WETLANDS: THE TALE OF TWO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

While the country was busy with the swearing-in ceremony of the president and the return of Besigye, we had to stare in horror and utter shock while over 2,500 people descended on Lubigi wetland like woodpeckers on a tight deadline with utmost impunity in broad day light armed with poles to erect a market. As if all of a sudden, all the land was declared vacant and people were supposed to serve themselves on a first come basis. Not even the line honorable minister was able to spare us such irritating scenes. My prayers rest with Lubigi and other wetlands out there across the country.

But first let us look at the some of the driving factors. Setting up a market for economic purposes was at the fore front. Whereas the constitution guarantees the right to engage in economic activities, it also guarantees a clean and healthy environment for all Ugandans. As to which one of these was more important in the Lubigi saga is obvious and not a subject of debate. 

“If government is setting up a sewage plant, why can’t we set up a market?”, “We know this is illegal but we also want to work and earn a living” These were some of the arguments being advanced by Lubigi wetland encroachers when asked to vacate the water catchment area as quoted in the Daily Monitor. This is awfully worrying and everything should be done to change this type of myopic thinking lest such impunity as witnessed at Lubigi soon spreads across the country and honestly, I do not see our institutions handling this one effectively.   

The government of Uganda is mandated to protect the natural resources including wetlands on behalf of Ugandans and by doing this, guarantee a healthy and clean environment for her citizens. The environmental benefits of wetlands are by far more important and priceless to be compared with the economic benefits.

The state minister for Environment Jessico Eriyo stated that the ministry had acquired GPS machines for boundary demarcation of wetlands to overcome the problem of people claiming titles in the wetlands. Whereas this is important, a lot more is desired if these resources are to be protected. People can still encroach on wetlands without acquiring titles as to ownership and that is bad enough. 

On 28^th of January 2011, in my article titled “The effects of wetland destruction will be too costly” published in the Daily Monitor, I noted that one of the underlying causes of this massive degradation is poverty which drives population to derive livelihood from wetlands, in this instance, by setting up a market in a wetland.

 

Whereas poverty is a social fact which will always exist, I proposed in the same article that the government and relevant stakeholders should strengthen the wetland community approach, resource user approach, and the ecosystem approach depending on the area of operation to cultivate practical community involvement in their protection. It is a myth to suggest that wetlands can be protected without the full cooperation of the community. We need to wake up and smell the coffee before wetlands come to extinction and our houses, schools, farms, villages, and towns become water catchment areas.  

While at this, the government should also desist from outrightly clearing projects that seek to acquire cheap and free land in the form of wetlands and forests without carrying out adequate assessment of the likely ramifications over the years. We do not need a job at the cost of massive degradation of the environment. A job benefits an individual but the environment is for all in the world.