shifting from the campaign to representation, development and the challenge of bringing together a constituency that experienced intense competition during the race.

Bagonza was subsequently remanded until October 5 at 10:00am, when the matter is expected to return to court for further proceedings. However, despite the charges being read in court, Bagonza has not yet taken plea, with the court reportedly finding that it does not have jurisdiction to receive his plea at this stage. The development marks a major turn in a case that has attracted considerable public attention since Bagonza was arrested in August amid an escalating dispute surrounding PACEID and its leadership.

Arrest

Bagonza, who heads the PACEID secretariat, was reportedly picked up by security operatives from his home in Entebbe on August 25, 2026, shortly after a series of public statements by Gen Muhoozi Kainerugaba concerning PACEID. At the time of his arrest, authorities did not immediately disclose where he had been taken, which security agency was holding him or the specific allegations against him.

His detention was later confirmed publicly by Gen Muhoozi, the Chief of Defence Forces, who posted a photograph of Bagonza on social media. The arrest came against the backdrop of Muhoozi’s criticism of PACEID, which he described as an illegal organisation and accused of corruption. Reports at the time indicated that the circumstances surrounding Bagonza’s detention had caused concern within PACEID, with the organisation seeking information about his whereabouts and calling for due process.

PACEID chairman Odrek Rwabwogo said he contacted security agencies after learning that Bagonza had been taken away but initially failed to establish where he was being held. Rwabwogo later said he travelled to Entebbe to meet President Yoweri Museveni after failing to establish which security agency had taken Bagonza.

According to Rwabwogo’s account, Museveni told him that he was not aware of the arrest and had not ordered it, and that he would seek to establish what had happened. The account brought the arrest into sharp focus because it contrasted with Gen Muhoozi’s public statements that arrests of PACEID officials had begun.

Charges

The case has now moved from the uncertainty surrounding Bagonza’s detention to formal criminal proceedings. Prosecution alleges that about Sh171 million was transferred from PACEID to Bagonza’s personal bank account. The circumstances of the alleged transfer and the purpose for which the money was allegedly received are expected to form part of the evidence as the case progresses.

Bagonza faces a charge of money laundering, alongside abuse of office. At this stage, the allegations remain accusations and have not been proved in court. Bagonza is therefore presumed innocent unless and until a competent court determines otherwise.

The decision not to take his plea immediately means the substantive proceedings have not yet reached that stage. He was instead remanded until October 5 at 10:00am, when the court is expected to consider the matter further.

Rwabwogo’s response

Rwabwogo has consistently called for the matter involving his aide to be handled through established legal procedures. Following Bagonza’s arrest, PACEID issued a statement expressing concern about his detention and said its immediate priority was his safety, dignity and due process.

The committee said it had instructed its lawyers to establish where Bagonza was being held, understand the circumstances surrounding his detention and ensure that the law was followed. Rwabwogo subsequently said that if there was a case against Bagonza, it should be presented before a competent court, where the evidence could be tested and the accused given an opportunity to defend himself.

“If there is a case, let it be brought before a competent court. Let the evidence be tested. Let Matthew Bagonza defend himself. And let the law take its course,” Rwabwogo said. He has also defended the legality of PACEID, rejecting assertions that the committee is an illegal organisation.

According to Rwabwogo, PACEID was commissioned on March 16, 2022, and any changes to its mandate would have to follow an established process rather than being determined through social media statements.

PACEID controversy

The Bagonza case comes at a time when PACEID has been the subject of a wider public dispute involving its mandate, operations and leadership. PACEID was established to support Uganda’s export growth, industrial development and access to international markets. Its official profile identifies Bagonza as head of the secretariat and describes the position as involving coordination of the committee’s executive work and engagement with external groups.

The organisation has previously defended its work and rejected allegations concerning its handling of public resources. In May 2025, Rwabwogo publicly denied claims that PACEID had received Sh37 billion intended for coffee-sector interventions. He said the money in question had instead been received by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation and disbursed to a company.

