The bitter fight over the Tooro throne has escalated dramatically, with journalist and Tooro royal clan member Andrew Mwenda launching a detailed rebuttal to Queen Mother Best Kemigisa’s account of how King Oyo’s successor should be determined.
Mwenda says Kemigisa’s claim that he announced a decision by a “self-appointed group of clan members” is not only false but an insult to Tooro’s cultural institutions, insisting that the succession process was initiated by more than 100 members of the Babiito royal clan and conducted through a 21-member Royal Succession Committee.
His statement, released amid mounting tensions within the kingdom, also puts a giant question mark over the alleged son of the late King Oyo — saying the purported heir was presented to the succession committee without a photograph, with conflicting names and without details about his mother’s family in Tooro.
Mwenda’s intervention threatens to deepen an already extraordinary royal crisis unfolding just days before Oyo’s burial.
‘This is a gross insult to our kingdom’
Mwenda was responding directly to Kemigisa’s September 10 statement in which she accused “select clan members” of declaring their own king while her son’s body was still lying in the coffin.
Kemigisa described the move as being in disregard of Oyo’s will and an agreement reached with government representatives.
But Mwenda has rejected her characterization of the succession process.
“The QM says that I announced a decision of a ‘self appointed group of clan members’,” Mwenda wrote.
“This is a gross insult to our kingdom and its cultural institutions.”
According to Mwenda, Oyo died on August 26, 2026, after which a general meeting of the Babiito clan was held at Karuziika Palace in Fort Portal City on August 28.
He says more than 100 princes and princesses attended the meeting.
That gathering, according to Mwenda, selected 21 people to constitute the Royal Succession Committee, headed by the Musuuga — the Prince Regent or caretaker.
The committee began its work on August 31 with one objective: finding a new king.
Mwenda’s account therefore directly challenges the Queen Mother’s suggestion that the succession process was the work of a small, self-appointed group acting outside the kingdom’s established cultural structures.
The mystery of Oyo’s alleged son
But the most explosive part of Mwenda’s response concerns the purported son of King Oyo.
According to Mwenda, there had been no official or informal communication to the Babiito before Oyo’s death that he had fathered a child, let alone a son.
He says the succession committee considered four candidates:
- George Desmond Kamurasi, son of Prince Jimmy Mugenyi;
- A purported son of Oyo, initially called Jacob Oyo and later Jackson Oyo;
- George David Kamurasi, son of Prince Kato Rukidi; and
- Edward Rukiidi Kijanangoma, son of Prince Kijanangoma.
The alleged Oyo son was reportedly presented to the committee by Patrick Kawamara, the Queen Mother’s brother and a member of the succession committee.
Mwenda says Kawamara had been placed on the committee to represent the interests of the Queen Mother, traditionally referred to as Nyina Omukama Ow’empeeka.
But when the committee asked for evidence concerning the alleged heir, Mwenda says serious questions emerged.
No photograph. No family details. Two names.
Mwenda claims the committee asked Kawamara to produce a photograph of Oyo’s purported son.
He allegedly could not.
The committee then asked about the clan of the child’s mother.
Mwenda says Kawamara identified her as a Muhinda, but declined to disclose her family in Tooro when asked.
Mwenda further claims that none of Oyo’s relatives on his paternal side — the Babiito — had previously heard about the purported child.
The committee, according to his account, was therefore confronted with a candidate whose identity was allegedly unclear, whose name had reportedly changed from Jacob Oyo to Jackson Oyo, and for whom no photograph had been provided.
Mwenda says that because all the other candidates had been presented with photographs, the committee considered the circumstances surrounding the purported son dubious and removed him from consideration.
That allegation strikes at the heart of the succession dispute.
The Queen Mother says Oyo’s will provides a clear succession order.
Mwenda’s response is effectively: before a purported son can be treated as heir, the kingdom must first establish who he is, who his mother is and whether he qualifies under Tooro custom.
Kamurasi won the vote — 15 to 1
Mwenda also disputes the narrative surrounding the first candidate reportedly selected by the succession committee.
He says that after four days of deliberations, the committee conducted a secret ballot.
The result, according to him, was decisive.
George Kamurasi received 15 votes, while each of the other candidates received one vote.
Mwenda says he personally intended Kamurasi to become king.
However, he disputes claims circulating on social media that Kamurasi rejected the throne.
According to Mwenda, Kamurasi did not decline.
