It is tough building or buying a home in Uganda, even for people who are well-heeled. So, you can imagine waking up to find that excavators have arrived to demolish your home. Your crime? You built your home in a wetland.
Legally speaking, this is not supposed to be an issue. If the law prohibits construction of residential houses in wetlands, it goes without saying that those breaking it have to suffer the consequences.
But this makes sense only if all homes built in wetlands end up getting demolished. Yet since the National Environment Management Authority (Nema) started its demolition exercise in Lubigi Wetland, it has done the job selectively, sparking anger and resentment.
A couple of weeks ago, a video of a woman whose home was demolished was circulating on social media after she, along with her child, attempted to commit suicide by throwing herself in front of speeding cars.
Many have asked why some homes are pulled down while others are left intact. Why are homes of individuals that Nema seems to fear left intact? And why are those belonging to the hoi polloi demolished?
Nema has not been able to answer these questions convincingly. When I was writing this article, I reached out to its senior public relations officer, William Lubulwa. He told me Nema does not demolish homes and only acts to restore wetlands, although a May 29 press release the authority published on its website says: ‘During the operation, affected persons were granted time to remove their valuables before both temporary and permanent structures were demolished…’
Mr Lubulwa also said Nema would carry out similar exercises in all wetlands across Uganda. We are going to wait and see how things pan out.
Meanwhile, a wetland near Kawuku off Entebbe Road is full of houses. Some are still under construction. When I first saw it in 2012, it had no house. All the houses there have been built over the years. In fact, the first demolition exercise in Lubigi happened without Nema saying anything about the Kawuku Wetland.
How do people buy land in a wetland, build homes and occupy them when Nema has done nothing to stop them? Crucially, can/will Nema pull down these homes?
It is much easier and cheaper to stop people from constructing in a wetland than to force them out. As I wrote in this column in 2024, Nema would protect all wetlands effectively if it monitored them regularly and prevented construction the moment a foundation is laid and construction materials are delivered.
There should be a team responsible for visiting wetlands regularly just to ensure no construction work is done. Nema also has to launch sensitisation campaigns about wetlands using effective communication channels targeting people who do not know that wetlands cannot accommodate residential homes. It is not clear whether this has been done.
On Nema’s website, a page about ‘Wetland and Waste Management Awareness’ does not have anything except a brief message saying ‘Coming soon’.
The authority has also struggled to curb noise pollution. How does Nema work with the public to report individuals and organisations causing noise pollution?
In many places in and around Kampala, pubs blast out music at full volume, oblivious to the inconvenience they cause non-revellers. In places far from Kampala, the noise is enough to wake the dead. Then there are pastors of small churches in many suburbs who also make a lot of noise in the name of praying.
If Nema has successfully restored Lubigi Wetland as it claims, it should now turn its attention to other wetlands and also rein in noise generators. People normally stop doing wrong things when they know there is a price to pay.
Those who lost homes in Lubigi now know what it means to build in a wetland, and if Nema did not carry out the exercise selectively, no one would build in a wetland again.