The current criminal case, however, concerns a separate allegation involving the approximately Sh171 million said by the prosecution to have been transferred from PACEID to Bagonza’s personal account.

Next step

Bagonza’s remand means the court proceedings will now move into the next stage as the prosecution and defence address the legal and factual issues surrounding the charges. The question of jurisdiction raised at the initial appearance will also be important because Bagonza has not yet entered a plea to the charges.

The prosecution will ultimately have to establish the allegations against him through admissible evidence, while Bagonza will have an opportunity to challenge the case through his lawyers.

The case is therefore likely to keep attention focused not only on the alleged Sh171 million transaction, but also on the broader dispute surrounding PACEID, its leadership and the circumstances that preceded Bagonza’s arrest. For now, the formal charges represent allegations only. The October 5 proceedings are expected to provide the next significant step in determining how the case will proceed.

The lawyers’ intervention follows President Museveni’s August 30, 2026 letter to the Minister for Kampala Capital City and Metropolitan Affairs, Minsa Kabanda, directing her to study a proposal by businessman Hajji Hassan Bulwadda and consult the Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA) before reporting back to him.

The lawyers, in an open letter addressed to Museveni, said the proposal should not proceed to the evaluation stage because, in their view, the Constitution prevents Government from leasing the square to a private developer.

“Your Excellency must reject this proposal immediately. The Constitution forbids it,” the lawyers said in the letter.

Their intervention has opened a fresh debate over the ownership, constitutional status and future of one of Kampala’s most prominent public spaces, with the proposed development also drawing opposition from city leaders and other actors.

Museveni directive

The controversy started after Bulwadda wrote to Museveni on August 18 proposing the redevelopment of two acres of City Square into what he described as a modern, eco-friendly real estate complex.

In his August 30 response, Museveni directed Kabanda to study the proposal, discuss it with KCCA and report back.

“I have received a letter from Hajj Hassan Bulwadda dated the 18th of August, 2026, proposing to develop the two acres at City Square in Kampala into a modern, eco-friendly real-estate complex, with a hotel, shopping mall, etc, using solar power, etc,” Museveni wrote.

“Study the proposal, discuss with Kampala Capital City Authority and come back to me,” he added. The directive was copied to Vice-President Jessica Alupo and Prime Minister Robinah Nabbanja.

The proposal envisages a commercial development using solar energy and incorporating retail and hotel facilities. However, the lawyers say the use of terms such as “eco-friendly” and “solar-powered” cannot change the legal character of the land.

They argue that the central question is not whether the proposed building would use renewable energy but whether Government can legally alienate the public space for private commercial development.

Lawyers invoke Constitution

At the centre of the lawyers’ argument is Article 237 of the Constitution, which provides for Government or local government to hold specified natural resources and land reserved for ecological and touristic purposes in trust for the people and protect them for the common good.

Ugandan courts have previously discussed the public trust doctrine in relation to Article 237(2)(b), including the Supreme Court decision in National Forestry Authority v Kiwanuka, which stated that the provision requires Government or local government to hold certain resources in trust for the public.

The lawyers argue that Constitutional Square falls within the category of public land that Government cannot simply dispose of at its discretion.

“A trustee does not own the trust property and only administers it for beneficiaries who cannot themselves consent it away,” they argue.

“Government holds Constitutional Square as trustee for the people of Uganda, present and future. It has no title to lease. It cannot give what it does not have.”

The group further argues that any lease granted in breach of the alleged public trust would be void and incapable of subsequent ratification.

The lawyers also rely on constitutional principles requiring protection of the environment and natural resources, saying the preservation of public green spaces is both an environmental and legal obligation.

Battle over Constitutional Square

The lawyers’ strongest legal argument is based on an earlier dispute involving Legal Brains Trust and businessman Hassan Basajjabalaba over several public properties in Kampala, including Constitutional Square.

The Constitutional Court had previously made findings concerning the status of the square and public land. However, the legal history is contested and requires an important distinction.

