Why Ankole Kingdom was never restored

Why did you decide to conduct your research on this controversial subject under the NRM regime? 
Researching on the history and politics of restoration and non-restoration of kingdoms is a global concern, since culture and tradition have impacted upon almost every aspect of humanity. While the study provides justification for the abolition of kingdoms, it cannot explain why some were restored and not Ankole Kingdom. There was need to seek historical explanation on how and why this political trend has come to occupy such a position in the modern era.

Ankole kingship is a subject that has been debated by scholars and politicians since 1993, but I think without so much evidence from the people of Ankole themselves.

As an academia, I wanted to explain the relationship between the ethnic groups in Ankole Kingdom and their response to the non-restoration of the kingship and make new theoretical underpinnings to the understanding of the dynamics of kingdoms in Uganda.

I was very interested in contributing to the body of knowledge and explore the relationship between Ankole kingship, politics and democracy in Uganda.

My master’s research on the history of local government in Uganda; A case of former Kigezi District and the restoration and non–restoration contradicts the principles of local governance. I wanted to unravel the unanswered pertinent question of why did NRM government restored other kingdoms in Uganda and yet still create others except Ankole Kingdom.
 
How long did it take you to complete your PhD programme? 
I was admitted in 2017 and started in 2018. Five years, save for the two years of Covid-19 that disrupted my data collection because most of my respondents were in western Uganda and elderly.
 
Which are the historical factors that led to the incorporation of kingdoms during British colonial rule and their subsequent abolition in 1967? 

This study reveals that the British maintained kingdoms in Uganda, and Ankole in particular, to aid in administration and imposition of colonial rule through the framework of divide and rule.

In fact, Ankole Kingdom was a British creation through the 1901 Ankole Agreement whereby they amalgamated the chiefdoms or principalities of Igara, Sheema, Buhweju to the main stream Nkore to form Ankole Kingdom in their interest.

This further explains why the people, especially from these principalities, do not want the kingdom restored. The majority Banyankole actually do not have a strong attachment to the kingdom.
 
Your study unravelled the dynamics behind the non-restoration of Ankole Kingdom. Which are these?
The general politics of unitarism by Milton Obote through the 1967 Constitution were major factors that explain the non-restoration of Ankole Kingdom. The non-restoration of Ankole Kingdom is largely embedded in the historical relation between Bairu and Bahima, complicated by the colonial state intervention in politics as well as the socio-economic state of Ankole in particular and Uganda as a whole. 

The kingdom was perceived to enforce the divisiveness among the Banyankole. Also, to note is the bad history of the kingship in Ankole, it was known to be oppressive to the Bairu who are the majority for instance the king of Igara, Musinga committed suicide while being taken to Mbarara which was the headquarter of Ankole Kingdom. Restoration of Ankole therefore may raise sentiments among the people.  

In fact most of my anti–restoration respondents were of the view that if the kingdom has to restored, let them restore the Nkore Kingdom; obuage shana mbukome nkadekye (let restoration of Ankole kingdom stop at River Nkadekye). 

One of the contentious issues that explain the non-restoration of Ankole Kingdom was related to the long practice of women oppression of gender inequality propaganda of not only the cultural norms but also the rulers of Nkore and Ankole.

Allow me to quote with permission, Okikuru Verona Rujoki one of my respondents and the only female monarchist said that even if I am a strong supporter of restoration of the kingdom, women had grievances against the whole cultural set-up of the institution of Obugabe, especially the inhumane practices like Okwarirana (sharing women among kinsmen) which dehumanised women and reduced them to sexual objects of men. Also, the other practice was Okusharana ahanda (blood relationship). 
 
Your research uncovered a nexus of pro and anti-restoration forces, linking the history of the Ankole Kingdom to broader theories of traditionalism and colonialism, specifically the great man’s theory and the two publics. Can you expound on this? 
Anchoring on the Great Man’s Theory, the study explained non-restoration of Ankole Kingdom as a consequence of the weaknesses of kingship. This is demonstrated by fragile leadership where some kings ruled jointly; climaxing with the high court case following the death of Omugabe Kahaya in 1944.

