The Umukuka III, Jude Mike Mudoma, this week sent Bugisu reeling after declaring illegal and defunct the Inzu Ya Masaba cultural institution. The decision has left a section of stakeholders drawing the lines on what Mudoma's motives could be.
In October 2023, the Nile Post published an insight into the power struggles among the Bamasaba cultural supremacists and political wheeler-dealers after an in-depth report by NBS Investigates. The article was revealing, telling the historical contexts of the power game and the political gambles therein.
Today, we reproduce the article to provide context.
___________________________________________________
A few weeks ago, a TikTok video was circulating on various social media platforms with aggressive messages. Gumazi Guwanga, a loudly rebellious Bamasaba culturalist, was calling out the government's two-facedness as far as the leadership of the cultural institution of the Inzu Ya Bamasaba is concerned.
“If you want to know how we behave, this is now the time. We shall kill one another. You want it or not. I know you have guns, but for us, the art of killing, we have it,” Guwanga verbally threatened.
The NBS Investigates team sought out this tough-talking man, and he reaffirmed his remarks without remorse. He told NBS journalist Paul Kayonga, “That is our position. It’s life and blood. We shall not change.”
This frustration is catalysed by the ongoing leadership crisis in the Inzu Ya Bamasaba, which has persisted without a solution for the last three years.
Historically, the Bamasaba, commonly known as Bagisu in Uganda, have not had a centralized cultural institution despite having a rich cultural influence beyond their territorial boundaries.
It wasn’t until 2010 that the people of Bugisu and their cross-border relatives in Kenya—the Baabukusu—agreed to form a centralized cultural leadership under the cultural institution of the Inzu Ya Bamasaba.
The former Inzu Ya Bamasaba Secretary General, Cornelius Wekunya, knows the nuts and bolts of the making of an institution that was alien to the history of their heritage.
Wekunya recalls that Mzee Jonathan Muwoma, the first Mugisu Cultural leader under Obote I, was particularly concerned with the increasing gerrymandering of Bugisu to create numerous districts out of its traditional single territory.
The proposal to establish a centralized cultural leadership in Bugisu was already taking shape with the recognition that Bugisu was not traditionally conversant with hereditary leadership. After extensive consultations, Wekunya recollects that Mzee Muwoma convinced other elders to establish such an institution (after all, it is in the constitution).
“By then, we had the whole of Bugisu, which was divided into Mbale and Sironko. And he (Muwoma) anticipated that we were likely to have more districts. But to remain united, despite the divisions, we needed that institution,” Wekunya recollects.
It was this spirit of unification that led to the establishment of the cultural institution with a written constitution and term limits for the elected monarch known as Umukuuka.
The institution has successfully had two leaders since 2010: Wilson Weasa Wamimbi, Umukuuka I, and the late Sir Bob Mushikoli, Umukuuka II.
Toward the end of Mushikoli’s reign, a rift was brewing, and a section of the members of his cultural council almost impeached Umukuuka II.
According to Mzee Wekunya, the former Secretary General of the Inzu Ya Bamasaba, by the time Mushikoli’s term expired, the cracks with some leaders of his leadership structures had become very glaring.
For Nelson Wedaira, the former speaker of the General Assembly of the Inzu Ya Bamasaba, the attempts to impeach Mushikoli angered a section of leaders, and they wanted to suspend some of them.
They went and held a meeting in the Republic of Kenya, in a place called Mabaga. There, it was noted that the speaker (Wedaira), the chairman of the cultural council, and the chairman of the Governing Board, as well as all officers sitting in the second General Assembly, were purported to have been impeached.
From Mabaga, the crisis escalated and created different power centers within the Inzu Ya Bamasaba. It is alleged that before his death, Bobi Mushikoli had handed over the office of Umukuuka to John Amram Wagabyalire after the expiry of his leadership team.
At the same time, a section of other elders allegedly elected Jude Mike Mudoma as their Umukuuka before the emergence of the seemingly isolated Masolo Yaaya Gidudu. The three now all claim the monarchy, creating a political crisis over this young cultural institution.
Whereas Mudoma is now gazetted by the Ministry of Gender as a cultural leader of the Inzu Ya Bamasaba, Wagabyalire claims the Inzu throne on the grounds that he was crowned on March 8, 2023, as the Umukuuka.
