Compulsory Land Acquisition for Government Projects in Uganda: Balancing Public Interest and Fair Compensation under Article 26 of the Constitution: A Case Study of EACOP

Compulsory acquisition enables infrastructure development but transfers concentrated losses to the people whose land is taken. This article examines how Uganda's constitutional and statutory framework balances those losses against public interest, using the East African Crude Oil Pipeline as a documentary case study. It applies doctrinal legal analysis to Article 26, the revised land legislation and selected Ugandan and comparative authorities, alongside a critical review of publicly available project and civil-society evidence. The analysis finds that public purpose and prior, fair and adequate compensation are cumulative requirements. A project's public importance cannot substitute for lawful acquisition procedures, and a high reported payment rate cannot establish the adequacy of individual awards or the restoration of livelihoods. Supreme Court authority protects prior compensation, while recent EACOP-related High Court decisions demonstrate the practical importance and constitutional sensitivity of court deposits where direct payment is contested or difficult. Published accounts also use different dates, populations and methods, limiting project-wide conclusions about household welfare. The article proposes a parcellevel compliance record, transparent and updated valuation, effective representation of different land interests, carefully conditioned compensation deposits and independent livelihood monitoring. It concludes that the constitutional balance is best achieved through verifiable safeguards before possession and accessible remedies afterwards, with project delivery assessed alongside the position of affected households.