The study, further, draws on “two publics” to illustrate the non-restoration of Ankole Kingdom as a historical mix of colonialism and traditionalism leading to redefinition of politics and economy in Ankole that enlarged the division between the Bairu and Bahima.

The two publics have led to absence of a strong tradition ethos that can account for the non-restoration of Ankole Kingdom. Using the “Two Publics” theory’s strength, the study found out that the restoration of kingdoms in Uganda was an express role of President Museveni, as their abolition in 1967 by Obote 1.
 
What are the main contentions between both the pro and anti-restoration forces? 
The pro-restoration (Nkore Cultural Trust) want the kingdom to be restored and the anti-restoration (Banyankole Cultural Foundation) do not want a kingdom restored, whereas the pros claim culture preservation as a major reason for restoration, the anti-restoration think culture can be preserved through other things like a museum, marriage and cultural exhibitions. The majority actually think restoration of the kingdom is not necessary for Banyankole because it will bring back the Bairu-Bahima not so good relation.
 
Why is the cultural dominance of the Bahima a big hindrance towards the restoration of the Ankole kingdom?
Nkore Kingdom, also referred to as Karo-Karungi, was a pre-colonial kingdom in Uganda up to 1901. This kingdom was politically dominated by the Bahinda ruling clan from Bahima who were a pastoral community.

Most of the administrative positions were a preserve of the Bahinda aristocrats selected by the Omugabe. Nkore and later Ankole society was composed of two sub-ethic groups Bairu (agriculturalists) and Bahima (pastoralists). The Bairu were and are still numerically more than the Bahima. Bairu provided manual services to the Bahima and paid tribute to the Omugabe and other Bahima seniors. Bairu there had a lower social status in the Ankole hierarchy.

It is said that the Bairu faced social injustice, oppression and discrimination in Ankole kingship. For instance, it’s the Bairu that would carry the king (Omugabe) from one place to another, its claimed that whenever the Omugabe wanted to spit he would spit in the mouth of a Mwiru or if he wanted to put his spear down he would put it into the foot of a Mwiru, the Bairu were the ones to light his smoking pipe and if he fell sick, the Bairu from the Basingo clan in particular would be slaughtered to save the life of the king.  

Restoration of Ankole Kingdom, therefore, may rise such sentiments among the majority Bairu which many antagonise peace and unity in Ankole and Uganda at large. One of the questions that arose from majority of my interviewees, was whose king would he be for, if the kingdom is restored?

Will only the Bahima–Bahinda pay allegiance to him yet due to migration, Ankole society now is occupied by Bairu majority. Surprisingly from my study, there are many Bahima who do not want the kingdom because it’s no longer relevant to the Banyankole who have embraced modernity, through education, modern agricultural practices and are now a wealthy society in Uganda.
 
Why can’t the Bahima and Bairu co-exist?
To some extent they are co-existing, today Bairu are great pastoralists, they marry Bahima girls and to a small extent Bahima boys marry Bairu. Bairu have benefitted from education just as Bahima, they have much in common now that brings them together.

Are kingdoms relevant in today’s contemporary society? 
Yes, it depends on the society that embraces them it. For instance, in Buganda, they have strong attachment to their kingdom and it has contributed significantly to development through many programmes. 

This is not the case with Ankole where  a kindship is alien to the people. Kingdoms to those that embrace them play a key role in uniting people for a common cause, cultural preservation thus enhance economic growth and development. 

Summary   
The study concludes that non-restoration of Ankole Kingdom is largely embedded in the historical relation between Bairu and Bahima, complicated by the colonial state intervention in politics as well as the socio-economic state of Ankole in particular and Uganda as a whole. The study concluded also that restoration or non-restoration of kingdoms in Uganda is largely associated with political imperative rather cultural preservation.

Recommendations
The study hence recommends that while kingship in Ankole has been divisive and a threat to national cohesion, non-restoration has been found to be a legitimate force to achieve national unity in Ankole.

Restoring Ankole Kingdom may be challenging to nation building and democracy since the majority Bairu may not give support to the government, a museum in addition to the like of Igongo Cultural Centre can be put in place, forge unity between the pro and anti-restoration forces. More books and documentaries about Ankole Kingdom should be widely published to inform people about their cultural.