Introduction
The main challenge in administering the Buganda protectorate was the lack of a clear and consistent policy from the British government. The 1900 Buganda Agreement and the 1902 Order in the Council led to a situation where the British authorities had to make decisions on behalf of the Buganda people without consulting them.[1]. This led to resentment among the Buganda people and several uprisings against the British authorities. As a result, this led to a power struggle between the British authorities and the Buganda monarchy. The British authorities wanted to assert their control over the protectorate, while the Buganda monarchy wanted to maintain its autonomy. This power struggle led to riots and rebellions in the protectorate, making it difficult for the British authorities to maintain Order.
The main conflicts
Jurisdiction conflicts
The 1900 Buganda Agreement and the 1902 Order in the Council led to jurisdiction conflicts because they both attempted to assert control over the same territory.[2]. The 1900 Buganda Agreement was an agreement between the British and the King of Buganda that gave the British control over foreign affairs and defense while allowing the King of Buganda to maintain control over internal affairs. The 1902 Order in the Council was an attempt by the British to assert control over all of the territories they claimed in Uganda. This led to a conflict of interest between the two parties and ultimately led to the British taking control of the entire country. Further illustrations about jurisdiction conflicts include the following:
Galt’s murder case. The 1900 Buganda Agreement and the 1902 Order in the Council did not specify who had jurisdiction over crimes committed within the kingdom.[3]. This led to a conflict when, in 1902, an Englishman, Frederick Galt, was murdered in Uganda; the British government claimed jurisdiction over the case because Galt was a British subject. Still, the Buganda government asserted jurisdiction because the murder occurred within its borders. The conflict was never resolved, and the case was never tried.
Another jurisdiction conflict is found in the case between katosi and kahizi. The jurisdiction conflict between the Katosi and Kahizi under the 1900 Buganda Agreement and the 1902 Order in the Council resulted from the different interpretations of the terms of the Agreement.[4]. The Katosi interpreted the Agreement as giving them jurisdiction over all of the territory covered by the Agreement. In contrast, the Kahizi interpreted it as only giving them jurisdiction over a portion of that territory. The conflict came to a head when the Kahizi attempted to arrest a Katosi chief who had been accused of crimes against the state. The Katosi resisted, and the two groups began to fight. The conflict eventually spread to other parts of the country, and the two groups continued to fight until a peace agreement was reached in 1904.
Legislative conflicts
The Buganda Agreement of 1900 and the 1902 Order in the Council were both attempts by the British to establish a more effective form of government in Uganda. However, these two pieces of legislation ended up conflicting with each other. The Buganda Agreement gave the King of Buganda great power and control over his Kingdom. However, the 1902 Order in the Council limited the power of the King and placed more power in the hands of the British[5]. This conflict between the two pieces of legislation led to great political instability in Uganda. The most serious conflict occurred in 1909 when the Kingdom’s demands for more power led to a standoff with the colonial government. The standoff was resolved when the British agreed to grant the Kingdom more autonomy. However, the conflict left a legacy of mistrust between the two sides, which led to further confrontations in the years that followed.
Land and mineral conflicts
The 1900 Buganda Agreement and the 1902 Order in the Council were important factors leading to land and mineral conflicts. The Buganda Agreement gave the British control over the Kingdom of Buganda. At the same time, the Order in the Council granted the British East Africa Company a monopoly over all land in the area.[6]. These two agreements led to a power struggle between the British and the Buganda people, which eventually boiled over into conflict.
The main cause of the conflict was the British desire to gain control over the rich minerals and land in the area. The British East Africa Company wanted to exploit the region’s resources for profit, but they were unwilling to share the wealth with the Buganda people. On the other hand, the Buganda people wanted to keep control of their land and resources. They saw the British as invaders trying to take away their livelihoods.
Revenue legislation conflicts
The 1900 Buganda Agreement and the 1902 Order in the Council led to Revenue legislation conflicts in a number of ways. For example, the 1900 Buganda Agreement granted the British Crown control over Uganda’s foreign affairs and defense, while the 1902 Order in the Council placed Uganda under the authority of the British East Africa Company.[7]. This led to confusion over who had the right to levy taxes and collect revenues in Uganda. Additionally, the 1900 Agreement guaranteed Buganda’s autonomy within Uganda, while the 1902 Order in the Council limited the autonomy of all of Uganda’s indigenous peoples. This led to conflict over the authority to levy taxes and collect revenue within Uganda.
For instance, the revenue legislation conflicts are well detailed under the bicycle fee debate. In the early 1900s, the British government sought to establish a more efficient way to collect taxes in Uganda. They decided to implement a new tax on bicycles, which was becoming increasingly popular then.[8]. This led to a debate between the British government and the Buganda kingdom, which had its taxation system in place. The British government argued that the new bicycle tax was necessary to raise revenue, while the Buganda kingdom argued that it would unfairly burden their people. Ultimately, the British government won the debate, and the new tax was implemented. However, the conflict between the two governments led to a delay in the implementation of the tax, which caused some confusion and frustration among the people of Uganda.
Conclusion
The Buganda Agreement of 1900 granted the Buganda Kingdom a large measure of autonomy within the British East Africa Protectorate. However, the 1902 Order in Council reversed many of the Agreement’s provisions, leading to conflict between the British authorities and the Buganda Kingdom. The conflict between the Agreement and the Order in Council led to instability in the Buganda protectorate. This was only resolved when the British government agreed to amend the Order in Council in 1919.
References
Lwanga-Lunyiigo, Samwiri. “The colonial roots of internal conflict in Uganda.” (1987).
Mabikke, Samuel B. “Historical continuum of land rights in Uganda: a review of land tenure systems and approaches for improving tenure security.” Journal of Land and Rural Studies 4, no. 2 (2016): 153-171.
Mugambwa, John. “The Protected State in the Uganda Protectorate-Re-Examination of Buganda’s Colonial Legal Status.” Afr. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 1 (1989): 446.
Tamukedde Mugambwa, John. “The legal aspects of the 1900 Buganda Agreement revisited.” The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law 19, no. 25-26 (1987): 243-274.
Taylor, Thomas. “The establishment of a European plantation sector within the emerging colonial economy of Uganda, 1902-1919.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies 19, no. 1 (1986): 35-58.
[1] Tamukedde Mugambwa, John. “The legal aspects of the 1900 Buganda Agreement revisited.” The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law 19, no. 25-26 (1987): 243-274.
[2] Mugambwa, John. “The Protected State in the Uganda Protectorate-Re-Examination of Buganda’s Colonial Legal Status.” Afr. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 1 (1989): 446.
[3] Tamukedde Mugambwa, John. “The legal aspects of the 1900 Buganda Agreement revisited.” The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law 19, no. 25-26 (1987): 243-274.
[4] Mugambwa, John. “The Protected State in the Uganda Protectorate-Re-Examination of Buganda’s Colonial Legal Status.” Afr. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 1 (1989): 446.
[5] Taylor, Thomas. “The establishment of a European plantation sector within the emerging colonial economy of Uganda, 1902-1919.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies 19, no. 1 (1986): 35-58.
[6] Lwanga-Lunyiigo, Samwiri. “The colonial roots of internal conflict in Uganda.” (1987).
[7] Tamukedde Mugambwa, John. “The legal aspects of the 1900 Buganda Agreement revisited.” The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law 19, no. 25-26 (1987): 243-274.
[8] Mabikke, Samuel B. “Historical continuum of land rights in Uganda: a review of land tenure systems and approaches for improving tenure security.” Journal of Land and Rural Studies 4, no. 2 (2016): 153-171.
write