Bloodshed as Court Rules on Land Dispute

Kateregga Muzamiru was seriously injured in the attack. Police have deployed heavily to prevent more danger

Mbarara High Court last week decided on the rightful owner of the 27 acre plot of land in Katete, visit Birere in Isingiro district that has been at the center of immense animosity over the past months.

Justice David Matovu’s ruling however, medicine which went in the favor of the family of Late Hajji Ahamad Barugahare’s as the rightful owner, left the losing side – the family of Mrs. Amina Miro — dissatisfied.

As a result, the Mbarara Municipality Speaker, Muzamilu Ssekaja who is also a family member of the Miro’s mobilized his relatives and they made a surprise attack on the determined land owners.

Judge Matovu had advised 64 year old Miro, the widow of late Hajji Nassuli Miro who had presented a land title claiming ownership of the land, to file a fresh case in a competent court. He said his order that they vacate the land was arising from a lower court and was not part of the main case.

Dissatisfied, the family of Miro nonetheless picked machetes and other weapons and attacked Hajj Barugahare’s family, gravely injuring six of them in a grisly brawl. The injured were rushed to Kilembe Hospital in Kasese district.

Ms. Miro claims that her husband bought the piece of land in 1979 from the late Hajji Ahmad Barugahare and that she is in possession of the land title.

She says however, that children of Barugahare started claiming ownership when their father passed away.

The attack incident forced the Rwizi regional police commander Hilary Kulayige, Resident District Commissioner Isingiro district Herbert Muhangi, Mbarara District Police Commander Jaffar Magyezi, and Isingiro DPC Muziima Magyezi to involve the two warring families in a meeting on Wednesday at Rwizi regional police headquarters in Mbarara town, advising them to stop the bloodshed.

The Isingiro RDC Hebert Muhangi asked the two families to stop fighting over the land until the High Court judge gives clear interpretation of his ruling, since it was not clear to both parties.



Header advertisement
To Top