NEMA OPERATIONS: Ugandans outraged by selective evictions
While NEMA asserts that the evictions are necessary to protect and restore the country's critical wetland ecosystems, the public's response highlights a complex interplay of environmental and social concerns.
The National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) is facing a storm of public reaction over its recent selective evictions of individuals encroaching on wetlands.
The controversial move by NEMA has ignited a heated debate among Ugandans, with accusations of bias and calls for more equitable enforcement of environmental laws.
NEMA’s decision to evict some, but not all, of the encroachers has led to widespread criticism and allegations of favoritism. Many Ugandans believe that the evictions are not being applied uniformly, with wealthier and more influential individuals seemingly exempt from the measures.
“I was forced out of my home with nowhere to go, yet I see other more affluent people still occupying their properties in the wetlands,” lamented John Mugisha, a resident affected by the evictions in Lubijji wetland. “This selective enforcement is unfair and unjust.”
While NEMA asserts that the evictions are necessary to protect and restore the country’s critical wetland ecosystems, the public’s response highlights a complex interplay of environmental and social concerns.
Wetlands play a crucial role in biodiversity conservation and climate regulation, but they have also become vital for the livelihoods of many Ugandans facing economic hardships.
“We understand the need to protect the environment, but there must be a fair and transparent process,” commented Sarah Namutebi, an environmental activist. “The current approach not only displaces vulnerable communities but also undermines the credibility of environmental conservation efforts.”
Government and NEMA’s Stance
In response to the backlash, NEMA has defended its actions, stating that the evictions are part of a broader strategy to combat environmental degradation. The agency claims that it is following legal procedures and prioritizing areas where encroachment poses the most significant threat to wetland health.
“The selective evictions are based on thorough assessments of the environmental impact and the urgency of the situation,” said Dr Barirega Akankwasa “We are committed to enforcing the law fairly and more than 300 houses will be razed down during the eviction Exercise in Lubigi.”
Amid the controversy, there are growing calls for comprehensive solutions that balance environmental protection with social justice.
Community leaders and activists are urging the government to provide alternative housing and livelihoods for those displaced and to ensure that all encroachers, regardless of their social or economic status, are held accountable.
“The government needs to adopt a holistic approach that includes resettlement plans and sustainable livelihood programs,” suggested Namutebi. “Only then can we achieve meaningful environmental conservation without disproportionately impacting the most vulnerable populations.”
As NEMA continues its efforts to reclaim Uganda’s wetlands, the reactions from the public underscore the need for a more inclusive and equitable approach.
The debate highlights the importance of transparent enforcement, fair treatment of all citizens, and the development of policies that address both environmental and social dimensions of sustainability.
The way forward will require collaboration, empathy, and a commitment to justice to ensure that Uganda’s natural heritage is preserved for future generations while respecting the rights and needs of its people.
