KAMPALA, Uganda – The long-running Mutungo Hill land saga has taken a new turn after members of the family of the late Dr. Muhammad Buwule Kasasa lodged a formal protest with the Chief Justice over the Supreme Court’s decision to refer the matter to mediation.
The protest, read publicly by Dr. Nulu Nakabonge Kasasa at a press conference at Piato Restaurant in Kampala, challenges what the family describes as a “procedurally irregular and unjust” attempt to reopen a dispute that the courts have conclusively determined.
Family Says Two Courts Already Settled the Case
In a strongly worded letter addressed to the Chief Justice and dated October 7, 2028, the family argued that the ownership of the contested Mutungo Hill land — known as Kyadondo Block 237 Plots 178 and 388 — was conclusively determined in favor of their late father, who became the registered proprietor in 1978.
The protest letter recounts a series of legal battles dating back two decades, starting with High Court Civil Suit No. 622 of 2003, in which the estate of the late Sir Edward Muteesa II sought to recover the same land, alleging fraudulent transfer.
However, the Muteesa family later filed HCCS No. 227 of 2005 against the Attorney General, seeking compensation for the same land — which, according to the Kasasa family, amounted to a legal admission that they had lost ownership.
In March 2020, High Court Judge John Eudes Keitirima dismissed the recovery suit with costs, invoking the legal doctrine of approbation and reprobation. This decision was later upheld by the Court of Appeal in November 2022 in Civil Appeal No. 152 of 2020, which described any further trial for recovery as “an exercise in futility.”
“These judgments were clear and final,” Dr. Nulu Kasasa said. “Referring this settled matter to mediation now is not only redundant but also undermines the authority and finality of judicial decisions.”
Allegations of Bias and Conflict of Interest
In their protest letter, the family further raised serious concerns about institutional impartiality in the mediation process, citing potential conflicts of interest involving both the judiciary and the Attorney General.
They questioned the propriety of the Chief Justice’s office directly mediating a dispute that involves parties “with deep historical ties to both the judiciary and the monarchy,” warning that it risks violating the constitutional right to a fair hearing under Article 28(1).
The letter also points to an alleged conflict of interest on the part of Attorney General Hon. Kiryowa Kiwanuka, who is said to be a founding partner of K&K Advocates — the law firm representing the Muteesa estate.
“The Attorney General has no legal standing in a private ownership dispute between two estates,” the protest reads. “His role is limited to the compensation claim filed by the Muteesa family against the government.”
The protest also highlighted growing divisions within the Kasasa family itself. According to Dr. Nulu Kasasa, many of the late doctor’s children were neither consulted nor involved in the mediation or proposed settlement discussions.
“There is no unity of consent among beneficiaries,” she said. “The process ignores our late father’s express wishes and the provisions of his last will — particularly the role of his appointed legal adviser.”
The letter invokes Section 180 of the Succession Act, arguing that any agreement reached without the involvement of the legally appointed adviser is “procedurally defective and likely invalid.”
The family also raised concerns about alleged estate mismanagement since Dr. Kasasa’s death in 2024, claiming that rental income from the disputed property remains unaccounted for, while several heirs have been left without basic support.
“Most of the children are still at school abroad pursuing their studies, while some have come back due to lack of school fees,” she added.
A separate letter signed by Moses Kaniyike Kasasa and Anwar Sempira Kasasa, both co-executors of the estate, also objected to the proposed terms of settlement in Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2024, describing them as “contrary to the last will of our late father.”
They expressed dismay that the ongoing mediation failed to address the “real issues in controversy,” particularly the alleged absence of any wrongdoing by Dr. Kasasa in acquiring the land.
“We wish to know the wrong committed by our late father against the late Kabaka Muteesa,” the letter states. “Our father bought the land from Lake View Properties Ltd in 1978, ten years after it was transferred from the Kabaka’s ownership. There was no mischief in that transaction.”
The two co-executors further questioned why the Attorney General had been excluded from the proposed settlement despite being a party to the suit, warning that the agreement could expose estate administrators to “serious liability” for bypassing the consent of beneficiaries and legal advisers.
Final Appeals to the Chief Justice
In their conclusion, the beneficiaries urged the Chief Justice to;
- Immediately halt the ongoing mediation process.
- Launch an inquiry into the neutrality and legality of the mediation proceedings.
- Ensure inclusion of the estate’s legal adviser in any future discussions; and
- Commission a forensic audit of the estate’s assets and finances.
“This case has traveled a long and definitive legal road,” Dr. Nulu Kasasa emphasized. “The courts have spoken clearly. Any move to reopen it now undermines judicial independence and the rule of law.”
The Mutungo Hill land dispute — one of Uganda’s most enduring property battles — involves competing claims between the estate of the late Sir Edward Muteesa II, former Kabaka of Buganda, and the estate of Dr. Muhammad Buwule Kasasa, a medical doctor and entrepreneur.
Legal experts say the latest protest could reignite debate over judicial finality, conflict of interest, and estate governance in high-value property disputes involving public figures.
