Ngoma Land Dispute: Applicants Appeal To Museveni And CDF Muhoozi As Court-Ordered Eviction Is Halted By Nabakooba

UgandaToday: Ngoma Land Dispute: Applicants Appeal To Museveni And CDF Muhoozi As Court-Ordered Eviction Is Halted By Nabakooba

By UgandaToday Investigations Desk

NGOMA TOWN COUNCIL, NAKASEKE DISTRICT, UGANDA — A contested land dispute in Ngoma, Nakaseke District, has prompted an appeal for intervention by President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni and Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, amid allegations that efforts to enforce a court-directed eviction have been severally frustrated.

The dispute involves  Kasule Samuel, James Musiime and Edith,  as applicants who are appealing for intervention, alongside the land proceedings  against Mubeezi James and two other respondents.

The complainants allege that the enforcement of the eviction was halted following the intervention of Lands Minister Judith Nabakooba and that security personnel were deployed to protect those they accuse of unlawfully occupying the contested property.

UgandaToday has not independently established all the circumstances surrounding the alleged intervention or verified whether a subsequent court order suspended the eviction. The allegations therefore require confirmation through the full court record, official correspondence and responses from the parties involved.

The Appeal To The President And CDF

Kasule  Samuel and Edith are appealing to President Museveni and General Muhoozi Kainerugaba to help ensure that the dispute is examined impartially and resolved in accordance with the law.

Their appeal centres on the need for the relevant authorities to establish the status of the court order, determine what happened during attempts to enforce it and ensure that no individual or institution acts outside its lawful mandate.

The appeal is not a substitute for the judicial process. Rather, the complainants are seeking attention from the country’s highest political office and the leadership of the armed forces over allegations involving the enforcement of a court order and the reported presence of security personnel at the disputed property.

Any intervention should respect judicial independence and avoid prejudging ownership or directing an outcome contrary to a court ruling. The appropriate objective is to ensure that the competent authorities establish the facts and that any valid court order is handled according to law.

What The Court Warrant Says

The court document supplied to UgandaToday is headed “Warrant Of Vacant Possession Of Land Comprised In Leasehold Register On Bulemeezi Block 981, Plot 32, 33, 34 And 36, Land At Ngoma, Nakaseke District.”

The warrant names Mubeezi James, Ntungire Stephen and Misaki Kaviigi as respondents, with Kasule Samuel and Musime James listed as applicants in the heading.

The document directs court bailiff Lubia Bernard to remove the named respondents from the property and deliver vacant possession to the applicants.

It also directs the Uganda Police Force to assist with execution of the warrant, emphasising that the eviction should be carried out peacefully and in an orderly manner.

Clear Text Of The Warrant

Document: Warrant of Vacant Possession

Property: Bulemeezi Block 981, Plots 32, 33, 34 and 36

Location: Ngoma, Nakaseke District, Uganda

Applicants named in the heading: Kasule Samuel and Musime James

Respondents named in the heading: Mubeezi James, Ntungire Stephen and Misaki Kaviigi

Court bailiff named: Lubia Bernard

Direction: The warrant directs the bailiff to remove the respondents from the specified land and deliver vacant possession to the applicants. It further directs the Uganda Police Force to assist in ensuring peaceful and orderly execution.

The warrant is important because it records a judicial direction concerning possession of the property. However, establishing whether it remained enforceable at the relevant time requires checking for any subsequent stay, appeal, injunction or variation.

Alleged Intervention By The Lands Minister

The complainants allege that Minister of Lands, Housing and Urban Development Judith Nabakooba intervened in a manner that halted execution of the eviction.

A letter attributed to the Minister is part of the documentary evidence accompanying this story. Its contents must be examined to establish what action was authorised, the reasons given and the legal basis for the intervention.

A minister may have a legitimate role in addressing land-administration concerns, but administrative intervention cannot simply replace a judicial decision where a binding court order remains in force.

UgandaToday will seek the Minister’s response and establish whether her communication concerned mediation, an administrative review, a request for a pause or an instruction affecting enforcement.

Until the letter and the subsequent court record have been authenticated, it would be premature to conclude that the Minister deliberately disobeyed a court order.

Police And Army Deployment Under Scrutiny

The complainants also allege that police and military personnel were deployed to protect the occupants against whom the eviction was sought.

The warrant itself calls for police assistance in executing the eviction peacefully. This makes the contents of the separate police letter particularly relevant.

This letter establishes when the local police were contacted, what instructions they received and what action they took. Any alleged military deployment should be verified separately through operational records, dated photographs, eyewitness testimony or official confirmation.

Security agencies have legitimate responsibilities to protect lives, prevent violence and maintain public order. Their presence at disputed land does not, by itself, establish that they were supporting unlawful occupation.

The critical issue is whether the deployment complied with the law and whether any action was taken to frustrate a valid court order.

Why The Dispute Deserves Transparent Investigation

Land disputes can threaten livelihoods, homes, investments and public confidence in the justice system. When parties produce competing accounts of court proceedings and security interventions, the public interest requires a careful examination of the documentary record.

The relevant evidence includes the original warrant, proof of service, any subsequent judicial orders, the police letter, the alleged ministerial communication and the property’s official land records.

The objective should be to establish lawful ownership and possession through evidence, rather than allowing political influence, intimidation or unverified accusations to determine the outcome.

Questions Requiring Answers

UgandaToday is seeking clarification on several issues:

• Was the warrant still in force when the eviction was allegedly halted?
• Was the warrant formally served on the relevant parties and enforcement authorities?
• What did the Minister’s letter direct, and under what legal authority?
• What instructions did the local police receive, and why was the eviction allegedly not completed?
• Were military personnel deployed to the property, and what was the stated purpose?
• What evidence supports the competing claims to the land?
• What explanations do the Minister, police, UPDF and named respondents offer?

The answers should be established through official records and a fair opportunity for every party to respond.

Conclusion: An Appeal For Justice And Accountability

Earlier eviction orders were also reviewed by UgandaToday, one of which is reproduced below here

The appeal by  Kasule Samuel and Edith to President Museveni and CDF General Muhoozi Kainerugaba brings renewed attention to the dispute in Moma, Nakaseke District.

Their request underscores the need for an impartial examination of the court warrant, the alleged ministerial intervention and the reported security deployment.

Any response by the relevant authorities should uphold the independence of the Judiciary, respect the rights of all parties and ensure that the law—not political influence or force—determines the outcome.

UgandaToday will continue examining the documents and seeking responses from the parties concerned.

The essential question remains: what does the complete court record establish, and were the actions taken over the Moma property consistent with the law?

#UgandaToday #NgomaLandDispute #NakasekeDistrict #LandJusticeUganda #RuleOfLaw #Accountability