In September 2025, the Supreme Court in Hassan Bassajjabalaba and Others v Legal Brains Trust set aside the Constitutional Court’s orders, holding that the Constitutional Court lacked jurisdiction to determine the fact-heavy enforcement dispute in the manner it had done.

The lawyers acknowledge the Supreme Court decision but maintain that it did not, in their interpretation, remove the constitutional protection of Constitutional Square.

“The Supreme Court’s decision of September 2025 in Basajjabalaba only set aside the order for refund of the compensation paid,” they state in the letter.

“The decision that the Constitutional Square is public trust property was not reversed.”

That interpretation could itself become the subject of further legal argument because the Supreme Court judgment overturned the Constitutional Court decision in the case. The dispute therefore leaves an important legal question about how the previous findings concerning the square interact with the Supreme Court’s ruling.

City leaders oppose plan

The lawyers are not alone in opposing the proposed redevelopment.

Kampala Lord Mayor Ronald Balimwezo has also rejected the proposal, saying City Square has historical, civic and constitutional significance and should remain a public space.

According to reports, Balimwezo told Attorney General Sam Mayanja that the square was set aside as Government Square in 1903 and has since acquired historical and civic importance. He cited the Kampala Capital City Authority Act and Article 237 in arguing that the land is public property held for Ugandans.

Balimwezo also described the square as an important green space in the central business district, serving as a carbon sink, dust filter and storm-water soakaway.

He asked the Attorney General to advise Government to reject the proposed development and instead support KCCA in maintaining the area as a protected urban park and heritage site.

The government has also previously recognised the historical significance of City Square. Uganda’s Department of Museums and Monuments lists City Square as a gazetted national monument and says the site is among Uganda’s protected cultural sites and monuments.

Lawyers point to Nakivubo

In their open letter, the lawyers use the redevelopment of Nakivubo Channel as one of the examples of what they describe as the dangers of transferring public spaces to private commercial interests.

The Nakivubo Channel has been redeveloped by Hamis Kiggundu’s Kiham Enterprises Limited.

The project has faced litigation, with traders’ associations challenging aspects of the redevelopment and linking the works to flooding and damage to property in the city centre. Kiggundu and his company have denied the allegations and have argued in court that the project was approved by KCCA and the National Environment Management Authority.

The lawyers say the experience should serve as a warning before another major public space is committed to private development.

They argue that a drainage channel whose function is to carry storm water towards Lake Victoria should not be treated as ordinary commercial land.

Their letter describes the situation as part of a broader concern about the treatment of public assets.

Entebbe Botanical Gardens, Centenary Park

The lawyers also cite the Entebbe Botanical Gardens and Centenary Park as examples of public spaces whose management and development have generated questions about long-term public access.

They refer to Museveni’s May 8, 2023 directive transferring management of the Entebbe Botanical Gardens from the National Agricultural Research Organisation to the Ministry of Tourism, Wildlife and Antiquities, saying the move was intended to attract investment and improve tourism.

The gardens were established in 1898 and have traditionally been associated with research and conservation.

The lawyers warn that arrangements initially justified on tourism or investment grounds can later become vehicles for private commercial development.

They make a similar argument about Centenary Park, saying KCCA’s management arrangement with Nalongo Estates Ltd expired but that structures remained on the site and public access was restricted.

Recent KCCA action has involved the removal of illegal structures as authorities prepare the area around the Kampala Flyover.

Forest battles cited

The lawyers further broadened their argument to Uganda’s forest reserves.

They cited the long-running disputes involving Butamira Forest Reserve, attempts to allocate portions of Mabira Central Forest Reserve to sugar production, and the controversy surrounding Bugoma Forest Reserve.

The group argues that these disputes illustrate a recurring tension between commercial investment and the constitutional obligation to protect public land and natural resources.

In their view, the proposed City Square redevelopment should therefore be examined not simply as an investment proposal but against the wider history of public land management in Uganda.

‘Kampala needs green space’

The lawyers say Kampala’s rapidly expanding population and increasing environmental pressures make the preservation of public open spaces increasingly important.