Instead, he requested time to consult his wife and business partners in London.
But, Mwenda says, the kingdom could not remain indefinitely without a successor and therefore proceeded to the next suitable candidate.
That process eventually produced the announcement of Edward Rukiidi Kijanangoma as king-elect.
The sudden shift from Kamurasi to Kijanangoma has been one of the major sources of confusion surrounding the succession.
Mwenda’s explanation suggests that the first choice remained undecided while Kamurasi sought time for consultations, prompting the clan to move on.
The September 8 palace meeting
Mwenda also provides a detailed account of a meeting at Karuziika Palace on Tuesday, September 8, involving the Queen Mother and Babiito representatives.
He says those present included Monsignor Mayombo, Father Oyo, Musuuga Charles Kamurasi, the Queen Mother’s brothers Patrick Kawamara and Misaki Kawamara, Mujaguzi, another brother and her younger sister.
According to Mwenda, the meeting became crucial because the Queen Mother reportedly refused to disclose details about Oyo’s purported son until his will was read.
“The QM said she was not going to disclose anything about Oyo’s purported son until the reading of his will,” Mwenda says.
The will was then read the following day before essentially the same group, although Princess Ruth Komuntale, Oyo’s sister and Batebe of Tooro, and Princess Margaret Komubaizi also attended.
It is what Mwenda says was contained in that document that has now become another major battleground.
‘The will only contains a hypothetical heir’
According to Mwenda, Oyo’s will was written on September 14, 2022.
But he says the document does not simply name a son as the automatic successor.
Instead, he describes it as containing “only a hypothetical heir.”
More importantly, Mwenda argues that Tooro customary succession does not automatically make every biological son of a king the next monarch.
He says there are customary requirements concerning the status of the child’s mother.
Mwenda’s argument is that if Oyo left a son, the kingdom must establish whether the child meets the customary requirements for succession — including the circumstances under which his mother was connected to the late king.
He stresses that his remarks should not be interpreted as accusing Oyo of having fathered a child under questionable circumstances.
“This is not to suggest that Oyo did any of this,” he says.
Rather, he says the issue is that Oyo was not officially married, meaning that if he left behind a son, the kingdom needs to know the identity and background of the child’s mother.
A direct challenge to the Queen Mother’s succession argument
Mwenda’s statement therefore presents a fundamentally different version of the succession crisis from the one advanced by Kemigisa.
The Queen Mother says the late king left a will that clearly established the succession order and that the clan subsequently ignored it.
Mwenda says the succession committee was properly constituted by the Babiito, considered the purported son but found his presentation inadequate, and selected candidates through a formal process.
The Queen Mother says the family is under siege and has been denied the freedom to mourn Oyo in peace.
Mwenda’s response focuses instead on the legitimacy of the cultural process and the unresolved questions surrounding the alleged heir.
The result is a stunning clash between the late king’s mother and the royal clan establishment over who has the authority to determine Tooro’s next monarch.
The throne fight is now bigger than Kijanangoma
The dispute is no longer simply about whether Kijanangoma should be king.
It now encompasses at least three competing questions:
Did Oyo leave a son?
Does the alleged son qualify to inherit the Tooro throne under customary law?
And did the Babiito succession committee have the authority to proceed with another candidate before those questions were conclusively resolved?
Mwenda’s statement suggests that the Babiito leadership believes the answer to the third question is yes.
Kemigisa’s statement suggests the opposite — that Oyo’s own wishes, contained in his will, should guide the succession.
And with the king’s burial approaching, neither side appears willing to retreat.
‘Let us bury my son’ versus ‘let us establish the heir’
The tragedy is that the dispute is unfolding at the precise moment when Tooro should be mourning.
Kemigisa has pleaded with the rival factions to put the throne fight aside and allow her to bury her son with dignity.
Mwenda, however, has now placed the spotlight firmly on the unanswered questions surrounding the alleged heir and the legitimacy of the succession process.
His statement has effectively thrown down a challenge to the Queen Mother’s version of events:
If there is an heir, prove his identity. If there is a will, establish exactly what it says. And if there is a customary succession process, explain why it should be discarded.
With Oyo’s funeral only days away, Tooro is heading into one of the most consequential moments in its recent history — with its royal family divided, its cultural institutions under scrutiny and its throne claimed through competing interpretations of custom, bloodline, will and legitimacy.
