Summary:
- Civil society organizations are urging the government to reconsider its stance on the allocation of Bugoma Central Forest Reserve, criticizing a report on the forest boundaries for failing to resolve key issues. They demand clear conclusions, preservation of the forest, and an end to intimidation of activists.
Civil society organizations are urging the government to reconsider its stance regarding the allocation of Bugoma Central Forest Reserve. Speaking to reporters on Friday, activists expressed disappointment with the completion of a report on the forest’s boundary reopening, noting that it has exacerbated the situation rather than resolving it.
“We are dismayed by the report’s failure to definitively determine whether Hoima Sugar Limited encroached upon Bugoma forest reserve land,” stated Godfrey Twesigye, Executive Director of Water & Environment Media Network Uganda (WEMNET). “Instead, it relies on illegally obtained certificates of registration, an illegal Environmental Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) certificate, search statements, and court judgments, without establishing whether the land in question falls within the designated Bugoma forest reserve area.”
Twesigye emphasized that while civil society appreciates efforts to reopen the forest boundaries, the process has fallen short of expectations by failing to address the core issue at hand. “Rather than solving the problem, it appears to validate the illegal land grab under the guise of Bugoma Central Forest Reserve.”
Dickens Kamugisha, CEO of the Africa Institute for Energy Governance (AFIEGO), pointed out the absence of a conclusive conclusion in the Bugoma forest report, unlike other similar reports. “We urge the government to provide a clear conclusion regarding the survey and to explain how Bunyoro Kingdom acquired land within a forest reserve and subsequently allocated it,” Kamugisha remarked.
The activists criticized the report for only addressing occupants without land titles while ignoring those with titles, including Hoima Sugar Limited, MZ, and a Bunyoro kingdom prince. They denounced the survey report as lacking credibility.
Furthermore, the activists noted their exclusion from the boundary reopening process, with government officials being interviewed instead. They called on the government to rectify the deficiencies highlighted in the survey and boundary opening report by recommending measures for Bugoma forest conservation.
“We demand that the government produce a conclusive finding on Hoima Sugar Ltd’s encroachment and revoke all illegal and fraudulent land titles within forested and protected reserves,” Kamugisha emphasized. “The boundary survey report should accurately delineate the forest land and ensure its preservation without using boundary exercises as excuses for deforestation.”
Lastly, the activists urged the government to cease intimidation tactics against colleagues involved in the campaign to protect Bugoma forest.