But according to Masolo Yaaya Gidudu, the two are not traditionally qualified because, “For Buguuga, you’re appointed by those who are below to Buguuga.” To Masolo, Wagabyalire, a Munyole, and Mudoma, a Sabiny, are not suited for the role.
Based on their constitution, the leadership structure of the Bamasaba is rotational among the three traditional households of the sons of Masaaba, the founding father of the Bagisu.
From 2010–2015, the youngest lineage of Wanaale took over leadership under Wilson Weasa Wamimbi and successfully handed over to the Mubuuya Lineage under the late Sir Bob Mushikoli from 2015–2020.
The time of the first lineage, Mwambu, to lead has now turned chaotic, with the three hot-headed claimants for the Bamasaba throne still chest-thumping.
Eddy Komoli, who served as the Deputy Secretary General of the Inzu from the reign of Mushikoli, says that since 2020, the family of Mwambu has had their chance to lead according to their constitution. However, among them, they have not come together to agree on one person to take the lead.
Stephen Kizubo, one of the elders from Mwambu who lost his bid to be Umukuuka, believes in persuasion for consensus.
“Because they are one, like now the one who has been there, Wagabyalire, came up to here, and people said, ‘If you’re working with Kizubo, our cultural leader, ME., you go ahead, because I said I don’t want kerere, let’s work together,’” Kizubo told this reporter.
Beneath these conflicting voices, there is a strong unifying heritage, each claiming to want to preserve, promote, and protect.
Moreover, circumcision, locally known as Imbalu, is invariably the most influential cultural aspect of the Bagisu and their cross-border relatives, the BaBukusu from Kenya.
This particular heritage originates from Bunandutu Village in Busano Sub-County, where there is a reserved cultural site used to initiate boys who are set for Imbalu.
“Various clans come from different areas, and during circumcision, they all come here for initiation and blessings before they are taken to their respective courtyards for circumcision,” said Eddy Komoli.
For Bagisu, culture is about blood and life. “Now, how can we as Bamasaaba have a king who does not originate from Bamasaaba?” Masolo Yaaya Gidudu, the revolting bidder for the Umukuuka, scoffed.
By word of mouth, it appears that the Bamasaaba are now losing authority over who should be the face of their heritage. A section of them points out political interference allegedly orchestrated by the officials of the state.
Masolo particularly alleges that the state wants to “... bring Omuguuga for the NRM, they are not bringing Omuguuga for the Bamasaaba.”
For John Amram Wagabyalire, the ungazetted Umukuuka, it is the state minister of Gender in charge of culture, Peace Mutuuzo, stirring the leadership conflicts in the Inzu Ya Bamasaba because she is favoring a group of her own choice,” Wagabyalire stressed.
On 14th July 2023, Mutuuzo authored a letter, ostensibly to provide guidance for the “conflict resolution of the cultural leader of Bugisu,” the letter is titled as such.
The minister was addressing Wilson Wamimbi Weasa, the Umukuuka emeritus, notifying him of a leadership conflict in a seemingly non-existent cultural institution stated as Bugisu Cultural Institution.
The letter would guide that, “the Bugisu cultural clan leaders could resolve the standoff in the Bugisu community.”
This is the first red flag raised in the minister’s letter over the non-existence of a cultural institution, the minister stated as Bugisu Cultural Institution.
To add volume to the confusion, the minister further suggests that the process has to follow the guidelines in the gazetted constitution of the Inzu Ya Bamasaba, yet she had identified a crisis in Bugisu Cultural Institution. The two are practically and legally different entities.
John Wagabyalire accuses one John Defasi Wabuya of establishing the Bugisu Cultural Institution that the minister is referring to.
“This man called Wabuya Defasi, he calls himself the chairman of the 26 clans. In our constitution, we don’t have a chairman of the clan; it is not there. This is the man who goes to confuse the minister.”
But Wabuya dismisses the allegations as false, claiming that he cannot be the person making laws alone.
“With that…I disassociate myself with it,” disclaimed Wabuya.
Whereas John Wabuya Defasi denies forming a parallel cultural institution and registering a new constitution, the NBS Investigates team came across a letter addressed to the permanent secretary of the Ministry of Gender by the Bugisu twenty-six clan leaders on December 5, 2022.
The letter, signed by Wabuya Defasi John as chairperson of the 26 clan leaders, submits a constitution of the Omukuuka W’ Obugisu to the ministry and presents Jude Mike Mudoma as the elected Umukuuka.
