Issue and Opposition: The East Madi Wildlife Reserve, northern Uganda, which stretches across 320 square miles of area (surrounding Apaa village) was inhabited by thousands of Ugandans for generations. This land was also their source of food production and livelihood. The villagers for whom this was ancestral land, protested against the government’s decision to zoning it as a reserve forest. The government actors such as forest rangers and soldiers tried various coercive techniques to oust the residents from this area. These techniques included burning down and damaging almost 900 homes, destroying cultivated crops, and stealing livestock. Women of Apaa village participated in a dilemma action to protest against the Ugandan government. This was not the first time that the Apaa residents were forced to migrate from their ancestral land. Uganda was a British colony. During the British, Apaa villagers were forced to displace as a public health strategy to control “sleeping sickness.” In the 1990s, wars compelled many Apaa villagers to leave their land and migrate for safety. The villagers started populating Apaa once again from 2008 onward but the government’s decision of changing the status of the area to reserve forest posed a big challenge for the returning villagers. Because these villagers had been uprooted several times, most of them had no proof of customary land rights over their ancestral land. In the absence of these proofs and title deeds, the government had the upper hand in the situation. This dilemma action was one of the many protests against the government decision impacting the habitats and livelihoods of Apaa villagers.
Dilemma Action: Protesting against the government’s decision, a group of elderly women in the village participated in public disrobing in front of government officials and community members.
Outcome: As a result of this dilemma action and other actions by the Apaa villagers, the Ugandan government offered 370 affected families 10 million Ugandan shillings (about $2,700), plus 20 bags of cement and 20 iron sheets to rebuild their homes as compensation for rehabilitation. However, the government compensation only covered a small number of households considering there were at least 2400 households (and a population of 13000) that were affected by the government decision. Currently, the decision to evict is on hold awaiting the result of an ongoing discussion under a parliamentary committee.