Constitutional changes were enacted in Uganda in a bid to foster greater unity between the territories of Uganda and prepare it for independence.

These moves caused friction, particularly between the British administration and Buganda. Speaking in the Commons, the British Secretary of State for the Colonies Oliver Lyttelton, informed the House that the government was withdrawing its recognition of the Kabaka of Buganda:

“It is with great regret that I have to inform the House that Her Majesty’s Government have been obliged to withdraw recognition from the Kabaka, the Native Ruler of Buganda, which is a Province of the Uganda Protectorate.

The relations between Her Majesty’s Government and Buganda are regulated by an Agreement signed in 1900. This Agreement provides, among other things, that the Kingdom of Buganda shall rank as a Province of the Protectorate and that the Kabaka, Chiefs and people shall co-operate loyally with Her Majesty’s Government in the organisation and administration of the Kingdom. The Kabaka has recently repudiated these obligations.

In August this year the Kabaka addressed a letter to the Governor in which he put forward two requests. The first purpose of the letter was to express his opposition to East African Federation; the requests were for transfer of Buganda affairs from the Colonial Office to the Foreign Office and for a time-limit for independence of Buganda within the Commonwealth. Before my reply could be given, these same two requests were presented in a memorandum attached to a resolution opposing federation adopted by the Lukiko or Council of Buganda. The Lukiko is an advisory body to the Kabaka and pays the closest attention to his wishes.

I discussed these requests with the Governor, who came to London for the purpose. I then sent the Kabaka a reply. On the question of federation, I had no difficulty in removing his fears and subject to one small amendment, to which I readily agreed, he expressed himself satisfied with the assurances he was given. In my reply I also explained that it was inappropriate for the affairs of Buganda to be handled by the Foreign Office; I finally explained carefully the reasons why Her Majesty’s Government could not contemplate the separation of Buganda from the rest of the Protectorate. These reasons are set out fully in the Governor’s statement, which has been issued in Uganda, but in brief they showed that such a step would be against the interests of all the peoples of the Protectorate including the Baganda themselves.

The Kabaka informed the Governor of his intention of publicly opposing Her Majesty’s Government on this subject—this despite his obligations under the Agreement and despite the fact that he, jointly with the Governor, in a statement issued in March last had affirmed the need for the future development of the Protectorate as a unitary state and of Buganda as a component part of that State. The Kabaka further declared his intention of refusing to nominate members to represent Buganda on the new Legislative Council to be set up early next year. If Buganda were without representation, this would deal a severe blow at the plans for increasing the number of African members on that Council and would have left Buganda without representation.

From this position the Kabaka has stubbornly refused to move. The Governor used every possible means to persuade him to honour his obligations to Her Majesty’s Government and not to default from his statements of last March. He has had five long interviews with him during the last six weeks. The Governor made it perfectly clear that his declared intention to break his solemn obligations and oppose Her Majesty’s Government might result in the gravest consequences. In a last attempt to avoid the action which has had to be taken, last Wednesday I myself addressed a personal message to the Kabaka, the text of which I will circulate in the Official Report.

This was given to him at an interview with the Governor on Friday last. It was all to no avail. After giving him three further days for reflection, the Governor again saw him this morning and gave him a last chance to change his mind. He refused to do so. Thereupon the Governor, with my authority, informed him that, in view of his determined opposition to the policy of Her Majesty’s Government, recognition would be withdrawn. His continued presence in Uganda would be a threat to public safety—[Hon. Members: “Oh!”]—and accordingly he will not be permitted to reside in Uganda. The Kabaka is now on his way to England by air. He will be free to live where he likes outside Uganda and an appropriate financial settlement will be made for this.

The Governor has declared a state of emergency in Buganda as a precautionary measure. I sincerely hope that this unhappy event will be accepted calmly and with understanding by the people of Uganda and that the Lukiko will in due course elect a new Kabaka who is prepared to co-operate with Her Majesty’s Government according to the terms of the Agreement.

The necessity for this step is all the more deplorable since under the enlightened and energetic leadership of the Governor, Sir Andrew Cohen, the Uganda Protectorate has been making great strides in the economic, social, and political fields. Through political reform both in central and local government, through the reorganisation of the cotton and coffee industries and through the expansion of education, much has been and is being done to advance the Africans in these fields. We must ensure that today’s events will not endanger the progress or future of the peoples of Uganda.”

Source: Hansard HC Deb. vol. 521 cols. 781-783, 30 Nov 1953