“Every city that has protected its public squares, parks and green corridors has done so because such spaces are not decorative,” they state.

They argue that public squares provide places where citizens can gather without paying an entrance fee, while offering shade, recreation and space for civic activities.

“A capital measured only by the density of its hotels and malls will have gained buildings and lost something it cannot buy back,” the lawyers state.

They contend that Kampala already has limited public green space and that losing another major open area would have consequences for the city’s environment and public life.

The group therefore wants the square preserved rather than redeveloped.

Directive not yet a lease

Despite the intensity of the controversy, the lawyers’ letter comes at a stage when no lease or transfer of City Square has been authorised.

Museveni’s August 30 directive instructed Kabanda to study the proposal, consult KCCA and report back to him. It did not itself grant Bulwadda a lease or transfer ownership of the land.

Kabanda has also said she does not have the authority to simply give away City Square and that any decision would have to follow the applicable legal procedures.

This leaves the proposed development at the assessment and consultation stage. The lawyers, however, want the process stopped before it proceeds any further.

They have called on Museveni, Kabanda, KCCA and other Government agencies to independently examine the legality of any transaction and not treat the presidential directive as authority to dispose of public land. They have also asked Bulwadda to withdraw the proposal.

“No developer, however well-intentioned, is entitled to ask the state to breach a public trust on his behalf,” they state.

For now, the City Square controversy has moved beyond a debate about a hotel or shopping mall. It has become a wider argument over how Kampala should balance private investment, urban redevelopment, environmental protection, historical preservation and the legal status of public land.

The eventual decision will depend on the consultations ordered by the President and the legal and statutory processes governing the square. But the lawyers have made their position clear: City Square should remain public, and the proposed commercial redevelopment should be rejected.

The latest confrontation has revived a long-running contest over who exercises executive authority in the kingdom when Omukama Solomon Gafabusa Iguru I is unable to actively preside over its affairs.

Rucunya, speaking for the Babiito ruling clan, has given Byakutaga until October 15, 2026, to leave office and hand over kingdom property. Byakutaga, however, has rejected the basis of the demand, arguing that the King remains alive and that the authority to appoint or dismiss the Prime Minister remains with him.

Okwiri issues October ultimatum

In a statement issued in his capacity as Okwiri, Rucunya described Byakutaga’s continued occupation of the Prime Minister’s office as illegal.

He said the Prime Minister’s original term had expired and that the subsequent extension had also run its course.

Rucunya further argued that the Babiito ruling clan does not recognise the authority of the Royal Commission to extend the Prime Minister’s tenure.

According to the Okwiri, an emergency meeting of Babiito clan leaders considered the matter and resolved that Byakutaga should vacate office.

He said the kingdom had also gone for a prolonged period without a functioning Rukurato, the kingdom’s parliament, and Cabinet, which he said had affected administration and development.

The statement gave Byakutaga until October 15 to peacefully hand over the office and kingdom property.

Rucunya also warned government agencies, development partners, organisations and individuals against conducting official kingdom business through Byakutaga without first establishing his authority to transact on behalf of Bunyoro-Kitara Kingdom.

“This is not a personal fight against Mr. Byakutaga,” Rucunya said in the statement, arguing that the dispute was about protecting the institution of Obukama, respecting kingdom structures and restoring proper administration.

The Okwiri (The Omusuuga of Bunyoro) appealed to Banyoro to remain peaceful and united, saying differences over leadership should be resolved through lawful and culturally appropriate means.

His position is consistent with remarks he made publicly in Hoima, where he maintained that Byakutaga’s tenure had expired and that the Royal Commission had no authority to extend it.

Byakutaga: King is alive

But Byakutaga has mounted a strong defence of his tenure, putting the authority of the Omukama at the centre of his argument.

In his response, Byakutaga said the Omukama was alive and therefore remained the only person with the authority to appoint or dismiss a Prime Minister appointed by him.

His statement challenges the central premise of Rucunya’s intervention — that the Okwiri, as head of the Babiito ruling clan, can take over management of kingdom affairs when the Omukama is indisposed.

