Looting the Karimojong’s: How the colonialists leti Karamoja  bleeding

In two of my previous writings, I have shown how colonial intrusion into Karamoja  left the sub region bleeding, causing some people in Karamoja to “look as if they  have reached a dead end on a one-way street in their own villages (manyattas).” As  an implementer of governance and accountability activities in Karamoja, I will, in  this article, explain why one may conclude that Karamoja was looted by the former British colonial rule. My starting point will be the early 1920s when colonial civil  administration began in Karamoja (Kabiito, 2021; Mukisa, 2025).  

As the colonialists gained control and began managing Karamoja affairs, they  viewed Karamoja’s livestock as a problem. In 1934, they developed a theory in  Karamoja that livestock was causing overgrazing, leading to soil erosion (Mamdani,  1982; Ocan, 1993; Muhereza, 1998). Without scientific evidence, a Karamoja  District Commissioner, R. D. Cordery, recommended a “compulsory livestock  reduction” program, which introduced the Karamoja Cattle Scheme (KCS). Under  the KCS, Karimojong’s were forced to sell their livestock to the government at a  lower price than in other areas like Buganda or Lango. The compulsory sale of cattle  through the Karamoja Cattle Scheme aimed to achieve three developmental goals:  (i) destocking and transitioning the pastoralists to a sedentary life, (ii) raising funds for the local colonial administration, and (iii) providing proteins (beef diet) for the  urban population (Quam cited in Okoth, 2023). However, Mamdan (1982) gives a  different opinion, stating that after grabbing the people’s land, the only way for the  colonialists to restore a balance between limited grazing pastures and livestock was  to seize the people’s cattle through the Karamoja Cattle Scheme. 

Based on the above, this is why I state that Karamoja was looted of its major  livestock resources leading to widespread suffering among the population. Firstly, if  the Karamoja Cattle Scheme was intended for development purposes, why was there  no visible development by 1962 when the British were transferring power to the  natives of Karamoja? Secondly, was the sedentary lifestyle necessary for the  nomadic pastoralists who were facing drought challenges in Karamoja?  Furthermore, the Annual Report of the Treasurer of Karamoja for the year 1934  shows that from the estimated tax revenue of £3,600 they received an excess of 

£1,650.15 (Mamdan,1982). But this was from a compulsory sale of cattle by the  Karimojong’s to the government. The final question is; did the colonial  administrators invest the surplus money in Karamoja affairs? If so, where and for  what specifically? In conclusion, without bias, I appeal to the British and their allies  to support the development agenda in Karamoja, rather than leaving the Karamoja  people to struggle in various forms of poverty. 

Ayub Mukisa (PhD) 

Executive Director. Karamoja Anti Corruption Coalition (KACC) Email: ayubmukisa@gmail.com