Gen Salim Saleh Distances Himself From Busabala Wetland Property As Nema Demolitions Spark Public Debate

Uganda's National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) has undertaken extensive demolitions in the Busabala wetland, sparking public debate and accusations of selective enforcement. Amidst these operations, Senior Presidential Advisor Gen. Caleb Akandwanaho (Salim Saleh) publicly distanced himself from a controversial storeyed building in the wetland, denying ownership of any such property. This development highlights the ongoing tension between environmental protection and property rights in Uganda, particularly concerning sensitive ecosystems like wetlands. The incident underscores the legal framework governing wetland conservation, NEMA's enforcement mandate under the National Environment Act, 2019, and the challenges of ensuring equitable and transparent application of environmental laws, especially when high-profile individuals are implicated.

The National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) in Uganda has recently intensified its efforts to reclaim encroached wetlands, leading to significant demolition exercises in areas such as Busabala. These operations, which have seen numerous structures razed, have ignited widespread public debate, with some critics alleging selective enforcement and double standards in the application of environmental laws.

A notable development amidst this controversy is the public statement by Gen. Caleb Akandwanaho, widely known as Salim Saleh and Senior Presidential Advisor on military affairs, disassociating himself from a controversial storeyed building in the Busabala wetland. This denial of ownership, prompted by social media allegations, brings to the fore the complexities of land tenure, environmental compliance, and accountability, particularly when prominent figures are linked to such properties. The incident underscores the persistent challenges faced by environmental regulators in enforcing laws impartially.

This article will delve into the legal framework governing wetland protection in Uganda, examine the powers and responsibilities of NEMA, and analyze the implications of such high-profile disputes for environmental governance, the rule of law, and the ongoing struggle to balance development with ecological preservation.

Uganda's commitment to environmental protection is enshrined in its Constitution and a robust legislative framework. The Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995, in Objective XIII of the National Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy, mandates the State to protect important natural resources, including wetlands, for the common good of all citizens. Furthermore, Article 237(2)(b) explicitly states that the Government or a local government shall hold in trust for the people and protect natural lakes, rivers, wetlands, forest reserves, game reserves, national parks, and any land reserved for ecological and touristic purposes.

The primary legislation governing environmental management is the National Environment Act, 2019, which repealed and replaced the 1995 Act. This Act provides a comprehensive framework for sustainable environmental management, recognizing the 'Rights of Nature' and empowering NEMA as the principal agency responsible for coordinating, monitoring, regulating, and supervising all environmental management activities in the country. Specifically, Part V of the Act addresses the management of the green environment, including restrictions on the use of wetlands.

Complementing the Act are the National Environment (Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores Management) Regulations, 2000. These regulations aim to promote the conservation and wise use of wetlands, prohibit their drainage or reclamation without NEMA's written approval, and make it unlawful to erect structures or disturb wetlands in a manner likely to have an adverse effect. The government of Uganda has also officially gazetted all wetlands in the country through 'The National Environment (Declaration of Wetlands) Notice, 2023', further solidifying their protected status and prohibiting activities like encroachment, drainage, or pollution within them.

The recent NEMA demolitions in Busabala and other wetland areas, such as Lubigi, highlight the Authority's exercise of its enforcement powers under the National Environment Act, 2019. Section 172 of the Act grants NEMA the mandate to impose administrative fines for environmental breaches, in addition to existing criminal prosecution measures, with fines ranging significantly depending on the severity of the contravention. NEMA also has the power to issue Environmental Restoration Orders, requiring individuals to restore damaged areas, and can undertake such restoration itself if the order is not complied with, at the cost of the offender.

The controversy surrounding the Busabala demolitions, particularly the alleged sparing of certain high-value properties and the subsequent public denial by Gen. Salim Saleh, raises critical questions about the equitable application of these laws. While NEMA maintains that its enforcement actions are lawful, data-driven, and based on set restoration criteria, public perception of selective enforcement can undermine the credibility of environmental governance. This perception is exacerbated when land titles may have been issued in wetlands in the past, creating a conflict between property rights and the public trust doctrine, which dictates that wetlands are held in trust by the government for the common good.

Uganda's legal framework also mandates Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) for projects likely to have significant environmental impacts, including those in wetlands. The National Environment Act, 2019, and the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 1998 (now ESIA Regulations, 2020), require developers to conduct EIAs and obtain approval before commencing projects. The failure to adhere to these requirements, coupled with potential corruption in the issuance of land titles in protected areas, contributes to the ongoing wetland degradation. The establishment of an Environmental Protection Force under the 2019 Act and NEMA's collaboration with the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions to strengthen environmental crime prosecution are steps towards more robust enforcement.

However, challenges such as underfunding, insufficient capacity of law enforcers, and weak coordination with other agencies continue to hinder effective monitoring and enforcement. The public debate ignited by the Busabala demolitions underscores the need for greater transparency, consistent application of the law, and accountability from all stakeholders, including high-ranking officials, to ensure that environmental protection is not merely a policy on paper but a lived reality for all citizens.

The ongoing NEMA demolitions in Busabala and the public disassociation by Gen. Salim Saleh from a controversial wetland property serve as a stark reminder of the complex interplay between environmental conservation, property rights, and political influence in Uganda. For legal practitioners, this scenario highlights the critical importance of conducting thorough due diligence in land transactions, especially those involving ecologically sensitive areas like wetlands. Advising clients on strict adherence to the National Environment Act, 2019, the Wetlands Regulations, and the requirement for Environmental Impact Assessments is paramount to mitigate legal risks and avoid severe penalties, including administrative fines and demolition orders.

Looking ahead, practitioners should closely monitor NEMA's enforcement actions, potential judicial reviews challenging these operations, and any further policy pronouncements aimed at strengthening wetland protection. The public outcry and the involvement of high-profile individuals underscore the increasing public awareness and demand for environmental accountability. The government's commitment to protecting these vital ecosystems will be tested by its ability to enforce laws impartially and transparently, ensuring that the 'public trust doctrine' for natural resources is upheld for the benefit of all Ugandans, irrespective of their status.