Byakutaga argued that he was appointed by the Omukama while the King was in good health and that the two had a long-standing relationship.

“The Omukama is ALIVE. As long as he lives, only he can appoint and sack the Prime Minister,” Byakutaga said.

The Prime Minister further referred to the recent intervention of the Tooro Kingdom Musuuga, saying Rucunya had been reminded of the limits of his authority.

He argued that if another kingdom’s royal official had initially made a similar decision regarding a Prime Minister but later reconsidered it after being reminded of the constitutional or cultural limits of that office, the same principle should apply in Bunyoro.

The dispute therefore goes beyond the personality of Byakutaga and Rucunya. At its heart is a contest over the interpretation of the powers of the Omukama, Okwiri, Babiito ruling clan and Royal Commission.

The Royal Commission question

One of the biggest flashpoints is the Royal Commission’s decision to extend Byakutaga’s tenure. Byakutaga was appointed Prime Minister by Omukama Solomon Gafabusa Rukirabasaija Agutamba Iguru I on January 15, 2018.

His initial term expired in October 2023 and was subsequently extended to June 30, 2024. A June 27, 2024 letter from the Royal Commission granted another one-year extension, a decision Rucunya disputes.

Rucunya argues that the commission exceeded its powers by extending the tenure. Byakutaga’s camp, however, has continued to maintain that kingdom leadership cannot be altered through unilateral action by the ruling clan or the Okwiri. The disagreement has previously produced rival administrative structures.

In September 2024, the Babiito-backed Okwiri faction swore in an interim Cabinet headed by Dr Baltazar Kyamanywa Kasirivu Atwooki. Byakutaga rejected the arrangement as illegal and said only the Omukama had the authority to appoint or dismiss kingdom officials.

The rival Cabinet could not take control of the kingdom offices after security was deployed at the administration premises, deepening the institutional standoff.

‘Who gives you the power?’

Byakutaga has now turned the question back to Rucunya: if the Prime Minister was appointed by the Omukama, where does the Okwiri derive the authority to remove him?

He also challenged the argument that decisions by the Babiito alone can constitute decisions of the entire kingdom.

Bunyoro has about 72 clans, he noted, arguing that the different clans are represented through the Rukurato.

His argument is that the ruling clan’s traditional role cannot automatically be translated into the power to appoint or dismiss a Prime Minister.

“How then does it become the role of the Babiito Clan to appoint and sack the PM?” he asked.

Rucunya, however, maintains that the Babiito, as the ruling clan, have a special responsibility to safeguard the institution of the Omukama and manage kingdom affairs where the King is unable to do so. That competing interpretation has become the central fault line in the dispute.

Subjects caught in the middle

The leadership crisis has also generated concern among kingdom subjects who fear that prolonged institutional paralysis could undermine Bunyoro’s cultural and development programmes.

Ochaki Orimi Nyabongo, a member of the Babiito ruling clan and former Rukurato representative, told reporters recently that the absence of a functioning Cabinet and other institutions was affecting the kingdom’s development.

He argued that, according to Bunyoro’s cultural norms, the Okwiri assumes responsibility for managing kingdom affairs when the Omukama is unable to do so.

Other subjects, however, have rallied behind the principle that the authority of an appointed Prime Minister should not be altered without the express involvement of the Omukama.

This divide has created two competing narratives: one side says the kingdom must be administered through its traditional structures while the other insists that the authority of the King cannot be transferred simply because he is indisposed.

Accountability allegations surface

The confrontation has also become personal, with Byakutaga accusing Rucunya of having a responsibility to account for kingdom property allegedly disposed of during an earlier administration.

Byakutaga said allegations surrounding the sale of kingdom property should first be addressed before Rucunya demands accountability from others.

The allegations have not been independently established in the material available for this article, but their introduction shows how the dispute has moved beyond questions of tenure into accusations over the management of kingdom assets.

Rucunya, meanwhile, has criticised the current administration for operating without a functioning Cabinet and Rukurato.

