Mukono Municipality is facing growing scrutiny over the emergence of a makeshift market structure at Ssaza, with residents, vendors, and stakeholders questioning whether due legal procedures were followed in its establishment and whether the development complies with national market regulations.
The structure, which has rapidly taken shape in the area, is already being interpreted by sections of the community as a new market site. However, key questions remain unanswered about its authorization, ownership, and long-term management, raising broader concerns about transparency, compliance, and the safety of vendors who may eventually be relocated there.
At the center of the debate is whether the municipality followed the legal framework outlined under the Markets Act, 2023, which sets strict requirements for establishing both public and private markets in Uganda.
According to Section 4 of the Markets Act, 2023, a local authority may only establish a public market through a formal resolution, and must first conduct a series of mandatory assessments.
These include determining the physical location, verifying land ownership, ensuring availability of funds, categorizing the market, defining user rights, and confirming compliance with the Physical Planning Act, 2010 and other relevant laws.
The law further requires that such processes be grounded in proper planning and legal authorization, including stakeholder consultation where necessary.
For private markets, Section 6 of the same Act requires an applicant to formally seek authorization from the local authority, providing detailed documentation such as land ownership evidence, technical plans, infrastructure designs, and other regulatory approvals.
The local authority must then either approve or reject the application within 30 days, giving reasons for refusal where applicable.
It is against this legal backdrop that concerns are now being raised over the Ssaza structure.
Questions Over Authorization and Process
In a written inquiry to the Town Clerk of Mukono Municipality, Francis Byabagambi, questions were raised about whether the construction of the Ssaza structure was officially sanctioned and whether due process for gazetting a market was followed.
The inquiry also sought clarification on whether the municipality publicly advertised the opportunity for interested developers or stakeholders to participate in establishing the market, as is commonly required under transparent public procurement and development procedures.
Additionally, concerns were raised about earlier municipal plans to gazette land at Tivoli Gardens as a temporary relocation site for vendors during the redevelopment of the Kame market. That process, according to sources familiar with the matter, appears to have stalled without clear explanation.
Further information suggests that there may be intentions within the municipality to require vendors to first occupy the Ssaza market once completed or operational, though this has not been officially confirmed.
Crucially, questions remain about the governance structure of the new market—specifically whether it will be directly managed by Mukono Municipality or placed under the control of a private operator.
When contacted for clarification, the Town Clerk reportedly indicated that he would first need to make inquiries into the matter, despite being the municipality’s chief accounting and administrative officer responsible for overseeing such developments.
This response has itself raised further questions among stakeholders about institutional coordination and oversight within the municipality.
As one stakeholder questioned: If the Town Clerk is not aware of what is happening, then who exactly is managing the development process within the municipality?
Community Concerns Over Transparency
Residents and vendors in Ssaza and surrounding areas have expressed mixed reactions to the development. While some welcome the possibility of a new trading space, others fear the lack of clarity surrounding the project could lead to long-term administrative and economic complications.
The absence of clear public communication regarding the market’s status has fueled speculation that the project may have proceeded without full compliance with statutory requirements.
Under Uganda’s local governance framework, such developments are expected to follow structured planning processes that ensure accountability, transparency, and public participation.
Any deviation from these procedures risks undermining trust in local authorities and exposing communities to legal and operational uncertainty.
Risks of Informal or Illegally Established Markets
Urban planning experts warn that the establishment of markets outside formal legal frameworks can pose significant risks—not only to authorities but also to vendors and the wider community.
One of the primary concerns is lack of regulatory oversight, which can lead to unsafe construction standards. Without approved architectural plans and inspections, structures may be vulnerable to collapse, fire hazards, or poor drainage systems that increase the risk of flooding and disease outbreaks.
Another major issue is uncertain tenure for vendors. Traders operating in unregulated markets often lack legal protection, making them vulnerable to sudden evictions, arbitrary fee collection, or displacement without compensation.
There is also the risk of financial exploitation, particularly where private actors are involved without clear contractual agreements or oversight. Vendors may be charged arbitrary fees, stall rents, or service charges that are not standardized or legally regulated.
Public health officials also warn that unplanned markets often lack essential infrastructure such as waste disposal systems, sanitation facilities, and clean water access—conditions that can quickly turn trading spaces into public health hazards.
Furthermore, loss of municipal revenue accountability becomes a concern when market operations are not formally gazetted or managed under approved municipal systems. This can lead to leakage of public funds and disputes over revenue collection rights.
Governance and Institutional Accountability in Question
The situation at Ssaza has also highlighted broader governance concerns within Mukono Municipality. The apparent lack of clarity between technical officers, political leadership, and implementation teams raises questions about coordination in urban development projects.
Under the law, establishment of public markets requires a formal resolution by the local authority and adherence to multiple regulatory checks. However, the ongoing uncertainty suggests either procedural gaps or communication breakdowns within the administrative structure.
Stakeholders argue that such ambiguity undermines public confidence in municipal planning systems and may expose the local government to legal challenges if due process is found to have been violated.
The Tivoli Gardens Question and Vendor Relocation Plans
Compounding the issue is the unresolved question of vendor relocation. Earlier municipal discussions reportedly identified Tivoli Gardens as a temporary site for vendors affected by the redevelopment of Kame market.
However, the apparent stagnation of that plan has left vendors in limbo, with no clear transition strategy communicated to those affected.
The emerging suggestion that vendors may instead be directed to the Ssaza structure—without clarity on its legal status—has further deepened uncertainty among traders who depend on stable market access for their livelihoods.
For many vendors, predictability and legal recognition of their trading spaces are essential for business continuity, credit access, and long-term planning.
Call for Transparency and Legal Compliance
As questions mount, stakeholders are now calling for Mukono Municipality to provide clear and detailed explanations regarding the Ssaza market development.
Key among the demands is confirmation of whether the project was formally approved through a municipal resolution, whether it complies with the Markets Act, 2023, and whether all necessary planning and land ownership verifications were completed.
There are also calls for full disclosure on whether the market will be publicly or privately managed, and what mechanisms will be put in place to protect vendors from exploitation or arbitrary displacement.
Urban governance advocates emphasize that adherence to legal frameworks is not merely a procedural requirement but a safeguard for both economic stability and public safety.
The unfolding situation at Ssaza highlights a critical intersection between urban development, legal compliance, and community welfare. While the establishment of new markets is often a sign of economic growth and expanding trade opportunities, the process through which they are created is just as important as the outcome.
Without clear adherence to the Markets Act, 2023, and without transparent communication from responsible authorities, developments such as the Ssaza market risk becoming sources of confusion, legal dispute, and potential harm to the very communities they are intended to serve.
For now, residents and vendors remain in a state of uncertainty, awaiting official clarification from Mukono Municipality on a project that continues to raise more questions than answers.
ENDS.
