utilization remains lose and incapable of cementing the relationship between these
key parameters.
5 Conclusion
The discussion in this chapter was based on the case of Uganda and used the African
feminism perspective, particularly the motherism brand to analyze people’s right to
land and soil so that these resources can sustainably be utilized. The discussion
makes it clear that in Uganda, the concept of land and soil are synonymous, and
rights attached to either of them are acquired contemporaneously. Rights to land and
hence soil are based on two principles: jus soli (soil rights based on birth right
citizenship) and jus sanguinis (soil rights based on right of blood or familial lineage).
Citizenship, which is one of the criteria upon which land and soil rights are based,
is a construct of the legal regime informed by the ideology of patriarchy, which
creates social strata of women and men, and citizens and non-citizens and accords
each of them different land and soil rights. The land law regime in Africa does not
specifically provide for the unconditional jus soli (birth right citizenship), which
would grant every person born in a particular country automatic citizenship and right
to land and soil. The common soil rights in Africa are based on the principle of jus
sanguinis (right of blood or familial lineage), which must be traced to ascertain a
person’s right to land and hence soil. The fact that soil access rights in many of
African countries are based on the principle of jus sanguinius, denies many persons
automatic land and soil rights, and hence weakens the link between land and soil
rights and sustainable development.
Land policies and laws, including constitutions, constructed within the purview
of the western ideology of patriarchy ignore the rights of the African people and
cannot be relied upon as the best platform to engender sustainable development in
African based on harnessing the land and soils. Conclusively, therefore, without
African governments providing an environment where persons in their countries
have equal land and soil rights, it remains hypothetical and a fallacy to assume that
African soils can be utilized sustainably under the current land tenure legal regime.
The only avenue to rectify the situation on the ground is to use the lenses of African
feminism perspective, particularly the motherism brand to re-construct policies and
re-enact laws related to land ownership and soil utilization so that they laws accord
equal land and soil rights to the poor and rich, women and men and citizens and
non-citizens in a bid to effectively implement the principle of sustainable land and
soil management.
Based on the foregoing conclusions, it is, therefore, recommended that African
governments should: review their land regulatory policies and laws, including
constitutions, to be able to grant land and soil rights to all Africans based on the
principle of jus soli. In the case of Uganda, which was used as a case for this chapter,
the Judicature Act still requires English common law and doctrines of equity to be
152
G. Busingye
key parameters.
5 Conclusion
The discussion in this chapter was based on the case of Uganda and used the African
feminism perspective, particularly the motherism brand to analyze people’s right to
land and soil so that these resources can sustainably be utilized. The discussion
makes it clear that in Uganda, the concept of land and soil are synonymous, and
rights attached to either of them are acquired contemporaneously. Rights to land and
hence soil are based on two principles: jus soli (soil rights based on birth right
citizenship) and jus sanguinis (soil rights based on right of blood or familial lineage).
Citizenship, which is one of the criteria upon which land and soil rights are based,
is a construct of the legal regime informed by the ideology of patriarchy, which
creates social strata of women and men, and citizens and non-citizens and accords
each of them different land and soil rights. The land law regime in Africa does not
specifically provide for the unconditional jus soli (birth right citizenship), which
would grant every person born in a particular country automatic citizenship and right
to land and soil. The common soil rights in Africa are based on the principle of jus
sanguinis (right of blood or familial lineage), which must be traced to ascertain a
person’s right to land and hence soil. The fact that soil access rights in many of
African countries are based on the principle of jus sanguinius, denies many persons
automatic land and soil rights, and hence weakens the link between land and soil
rights and sustainable development.
Land policies and laws, including constitutions, constructed within the purview
of the western ideology of patriarchy ignore the rights of the African people and
cannot be relied upon as the best platform to engender sustainable development in
African based on harnessing the land and soils. Conclusively, therefore, without
African governments providing an environment where persons in their countries
have equal land and soil rights, it remains hypothetical and a fallacy to assume that
African soils can be utilized sustainably under the current land tenure legal regime.
The only avenue to rectify the situation on the ground is to use the lenses of African
feminism perspective, particularly the motherism brand to re-construct policies and
re-enact laws related to land ownership and soil utilization so that they laws accord
equal land and soil rights to the poor and rich, women and men and citizens and
non-citizens in a bid to effectively implement the principle of sustainable land and
soil management.
Based on the foregoing conclusions, it is, therefore, recommended that African
governments should: review their land regulatory policies and laws, including
constitutions, to be able to grant land and soil rights to all Africans based on the
principle of jus soli. In the case of Uganda, which was used as a case for this chapter,
the Judicature Act still requires English common law and doctrines of equity to be
152
G. Busingye