The two sides therefore accuse each other of undermining the kingdom’s institutional order, although they disagree fundamentally on who has the lawful or cultural authority to restore that order.

Government asked to intervene

Byakutaga has urged Rucunya to continue engaging the central government through Prime Minister Robinah Nabbanja.

He referred to a June 2026 stakeholder meeting chaired by Nabbanja that brought together ministers, MPs, religious leaders, cultural leaders and other prominent figures from Bunyoro.

According to Byakutaga, the meeting sought legal guidance from the Attorney General and Solicitor General on how to address the vacant Cabinet and Rukurato.

He argued that the Prime Minister needs those institutions to function effectively but cannot simply appoint them without the required authority.

The dispute has also attracted attention because Bunyoro is preparing for major economic and cultural opportunities, including activities linked to the hosting of AFCON matches in Hoima.

Byakutaga urged the competing factions to concentrate on development, including the renovation of Gasani, the King’s burial grounds, rather than allowing disagreements over leadership, proposed cultural leaders’ stipends and other resources to fracture the kingdom.

A battle over institutions

The latest confrontation has left Bunyoro facing a difficult institutional question: who speaks for the kingdom when the Omukama is alive but unable to actively exercise his responsibilities?

For Rucunya, the answer lies in the traditional authority of the Okwiri and Babiito ruling clan.

For Byakutaga, the answer is unequivocal: the powers remain with the living Omukama, who appointed him.

That fundamental disagreement has survived previous attempts at reconciliation and produced rival appointments, disputed extensions and competing claims to authority.

Rucunya has now set October 15 as the deadline for Byakutaga to leave office. Byakutaga, in turn, says the Okwiri has no authority to sack him.

The standoff therefore remains unresolved, leaving Banyoro watching closely to see whether the two factions can find a negotiated solution or whether the kingdom will again witness competing administrations.

For now, both sides publicly invoke the same objective — protecting Bunyoro-Kitara Kingdom — but differ sharply over who has the authority to determine how that protection should be exercised.

The development follows the emergence of a forensic handwriting report which, according to documents reviewed in the dispute, questions signatures attributed to the ailing businessman in documents used in connection with the Baagalaliwo Foundation.

The allegations have opened another chapter in a long-running family battle over the control and ownership of properties, company shares and other assets associated with Baagalaliwo, who has been incapacitated after falling into a coma. At the centre of the dispute is the Baagalaliwo Foundation, a charitable organisation registered by Hajjat Nanziri.

She has reportedly maintained that her husband instructed her to incorporate parts of his estate into the foundation, including property associated with his late mother, Hajjat Mulasi Nakakawa, in Kisugu, Makindye Division, as well as assets that had allegedly been donated to relatives and members of the Muslim community in Iganga.

The claims, however, have been challenged by beneficiaries of the disputed properties, who questioned whether Baagalaliwo personally authorised the transactions and documents attributed to him. The beneficiaries subsequently sought forensic examination of signatures said to belong to the businessman.

Forensic report raises questions

A handwriting examination attributed to police forensic expert Erisa Ssebuwuufu reportedly concluded that the questioned signatures were not genuine. According to the report cited by the complainants, the signatures examined did not originate from Hajj Baagalaliwo.

The findings have become a key element in the dispute because of the businessman’s medical condition at the time some of the disputed documents were allegedly executed. Hospital records cited by the complainants reportedly show that by April 2023, when the disputed entity was registered, Baagalaliwo had already been in a coma for about two months.

The beneficiaries argue that his medical condition made it impossible for him to personally communicate instructions or execute documents in the manner alleged. The report and medical records are now part of material being relied upon by those challenging the administration of the estate. However, the allegations remain subject to investigation and, where applicable, determination by the courts.

Police summon Nanziri

The latest development is a police summons issued to Hajjat Nanziri in connection with allegations surrounding the management of her husband’s estate. According to information emerging from the dispute, Nanziri was directed to report to the Kampala Metropolitan East Criminal Investigations Department for interrogation.

