utilize the land, those that utilize the land, especially for agriculture purposes, have
little stake in the land. The latter may over-exploit the soil without taking into
account the need to conserve it, because they are not its recognized owners.
The uniqueness of African feminism in the drive to deconstruct and reconstruct land
and soil rights lies in the fact that it is largely built on indigenous models of African
motherism (love), African womanism (Queen mother), African femalism (greater
respect for the female body), and snail-sense feminism (slow, but sure—women’s
adaptation strategy to patriarchal systems).
29 The implications of this theoretical
analysis is that much as women and non-citizens are denied automatic access to land
and hence soil rights by the patriarchy society, they nevertheless remain a potential
force that can be relied upon to sustainably utilize the soil, if given a legal authority to
do so. It is a fact that today; many industries and plantation farms in Uganda are owned
by non-Ugandans, initially Indians of British origin, and now increasingly the Chinese.
African feminism paradigm being a medium through which the socio-legal
phenomena that regulates land and soil rights is viewed and interpreted equally
helps to critique the current move by contemporary African leaders to provide
solutions to African specific problems, largely basing on harnessing the soil.
30
That is because the vision of sustainable development of African leaders is riddled
with the western capitalist and exploitative paradigms that are not well integrated
into the African social fabric.
The so proclaimed paradigm of African solution to African problems is largely
financed by the Western donor community whose hidden interest is to suffocate the
indigenous African womanism paradigm that loves and cares for the African land
and soil.
That remains true much as paradigm of ‘an African solution for African problems’ appears to front the human rights regime reminiscent in the Western ideologies.
31 The latter cannot be accommodated within the African society without
appropriate reconstruction measures capable of making it African use friendly.
That thinking, however, provides a window of hope because it shows that Africans
are aware that they are endowed with capacity to meritoriously reason and ably
provide their own perspectives of the factual socio-legal phenomena regarding
access to land and soil rights.
Together with the African feminism perspective, the African paradigm of ‘African
solution to African problems’ may therefore, cautiously be relied upon to provide
possible solutions to the inequalities in the romanticized land tenurial systems created
by the western patriarchy ideology during the colonial era to regulate access to soil
rights. In this respect, motherism brings on board dynamics of rebuilding society in
29 Nkealah (2016) and Ezenwa-Ohaeto (2015).
30 Mays (2003).
31 Chirisa et al. (2014).
African Feminism, Land Tenure and Soil Rights in Africa: A Case of Uganda
139
little stake in the land. The latter may over-exploit the soil without taking into
account the need to conserve it, because they are not its recognized owners.
The uniqueness of African feminism in the drive to deconstruct and reconstruct land
and soil rights lies in the fact that it is largely built on indigenous models of African
motherism (love), African womanism (Queen mother), African femalism (greater
respect for the female body), and snail-sense feminism (slow, but sure—women’s
adaptation strategy to patriarchal systems).
29 The implications of this theoretical
analysis is that much as women and non-citizens are denied automatic access to land
and hence soil rights by the patriarchy society, they nevertheless remain a potential
force that can be relied upon to sustainably utilize the soil, if given a legal authority to
do so. It is a fact that today; many industries and plantation farms in Uganda are owned
by non-Ugandans, initially Indians of British origin, and now increasingly the Chinese.
African feminism paradigm being a medium through which the socio-legal
phenomena that regulates land and soil rights is viewed and interpreted equally
helps to critique the current move by contemporary African leaders to provide
solutions to African specific problems, largely basing on harnessing the soil.
30
That is because the vision of sustainable development of African leaders is riddled
with the western capitalist and exploitative paradigms that are not well integrated
into the African social fabric.
The so proclaimed paradigm of African solution to African problems is largely
financed by the Western donor community whose hidden interest is to suffocate the
indigenous African womanism paradigm that loves and cares for the African land
and soil.
That remains true much as paradigm of ‘an African solution for African problems’ appears to front the human rights regime reminiscent in the Western ideologies.
31 The latter cannot be accommodated within the African society without
appropriate reconstruction measures capable of making it African use friendly.
That thinking, however, provides a window of hope because it shows that Africans
are aware that they are endowed with capacity to meritoriously reason and ably
provide their own perspectives of the factual socio-legal phenomena regarding
access to land and soil rights.
Together with the African feminism perspective, the African paradigm of ‘African
solution to African problems’ may therefore, cautiously be relied upon to provide
possible solutions to the inequalities in the romanticized land tenurial systems created
by the western patriarchy ideology during the colonial era to regulate access to soil
rights. In this respect, motherism brings on board dynamics of rebuilding society in
29 Nkealah (2016) and Ezenwa-Ohaeto (2015).
30 Mays (2003).
31 Chirisa et al. (2014).
African Feminism, Land Tenure and Soil Rights in Africa: A Case of Uganda
139