Sacred trees damned to an uncertain future

Three kilometres east of Arua City near Ediofe Cathedral is a sacred tree whose trunk diameter of more than three metres casts an impressive shadow of more than 150 square metres.

The Muntu clan stakes claim to what locals in this northwestern part of Uganda simply call the Saka tree. The clan, which is part of the Lugbara ethnic group, believes that the tree was planted by their forefathers—Ebio and Ona—who were brothers.

“Their intention was not to plant a tree. They built a granary and one of the poles sprouted into the current Saka tree, which is over 300 years old,” Felix Dramadri, the head of the clan, told Monitor.

“There is a similar tree in Onduparaka County, which is also owned by the Muntu clan. When the Saka tree grew bigger, it was used to discuss clan issues and matters of importance, and spell out curses.”

Dramadri further reveals that next to the Saka tree there is a similar smaller tree that has also existed for long.

“When a girl gets married, the first bull is slaughtered under the smaller tree, roasted and eaten by the clan elders under the Saka tree. The name Saka comes from the process of sharing beef,” Dramadri said.
Such is the sacredness of the Saka tree that not only is it called the “tree of honesty”, but also local customary court sessions are staged under its canopy. 

“If you kill somebody with poison and you deny having done it, you are brought under this tree to be interrogated by the Muntu clan elders,” Dramadri told Saturday Monitor, adding, “The elders will spit in a calabash of kwete (a local brew made out of fermented maize, malt and yeast) mixed with red soil from the dead person’s grave and offer it to you to drink.”

If you committed the murder, you die within a month as per Dramadri.
“The funeral rites of the clan members living around the Saka tree are held under this tree. And when we want to hold Mass a priest is invited and we celebrate it here,” the Muntu clan head revealed, adding, “National events such as immunisation programmes are held here. It is one of the polling stations in the area.”

The Muntu clan won the Tangible Cultural Heritage award at the 2021 National Cultural Heritage Awards organised by the Cross-Cultural Foundation of Uganda (CCFU). It was a recognition for preserving the so-called “tree of honesty.”

Yet the Saka tree—indeed like other sacred trees in Uganda—is threatened by creeping signs of gentrification. The proposed expansion of the Ediofe-Onduparaka Feeder Road could see the tree felled. Dramadri, however, said they are only “willing to sacrifice the smaller tree, which has no name. Saka tree, he added, should be spared, especially since the Atezeku tree in Onduparaka Trading Centre was “sacrificed” two years ago “for a road expansion” works.

Mpigi case
There was a huge uproar by cultural rights activities earlier this year when a sacred tree locally known as Nabukalu at Mabuye Village in Mpigi District, was uprooted to pave way for the Busega-Mpigi Expressway.

The indigenous African “bush candle” tree, commonly known as Muwafu in Luganda, sat on a 0.083-acre piece of land belonging to the Lugave (Pangolin) Clan in the Buganda Kingdom. Clan members used to visit the site for blessings. Members of the Lugave Clan believed that the tree, that was said to be 100 years old, was sacred.

The China Civil Engineering Construction Corporation and the China Railway 19th Bureau Group Company Limited, the contractors for Busega-Mpigi Expressway, uprooted the tree on March 10.
Hussein Katamba, the caretaker of the site and kibanja (plot of land), had sued Uganda National Roads Authority (Unra), demanding Shs500m as compensation to relocate the ancestral cultural site and clan spirits. The Mpigi High Court on March 9, however, ruled that Katamba should only be given Shs4.6m, reasoning that “the plaintiff didn’t bring any official from Buganda Kingdom to confirm the existence of the cultural site..., nor did he bring any of the people who are said to always be going to the site for healing.”

The presiding judge also noted that the site is not listed anywhere as required by the Historical Monuments Act, 1968. 

The road project, which kicked off in May 2020, was expected to be completed this May. Construction works, however, currently stand at only 15 percent, with officials blaming the snail pace on unresolved land wrangles. Works and Transport minister Gen Katumba Wamala said they had given the contractors up to May 2025 to enable them to complete the work. He added that the majority of project affected persons (PAPs) had already received their compensation packages and the remaining few will be cleared soon.

Crying foul
Mr Fredrick Nsibambi, CCFU’s deputy executive director, said the felling of Nabukalu tree was the clearest indication yet that “we still have a long way to go to harmonise ‘modern’ development interventions with our indigenous knowledge systems.”

Mr Nsibambi told Monitor that its uprooting “illustrates our inability to build on our traditional cultural resources to achieve development that reflects our aspirations, identities and desires as Ugandans or Africans.”

According to Mr David Kalanzi—a cultural heritage consultant—a Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment (CHIA) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) should be carried out before constructing projects like roads or canals.

“The Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment enables you to find out if there are any sites, spots or monuments that are of cultural importance. You then mark out the important cultural resources or spots,” Mr Kalanzi said, adding, “Once they are identified, you have to discuss with the owners of these sites, spots or monuments. Some cultural sites may require a relocation ceremony. Once they are transferred to another place this will enable you to continue with your project.”

Mr Nsibambi said: “Cultural heritage is an important aspect of our identity, history and aspirations. In Uganda, a beautiful collage of 65 culturally diverse ethnic groups presents unique cultures reflected in varied traditional cultural institutions, cultural sites, languages, indigenous knowledge and skills, the creative and performing arts, crafts, dress and food. The country’s natural, cultural and historical landscapes and archaeological sites also showcase our cultural heritage.”

Mr Nsibambi said a tradeoff ought to be struck between urbanisation and “promoting our heritage.” 
He castigated the government for allocating “meagre resources (0.003 percent of the past three budgets) … to the cultural sector and [having] its activities clustered under the Department of Culture and Family Affairs under the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development and the Department of Museums and Monuments under the Ministry of Tourism Wildlife and Antiquities.”

Another challenge affecting the preservation and promotion of Uganda’s cultural heritage, as per Mr Nsibambi, is the evolution of the whole notion of a family.
“Increasingly, we see small nucleated units, rather than the extended families of old. Further, families are increasingly single-parent headed. The intergenerational transmission of values (including cultural values) is therefore impaired,” he reasoned.

Mr Nsibambi also added that the climate crisis has compounded matters, with “culturally important trees … threatened due to prolonged droughts” and “cultural sites such as Ekisahlalha kya Kororo in Kasese District and the historical buildings in Kilembe Town in Kasese … damaged due to flooding of the rivers as a result of melting snow on top of the Rwenzori Mountains.”

He warns that “the extractive industry” will disfigure the Albertine region, with natural habitats for flora and fauna “cleared for development.”