She is a lawyer and a founding member of the Federation of Women Lawyers-Uganda (FIDA-Uganda), and is also related to the late former Attorney General and presidential candidate Godfrey Lukongwa Binaisa. Sources close to the matter say investigators want to question her about several transactions and documents that have become the subject of complaints. Nanziri and her legal representatives have, however, disputed the allegations.

Her daughter, Adilan Naseem Nalulyo Baagalaliwo, has also reportedly been named among those police want to question. Nalulyo is a corporate manager at Stanbic Bank and a lecturer at Uganda Technology and Management University (UTAMU).

The widening investigation has reportedly extended to other daughters of Nanziri, including twin sisters, over claims that they may have participated in or benefited from transactions being challenged by other members of the family. Police have reportedly given the targeted family members until September 18, 2026, to voluntarily report to the Kampala Metropolitan East CIID station. Their lawyers are expected to accompany them during the process.

Lawyers challenge criminal probe

The criminal investigation has also triggered a legal confrontation. The family’s newly retained lawyers, Nabweteme, Nakamatte & Co Advocates, reportedly wrote to investigators questioning the continuation of criminal proceedings while civil cases concerning the estate remain before court.

The lawyers are understood to have argued that the existence of civil litigation should affect the criminal investigations arising from the same dispute. However, the complainants have challenged that position, citing previous Ugandan judicial decisions concerning the relationship between civil disputes and criminal investigations.

One case cited in the dispute involves former land commissioner Sarah Kulata Basangwa. According to the legal position relied upon by the complainants, the existence of a civil suit does not automatically prevent the State from investigating or prosecuting alleged criminal offences arising from the same facts.

The distinction is important because ownership disputes may be resolved through civil proceedings, while allegations such as forgery, uttering false documents or fraudulent alteration of official records may independently attract criminal investigation.

Whether any individual ultimately faces criminal charges will depend on the evidence gathered by investigators and decisions by the relevant prosecutorial authorities.

ADR proposal rejected

The estate dispute has also reached the Family Division of the High Court, where alternative dispute resolution was reportedly recommended as a possible way of resolving the family disagreement. The proposed mediation was intended to preserve family relationships and protect the legacy of Baagalaliwo while avoiding prolonged litigation.

However, according to people familiar with the proceedings, the effort did not produce a settlement. The disagreement has since continued to generate complaints involving property, company shares and other assets.

Shareholding dispute

Another major front in the battle concerns Natural Foods Industries Limited, a family-linked company associated with Baagalaliwo. The company dispute came into the spotlight after Neema Baagalaliwo, the businessman’s eldest daughter, petitioned the Uganda Registration Services Bureau (URSB) over what she described as irregular alterations to the company’s shareholding records.

Neema, accompanied by her lawyer, Senior Counsel Festo Julius Kavuma Kabenge, reportedly appeared before an Assistant Registrar, Daniel Nasasira, to explain her complaint. She alleged that shares which her father had given her when the family company was established in March 1979 were subsequently removed from the company register.

She further alleged that the shares were redistributed to one of her stepmother’s daughters. The dispute also allegedly affected her brother, Hajj Bashir Balozi Baagalaliwo. According to Neema’s account, Balozi’s shares were similarly removed from the company’s records. She further alleged that her brother’s signature was used in documents connected to the disputed changes. Balozi has reportedly lodged a complaint at Jinja Road Police Station alleging forgery and uttering of false documents.

Nanziri disputes allegations

Hajjat Nanziri has denied the allegations surrounding the shareholding changes. In her response to the URSB complaint, she reportedly attributed the discrepancies to the digitisation and updating of the company’s records. She argued that the process was handled by lawyers and URSB officials and that she was not personally responsible for the alleged alterations.

Nanziri also reportedly maintained that her daughters received shares from their father, just as Neema and Balozi had received theirs. The URSB proceedings did not conclusively determine who initiated the alleged changes. In his ruling, Assistant Registrar Nasasira reportedly acknowledged that Neema had lost her shares but said the available evidence did not establish who was responsible for the alterations. Given the seriousness of the allegations and the level of proof required, Nasasira advised Neema to pursue the matter before the High Court, which has jurisdiction to adjudicate the wider dispute.

