An ownership dispute stemming from a property formerly under the control of the Asian’s Property Custodian Board (DAPCB) has brought the curtains down on the operations of one of Kampala’s oldest bars.

Since opening its doors back in the 1960s, La’Bella Bar and Restaurant’s erstwhile location was Plot No 1, Dewinton Road in Kampala. Plot No 1, Dewinton Road, is among the hundreds of properties and businesses formerly owned by Asians, which had been placed under the control of the DAPCB. This was after President Amin declared “an economic war” and expelled Asians from Uganda.

La’Bella was closed on the morning of March 6 by musclemen (widely known as Kanyamas) backed by local council officials and police officers. This publication understands the latter two were brought in by Kassam Properties Consultants Limited that is associated with Ms Mumtaz Kassam, a Kampala-based lawyer.

We understand La’Bella’s proprietors, including Ms Sara Khatete and Omuzaana Sophie Nakajubi—one of the widows of the late Kabaka Freddie Walugembe Muteesa, accuse Kassam Properties officials of violently evicting them from the premises. They are also up in arms about the fact that La’Bella has been cordoned off without a court order even when there is a pending court case between them and Kassam Properties.

“We were simply invaded by a group of people claiming to be owners of the property. They harassed whoever they found on the property. They beat up some of the workers, unplugged electrical appliances and locked us outside, asking for rent,” Ms Khatete told Saturday Monitor.

Kassam weighs in

Mr Aggrey Muhwezi, a property manager with Kassam Properties, however, told Saturday Monitor that the pending court case notwithstanding, some peculiarities cannot be overlooked.

Who went to court? We were the ones who went there. We applied for distress. That is the matter which they are saying is still before court,” Mr Muhwezi said.

While Mr Muwhezi revealed that the property was repossessed more than 20 years ago, Ms Khatete and Omuzaana Nakajjubi question the circumstances under which this played out. They told Saturday Monitor that whereas Section 9 of the Expropriated Properties Act (EPA) required claimants to any of the properties to return and be physically present, the original owners of Plot No 1, Dewinton Road—said to be Kasamali Valiji and Dayambai Nazarali Valijee—never returned to Uganda.

An April 2021 report of the 10th Parliament’s investigation into the operations of the custodian board concluded that repossession certificates for 637 properties were issued even when the owners never returned. Saturday Monitor could not independently verify whether Plot No 1, Dewinton Road, is one of them.

The sub-committee of the Committee on Statutory Authorities and State Enterprises (Cosase) noted that at least 4,000 out of the 10,000 properties that had been lined up by government for sale or return to their original owners had been fraudulently acquired or repossessed.

The committee recommended revocation of repossession certificates issued to persons who did not return to Uganda.

“All repossessions whose former owners didn’t physically return to manage the properties as required by law should be cancelled or revoked for being null and void… The minister should invoke his/her powers under Section 9 (1) of the EPA to make an order to either retain such properties as government or the same be disposed of in a manner prescribed by Regulation 11 of the Expropriated Properties (Repossession and Disposal)..” the committee recommends.

AG opposes report

In a legal opinion that he sent President Museveni last March, Attorney General Kiryowa Kiwanuka said the recommendations of the Cosase report are “not legally tenable.” He added that they would expose [the] government to unnecessary litigation.

He wrote: “The recommendation of the Cosase sub-committee for Departed Asians Property Custodian Board to initiate the process for cancellation of repossession certificates acquired and any substitute titles is not capable of implementation in light of the existing case law.”

Mr Kiwanuka also concluded that under no circumstances can a minister revoke a repossession certificate.

“Even if there was an error on the part of the government, the minister cannot cancel a certificate of repossession,” he revealed.

Powerlessness

Ms Khatete, however, says in light of advice of the Attorney General, the courts would have been expected to expedite hearing of cases around properties whose ownership is in dispute. She further opines that they should also give the occupants of such properties more protection.

“If they can re-enter our property even when the matter is pending in court—which the Attorney General says is the only one with the power to revoke certificates that were fraudulently obtained—then we have nowhere to go,” Ms Khatete noted.

Mr Muhwezi, however, insists that Kassam Properties’ actions are legal and appropriate in light of the provisions of the Landlord Tenants Act, 2022.

“What does the Landlord Tenants Act say?” he asked rhetorically, adding, “That if a tenant does not pay, you give a 30-day notice. We went and served a notice. Thirty days elapsed. We went to the police and applied for re-entry. We did not require a court order to re-enter.”

It does not look like parties embroiled in ownership disputes over properties formerly under DAPCB have anywhere to run. Sources at the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs have since told Saturday Monitor that the line minister, Mr Nobert Mao—working on the orders of President Museveni—has opened a new line of investigations into some of the contested properties, Plot No 1, Dewinton Road, inclusive.

For any Opinions, breaking news, Exposes, story ideas, human interest articles or Exclusive inside Stories; email Uganda Daily on: [email protected].