What you need to know about 10-year-old Shs43b Karuma dam land compensation fight

“There is a category we paid off, the majority of them, and there is another category of the vulnerable we intend to construct houses for,” Ms Bateebe responded.

“Are those people here, those they displaced” Mr Museveni called out. He added: “Can’t they construct houses for themselves if we provided them with iron sheets and cement?”

In a nick of time, one PAP sprung out of the congregation gathered at the project site at Karuma Cell, Karuma Town Council in Kiryandongo District. At the podium, the President gave the unidentified PAP the option: “The land is there, now these government people have made a long list of costs, the question is if we gave you cement and iron sheets can’t you build for yourselves?”

To which the PAP responded: “We can do that one Your Excellency, but our fear is the Environment Impact Assessment; I don’t think it was taken well…that place is full of elephants.”

“Is it a [national park?” the President retorted. The PAP responded: “It is very near the park whereby if we are to go if there is an electronic (fence) or something to stop the elephants…”

The President responded: “Yes, we can put an electric fence there. But if we gave you iron sheets and cement would you build for yourselves?” The houses are due for construction in Lapono Village in Nwoya District.

The PAP responded: “Through our pockets, what about labour?” The President quipped: “You can pick from your pockets, because these government people are making it expensive. What is the cost of constructing a house?”

The PAP responded: “I’m not an engineer, Your Excellency,” sending the crowd into laughter. However, as per Ms Bateebe each PAP’s house, three rooms and attended amenities, was estimated to cost Shs100m.

After the back and forth over the matter, the President proposed that the group of PAPs in question should be mobilised and brought to him for a meeting to be attended between officials from the ministries of Energy and Finance at a later date.

There are two takeaways from last Thursday’s melodrama; the President continued inserting himself in solving, even the minutest problems, which render institutions, and technocrats for that matter, useless. 

Questions bound why and how the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP)—resettlement of PAPs—for the Karuma Hydropower plant has taken fourteen years.

The construction of the hydro plant started in August 2013, with an initial completion timeline of 60 months ending December 2018 but was extended by another 60 months on account of defects and the back to back Covid-19 lockdowns.

In 2009, the ministry of Energy hired Indian company Energy Infratech Private Ltd to undertake feasibility studies that determined that the optimum capacity of the site is 600MW as opposed to the previous designs of 200MW provided by Norwegian firm, Norpak Power Ltd.

The inception

Energy Infratech Private Ltd was engaged again in 2010 to undertake the RAP study, which detailed that 1,146 acres of land was required for the project. The filling of the reservoir was anticipated to flood approximately 642.634 acres of land in a stretch of 25km upstream of the dam area within the 100 metres from the highest water mark across the sub-counties of Kamdini and Aber in Oyam District.

Of this, 486 acres was private land acquired across Kamdini and Aber sub-counties in Oyam, and Mutunda sub-county in Kiryandondo District affecting 414 people.

In December 2011, the company submitted the RAP report charting a framework for compensation and resettlement, and related social dimensions.

Accordingly, the government acquired land in the villages of Karuma and Awoo in Mutunda Sub-county in Kiryandongo, and Nora, Akurudia villages in Kamudin Sub-county in Oyam.

Of the 414 PAPs, at least 120 were deemed vulnerable and preferred to be resettled while 294 opted for cash compensation and would find where to relocate. Physical resettlement of the PAPs required 200 acres of land acquired in Lapono Village.

Article 273 of the Constitution vests power over land in hands of the owners, so one has to be reasonably paid off before their land is taken away subject to Article 26 that stipulates that: “No Person Shall be compulsorily deprived of property or any interest in right over property of any description except where the taking possession is necessary for public use and or is made under the law after prompt payment of fair and adequate compensation’’.

Current land acquisition procedures according to the law, last amended in 1970, involves planning to determine the different land options available for meeting the public need in a participatory; mapping the exact location and size of the land to be acquired; publishing a notice to inform owners and occupants in the designated area that the government intends to acquire their land and requesting people to submit claims for compensation for land to be acquired.

The notice describes the purpose and process, including important deadlines and the procedural rights of people.

Then, hold public sensitisation ad consultative meetings providing people with an opportunity to learn more about the project, and express their opinions and needs for compensation; determination of the equivalent compensation for the land to be acquired at the stated date of valuation; owners and occupants submit their claims which are valued by a government valuer. The valuer offers what they deem to be an appropriate compensation.

Disclosure of award and negotiations follow next. Where PAPs accept the compensation payments are effected but in the circumstances of disagreement they are allowed to bring in independent valuers and later seek court redress.

Across the three villages that were to be impacted; of the 120 PAPs that were deemed vulnerable and candidates for physical resettlement, 71 were from Karuma Village and 48 from Awoo. Nora Village had only one vulnerable PAP who was physically disabled but economically stable and had already relocated his family bringing the total number of PAPs to be physically resettled to 119.

