Open Letter to Ambassador Simon Mulongo

Dear Ambassador Simon Mulongo,

I recently came across a purported write-up attributed to you concerning His Highness Jude Mike Mudoma, the Umukuka III of Inzu Ya Masaba, and the “Curregenda” effected by the Hon. Minister of Gender, Labour and Social Development, Betty Amongi.

As the Spokesperson of the Bugisu Cultural Institution, I feel compelled to respond to several misrepresentations in your remarks, which unfortunately are inimical to the unity and progress we continue to preach and practice among the Bamasaaba people. Ours is a cultural institution dedicated to unity, development, and fidelity to both tradition and the laws of Uganda.

1. On the “Curregenda” by Hon. Betty Amongi

Let us be clear: the Minister acted within the confines of Ugandan law. The Cultural Leaders Act (CLA), 2011, and relevant constitutional provisions empower her to correct and realign processes within cultural institutions where inconsistencies or legal contradictions exist.

If you disagree with her actions, the appropriate challenge would be to cite the law contravened not to cast aspersions based on sentiment or political expedience. Otherwise, your criticism may come across as grandstanding, not legal reasoning.

2. Alleged Division of the Bamasaaba and the “Babukusu” Narrative

You are on public record Hansard inclusive as having championed a divisive narrative by attempting to create a separate identity called the Babukusu tribe, a concept that has no legal nor cultural legitimacy in Uganda to date. Where are its geographical or cultural coordinates?

Instead of uniting the Bamasaaba, this approach sought to sow division where none should exist. Ironically, the same unity you now demand was neglected when you had the opportunity to uphold it especially during your Constituent Assembly (CA) days in 1994.

3. Mischaracterizing the Umukuka III

His Highness the Umukuka III is not a lawmaker nor an enforcer of public policy. He is a cultural leader. Accusing him of self-aggrandizement is not only false but a gross misreading of his intentions and actions.

A man lobbying for scholarships, coordinating relief efforts for victims of landslides in Bunambutye (over UGX 100 million delivered), supporting cultural infrastructure, and registering our sacred Imbalu tradition with UNESCO cannot, by any honest measure, be labeled selfish.

4. Origin of Conflict in Bukuka

You conveniently glossed over the true origin of the leadership conflict within the institution. After the contested 2020 elections, His Highness Jude Mike Mudoma chose the path of peace and sought redress through the High Court.

The presiding Judge advised that statutory avenues under the CLA be exhausted first, particularly Section 16(1)(2). It was only after this, with guidance from Hon. Minister Amongi, that reconciliation and lawful recognition were achieved culminating in a consensus reached at Maluku District Hall among clan chairmen and other stakeholders.

You were not present, yet you question the legitimacy of the process and outcome?

5. On the Term “Bugisu”

Bugisu is not a personal invention of any modern leader or minister. As early as 1900, English scholar Rascoe documented Bugisu as a known region. The 1962 Constitution listed it as one of Uganda’s ethnic groups. Why didn’t you oppose it then? Instead, you introduced “Bukusu” a name with no standing under Ugandan law.

History teaches us that names can emerge from various circumstances some even from insults, such as “Busajabwankuba” near Mbale City. Names evolve, but what matters is the unity and identity they promote.

6. Legal Authority and the Role of Parliament

The Inzu Ya Masaba constitution, which you and others attempt to defend, lacks a clear legal basis. Under Article 79(1)(2) of the Constitution and Section 38 of the Local Government Act, only Parliament and, to an extent, Local Governments have law-making powers.

Cultural institutions may not enact binding laws. Customary law will never be codified in Uganda and certainly not by self-appointed elders acting ultra vires.

7. Who Are the Real Dividers?

Let’s speak plainly: this petty war was ignited by the “WWWWW” faction Walimbwa, Washaki, Wamimbi, Wabuyi, and Wedaira after they were lawfully relieved of responsibility by the Umukuka III. Since then, some have resorted to clandestine and criminal activities, and are rightly under police investigation. Cultural disagreements should not become safe havens for criminal behavior.

8. Tangible Achievements Under Umukuka III

Under the stewardship of Umukuka Jude Mike Mudoma, our institution has registered tangible success:

• Scholarships and student support
• UGX 100 million in relief items for Bunambutye landslide victims
• Renovation of the annex building (UGX 70 million)
• UGX 8 billion lobbied for the Cultural Centre
• HIV training for clan chairmen (fully funded)
• Successful Imbalu ceremonies and UNESCO registration
• Hosting of foreign kings, ministers, and national cultural leaders
• Planned construction of a museum

Are these the hallmarks of a leader bent on self-enrichment?

Final Word

The Umukuka III will not reign forever, but Bukuka (the institution) must endure. That is the legal and cultural principle we uphold.

Ambassador Mulongo, your recent remarks demand a public retraction, or at the very least, a thoughtful rephrasing. Your dignity, your legacy, and your loyalty to the Bamasaaba people would be better served by choosing the path of truth and reconciliation.

Steven Masiga
Spokesperson, Bugisu Cultural Institution
Tel: 0782-231577

Do you have an advertisement or article you want to publish? Mail us at theugreports@gmail.com or WhatsApp +256757022363.