President Yoweri Museveni has backed plans to transform Kampala’s historic City Square into a modern commercial complex featuring a hotel, shopping mall and other business facilities, escalating a dispute over the ownership and future of one of the capital’s remaining public green spaces.
The proposed redevelopment, championed by businessman Hassan Bulwadda, has drawn opposition from Kampala city leaders and renewed claims from businessman Hassan Basajjabalaba, who maintains that his company acquired rights to redevelop the land more than two decades ago.
Attorney General Sam Mayanja has dismissed Basajjabalaba’s claims, arguing that the lease offer he relies on was rescinded and that the property remains public land.
In an interview published by Daily Monitor on Thursday, October 22, Mayanja said an earlier lease arrangement did not confer permanent ownership of the two-acre site on Basajjabalaba or his company.
“A lease on public property does not confer permanent proprietary rights on a lessee,” Mayanja explained, adding that the offer had been cancelled and that the businessman had reportedly been compensated.
The Attorney General argued that the government should focus on modernising the city rather than revisiting what he described as a concluded matter.
How the City Square dispute reignited
The latest controversy followed a letter dated August 30, 2026, in which Museveni directed Minister for Kampala Capital City and Metropolitan Affairs Minsa Kabanda to examine Bulwadda’s proposal to redevelop City Square.
In the letter, Museveni said he had received a proposal from Bulwadda on August 18 seeking to transform approximately two acres of the prime city-centre land into a modern, environmentally friendly commercial complex powered by solar energy.
“Study the proposal, discuss with Kampala Capital City Authority and come back to me,” the President instructed Kabanda.
The proposal envisages a mixed-use development combining commercial retail spaces and hotel accommodation, alongside landscaped green areas and other amenities.
A ministerial committee comprising officials from several government institutions was subsequently established to examine the proposal’s legal, planning, environmental, security and administrative implications before a final decision is made.
According to earlier reports, the proposed complex could include a five-storey commercial building, a rooftop restaurant, parking facilities, fountains, landscaped areas and solar panels.
The government’s endorsement of the proposal has, however, intensified questions about whether a historic public space should be redeveloped for commercial purposes.
Basajjabalaba insists he owns the land
The dispute resurfaced in September when Basajjabalaba appeared before Parliament’s Committee on Commissions, Statutory Authorities and State Enterprises (COSASE), chaired by MP Muwada Nkunyingi.
He told the committee that his company, HABA Group, won a competitive tender in 2001 to redevelop City Square and paid the then Kampala City Council approximately Shs1.6 billion as a premium.
Basajjabalaba said the arrangement initially provided for a five-year lease, with a further 49-year sublease, and argued that his company remained entitled to the property or compensation following the cancellation of the deal.
He also maintained that his original design would have preserved the green space above the development while allowing commercial activities underneath.
The dispute is connected to wider compensation claims by HABA Group against the government over cancelled agreements involving public markets and other properties.
However, Mayanja has maintained that the lease offer was rescinded and that the government is not obliged to treat the cancelled arrangement as giving Basajjabalaba continuing ownership rights. The competing claims and documents have also attracted parliamentary scrutiny.
Lord Mayor, opposition reject redevelopment plan
The proposed redevelopment has faced resistance from Kampala Lord Mayor Ronald Balimwezo, who argues that City Square should remain an open public space for recreation, environmental protection and public gatherings.
Balimwezo has cited the square’s historical significance and the need to preserve Kampala’s remaining green spaces, warning that commercial construction could permanently alter the character of the city centre.
The Leader of the Opposition in Parliament, Joel Ssenyonyi, has also questioned why Parliament was not directly involved in discussions concerning the proposed redevelopment of public land.
Speaking in Parliament on September 30, Ssenyonyi warned against allowing the project to proceed without adequate public scrutiny, pointing to previous controversial public-land development projects in Kampala.
Government, however, previously clarified that Museveni’s August directive was an instruction to assess the proposal and provide advice, rather than a final decision to allocate the land.
A historic public space at the centre of the debate
City Square, also known as Constitution Square, dates back to 1903, when it was established as Government Square. It has served as a public gathering place and is recognised as a protected national monument.
Critics of the redevelopment argue that the space provides environmental benefits in a densely built-up central business district, helping with urban cooling, stormwater management and public recreation.
Supporters of the proposal argue that a modern commercial complex could improve the city’s appearance, attract investment, create employment and introduce more organised green spaces and environmentally friendly infrastructure.
Bulwadda has said funding for the project has been secured and that his plans include retaining and expanding landscaped areas. The final outcome, however, depends on the government’s review and the applicable legal and planning requirements.
Museveni’s backing gives the redevelopment proposal significant political momentum, but the dispute over Basajjabalaba’s alleged lease rights and objections to commercialising a historic public space remain central to the controversy.
The decisive question is whether the government can proceed with the proposed investment while resolving the competing claims and addressing concerns over the legal protection, environmental value and public ownership of City Square.