According to an assessment report seen by this newspaper, the vulnerable groups identified included women headed households (widows), households victimised by HIV/Aids, headed by children, made up of the aged or handicapped, impoverished or socially stigmatised as a result of traditional or cultural bias, economically marginalised and internally displaced persons who were tenants or licensees.

“The physical resettlement of these PAPs required 200 acres of land which had to be suitable for mixed livelihood use suiting both agriculture and livestock rearing,” reads in part the RAP report.

During the RAP implementation—compensation payments and resettlement—the Ministry constituted a team to oversee the exercises as well as review any other activities associated with the process among which were grievance redress and settlement of court cases.

According to documents there were two RAP exercises; the first covering, the hydropower plant, and the second covering the filing reservoir. In 2015, the ministry embarked on construction of houses for PAPs that opted for resettlement, which process has dragged to-date.

Enter the suits

On the other hand, the ministry of Energy is battling court cases with a group of seven PAPs claiming among others, undervaluation, trespass, or their land not having been valued. The suits amount to Shs13b, according to documents seen by this newspaper.

One of such cases that has presented a dilemma is of a family in Oyam District that sued the Energy ministry and the contractor, Sinohydro Corporation Ltd, for unlawfully crushing its rock into aggregate and using it in construction of the dam without compensation.

In the suit of Etot Paul and eight others Versus Attorney General and Sino Hydro Corporation Ltd, logged at the High Court’s Land Division in 2015, the group wanted court to compel government and the Chinese contractor, to pay for aggregate derived from the family rock in plots 76 and plot 77 measuring 14 acres in Nora Village.

In his ruling of the case, Justice Andrew Byabashaija stated the that rocks on the plaintiff’s land fit within the provisions of Article 244(5), which excludes any stone commonly used for building or similar purposes from the definition of minerals and therefore part of land owned by individuals as per Article 237 (1) of the Constitution.

The group was awarded Shs1.2b as the market value for the land, Shs8.3b as value for the rock deposits on the suit land and Shs1b as general damages.

On June 18, 2018, the ministry through the Attorney General appealed Judgement and on November 5, 2019, the Court of Appeal allowed the application to stay the execution of the High Court judgement. This was on condition that the ministry pays the group Shs813m undisputed value for land before November, 30 2019.

While the ministry, according to document, had agreed to the payment of the undisputed sum as approved by the Chief Government Valuer (CGV) in the valuation Report of 2011 amounting to Shs195m, instead of Shs1.2b as value for land, crops and dwellings, it was later established that the CGV’s valuation report was never produced as evidence in the High Court proceedings while the plaintiff adduced a professional valuation report which valued the acquired land, affected properties including costs and losses incurred totaling to Shs813m.

A garnishee order was instituted on the ministry at the High Court in Kampala to pay the undisputed amount of Shs813m. The ministry paid Shs828m as value for land acquired and properties inclusive of Shs15m as cost of the garnishee proceedings as determined by Court under order 23 (Rule 9) of the Civil Procedure Rules.

On January 22 2022 the Court of Appeal delivered its Judgement in which it substantially held that the rocks and sand deposits should not be valued and compensated separately from the market value of the land. The Court of Appeal ruled that both the High Court award of Shs8.3b as the value of rock deposits in the acquired land be set aside while the Shs1b as general damages was substituted with an award of Shs203m.

“On April 14, 2022 the Solicitor General advised the Ministry to pay the decretal sum of Shs203m to Etot Paul Peter and his co-respondents and on May 4, 2022, the ministry wrote to GP Advocates to request for bank account details onto which the above payment should made. To date, the requests for account details have not been submitted. The ministry is, however, informed that Etot Paul Peter and his co-respondents have appealed the Judgement,” reads in part, a summary of the case.

In another case before the Masindi High Court, Benjamin Mugenyi sued the Energy ministry through the Attorney General claiming his land was not surveyed and was seeking Shs226.5m. The ministry acknowledged acquisition of Mr Mugenyi’s land and accordingly compensated land but he did not consent to the property value approved by the Chief Government Valuer.

Also at Masindi High Court, former Kibanda County MP Sam Owor Amooti Otada sued alleging that he is entitled to disturbance allowance in computation of total compensation to him from the The Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces (UPDF) for occupying land he rightfully owned. He further alleged that part of his land, 22 acres, was compulsorily acquired for the project valued at Shs1.159b inclusive of a 30 percent disturbance allowance. The ministry paid him Shs892m as approved by the Chief Government Valuer but declined to pay for the said disturbance allowance additional Shs267m as disturbance allowance for UPDF having occupied the land. The ministry bounced off the claim to the Ministry of Defence, which bounced it back.