Wabuya insists he is not aware of the letter or any attempts to establish a corresponding cultural institution.
The controversial cultural institution in the minister’s letter has a constitution that contradicts the gazetted constitution of the Inzu Ya Bamasaba.
Eddy Komoli elaborates that there is no General Assembly in Bugisu Cultural Institution. It’s in the powers of the Omukuuka in Bugisu Cultural Institution to appoint every person. But when it comes to Inzu Ya Bamasaba, there is specialization, and it’s not the responsibility of the Umukuuka in the Inzu. The only responsibility he has is to appoint the cabinet.
This constitutional dilemma appears to have been a crafted plan by a section of Mudoma promoters to have him gazetted as Umukuuka.
It is alleged that the ministry had declined to gazette Mudoma over claims that the institution of the Inzu Ya Bamasaba had been registered as a limited company by some individuals.
“We had only rectified the name from a company limited, ... so here, we had to sit down and hurriedly do this, such that we had put on the Guguuga properly, and later on try to make constitutional reforms and so on,” Wedaira admits the establishment of another entity he claims not to be a cultural institution.
Mathias Nabutele, a delegate in the National Assembly of the Inzu Ya Bamasaba, knows the details of the coming of a limited company to be associated with the Inzu.
“There was a car given to the institution by the president in 2011, and there was no entity, and they didn’t want to register it in anybody’s name. It is an asset of the institution. Under the guidance of the Ministry of Gender, they created that company. That’s very far under the leadership of the first leader,” confirms the ousted Speaker of the General Assembly, Nelson Wedaira.
By establishing Bugisu Cultural Institution, the Mudoma promoters, knowingly or unknowingly, created a parallel cultural institution, which they are now trying to disown. Besides, the decision by the minister to offer guidance on how the conflict should be resolved was an illegality, according to Lawyer Isaac Otim.
“According to the law, actually, the government has no say in resolving the disputes of traditional institutions. Simply because, the law gives two ways. One… these disputes can be resolved by the clan leaders, or leaders in a traditional sense. In the alternative, these issues can be taken to courts,” Otim counseled.
However, Minister Peace Mutuuzo insists that she did the right thing and “is ready to appear before court” over the matter. The minister’s unapologetic stand that all that was legally there to be followed was followed, and a one Jude Mike Mudoma, was eventually gazetted as Umukuuka III, has now forced John Amram Wagabyalire to challenge Mudoma’s gazettement in court.
“The ministry has illegally gazetted a new cultural institution as the cultural leader of the old cultural institution. This happens within one week,” Lawyer for the applicant Alenyo George William told NBS Television.
Embattled John Amram Wagabyalire and his lawyers want the high court in Mbale to:
- Find Mike Jude Mudoma guilty of forging an order of court.
- Create a ‘Bogus’ cultural institution.
- Contempt of court.
- Issue an interim order against his gazettement.
Legally, under the Institution of Traditional or Cultural Leaders Act, 2011, cultural leaders are not supposed to engage in partisan politics. But practically, all the factions in the battle for Omukuuka appear to pay allegiance to the ruling NRM.
“Me, I am free, I am ready to serve the sitting government,” Wagabyalire noted, as Mudoma confirms that many of them, who have been there, have been politicians. The late Mushikoli was a UPC fanatic, just as the first one (Wilson Weasa Wamimbi) was an NRM cadre.
Political scholar Dr. Gerald Walulya puts forward that the direct influence of government in the affairs of cultural institutions was deliberately packaged with freebies and money, as the state provides to the willing monarchies in Uganda.
“As a result, the government assumed control over those kingdoms and chiefdoms arising out of its support towards these cultural institutions,” emphasized Walulya.
But according to Minister Mutuuzo, the money and support to the ‘willing’ cultural leaders is an ‘honorarium.’
“But for only the gazetted cultural institutions and those who wish. Buganda objected. So, we don’t give Buganda anything because the cultural institution did not wish to be part of that honorarium,” underscored Minister Mutuuzo.
The battle for Omukuuka remains a complex political puzzle that culturalists and politicians are struggling to solve. Is there an invisible hand of the state at play, or is it a tactic of divide and rule?
The battle for the Omukuuka now remains a matter for the court to determine the future of an institution stuck in conflict, politics, and the law.