Land transactions under scrutiny

The third major area of contention involves land allegedly belonging to Baagalaliwo. One disputed transaction concerns approximately two acres along Lake Drive Road in Luzira, Nakawa Division, Kampala. According to the allegations, the property was sold by Hajjat Nanziri to a prominent lawyer based in Kololo. Following the transaction, the property’s title was reportedly changed from Kyaddondo Plot 888 to Kyaddondo Plot 888B.

The annual Kaliisoliiso dinner held at Hotel Africana and organized by CBS FM, brought together partners and stakeholders to raise support for road safety initiatives and the development of the Nkozi Hospital Accident and Trauma Centre, which will strengthen Nkozi Hospital’s capacity to provide quality emergency and trauma care to victims of road traffic accidents.

Speaking at the dinner, Centenary Bank Managing Director, Godfrey Byekwaso, said the Bank’s responsibility to Ugandans extends beyond providing financial services to supporting initiatives that make a meaningful difference in people’s lives.

“At Centenary Bank, our purpose is to transform lives through inclusive financial services. Supporting initiatives that preserve lives and strengthen communities is a natural extension of that purpose,” he said.

He noted that health and well-being are closely linked to the social and economic progress of communities because when people have access to timely healthcare and safer environments, they are better able to work, provide for their families, run businesses, and contribute to the development of their communities.

According to the 2025 Uganda Police Annual Crime Report, Uganda recorded 26,044 road traffic crashes in 2025, up from 25,107 in 2024. The crashes resulted in 5,383 deaths, compared to 5,144 deaths recorded in 2024. That means an average of at nearly 15 people died daily from road accidents.

The Bank’s partnership with Nkozi Hospital and CBS FM is one of the initiatives through which it is supporting better health outcomes and road safety. The Bank has been part of efforts to develop the Accident and Trauma Centre at Nkozi Hospital since the first fundraising drive in 2016.

Located along the Kampala-Masaka highway, Nkozi Hospital serves communities along one of the country’s major transport corridors and receives victims of road traffic accidents, among others. The development of the Accident and Trauma Centre is expected to strengthen the hospital’s capacity to provide timely emergency and trauma care to accident victims.

Every year, Centenary Bank dedicates 1.5% of its previous year’s profits towards Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives in education, health, environmental stewardship, Social Mission of the Church and community development.

As part of its continued support, Centenary Bank entered into a three-year Memorandum of Understanding with CBS FM in 2025, committing UGX 280 million to the Road Safety Programme. The Bank contributed UGX 80 million in 2025 and an additional UGX 100 million this year, bringing its contribution under the partnership to UGX 180 million. Over the years, Centenary Bank has contributed more than UGX 400 million towards the initiative through fundraising dinners, marathons and other activities.

“Our decision to support this initiative reflects who we are as an institution. We serve millions of Ugandans across the country. Every day, our customers travel on these roads to open their shops, transport produce, report to work, attend school, visit their families, and more. Their safety matters to us because they are the people we exist to serve,” Byekwaso said.

Byekwaso commended CBS FM for keeping road safety and community well-being on the public agenda and mobilising different stakeholders around the development of the Nkozi Accident and Trauma Centre.

“Centenary Bank remains committed to partnerships that create lasting value for the communities we serve. We will continue to support initiatives that contribute to healthier, safer and more resilient communities because transforming lives means caring about the well-being of the people we serve every day.”

The Katikkiro of Buganda, and Chief Guest of the dinner, Charles Peter Mayiga, cautioned Ugandans against reckless driving and urged motorists to take personal responsibility for preventing road crashes.

“Do not drink and drive, always use your seat belt, do not use your phone while driving, exercise patience and discipline on the roads, particularly when overtaking, approaching busy areas and interacting with pedestrians and other road users. These may appear to be simple actions, but they can make the difference between life and death. Every road user has a responsibility to protect their own life and the lives of others,” he said.