Opinion | By Andrew Irumba Katusabe
Muli bantu babi muno Ruhanga ali mukubanika misana tuku tuku.
For more than three decades, Musuuga Kamurasi has stood at the centre of Tooro’s royal institution, carrying a responsibility that many may not fully appreciate.
Since the reign of the late Omukama Oyo Nyimba Kabamba Iguru Rukidi IV began in 1995, Kamurasi has been widely regarded by his supporters as one of the strongest shields around the young King and the institution of the Babiito.
He made a commitment to protect his brother’s son and, for years, remained in that role through periods of uncertainty, controversy and internal disagreements surrounding the kingdom.
But today, a difficult question must be asked: Who protected the man who spent decades protecting the throne?
The question becomes even more painful when one looks at the circumstances under which Musuuga has lived.
There are claims that while other royal offices received substantial financial support, Musuuga’s office was left without a dedicated allocation for years. Those claims deserve a transparent explanation from the relevant authorities because Musuuga is not simply another royal figure. He is the head of the Babiito ruling clan and occupies a position of considerable historical and cultural significance within Tooro.
If these allegations are correct, then Tooro has a serious institutional problem that cannot be hidden behind ceremonies, titles or speeches.
How can an institution expect one of its principal custodians to carry enormous responsibility while denying his office the resources necessary to function with dignity?
And now, a simple gesture has exposed the bigger question.
Friends have reportedly come to Musuuga’s aid by presenting him with a vehicle. The gesture is welcome, but it should also force Tooro’s leadership to look in the mirror.
Why should friends have to step in to provide basic support to a senior royal figure after decades of service to the kingdom?
The issue is not merely the vehicle.
The issue is dignity.
It is about whether the people who have spent years talking about protecting the kingdom’s heritage also remember the people who have personally carried that heritage on their shoulders.
Even the physical appearance of Musuuga in recent public engagements has prompted discussion among Tooro subjects. Some have interpreted the renewed sense of hope surrounding him as evidence that what he needed was not extravagance, but recognition, support and the knowledge that his contribution mattered.
That is a powerful lesson for any institution.
Leadership is not only about protecting an office. It is also about protecting the people who serve that office.
There have also been allegations regarding the welfare and living conditions of Musuuga and the support available to him from members of his immediate family. These are deeply personal matters and should not be turned into political ammunition without giving those concerned an opportunity to respond.
But they raise an unavoidable broader question: Has Musuuga been adequately supported by the institution he helped preserve?
Then comes the issue of money.
Claims have circulated concerning government funds reportedly received in connection with Tooro-related activities and allegations that only part of the money was transferred to the kingdom’s official account. These are serious financial claims and should not be treated as established facts without documentary evidence and responses from those accused.
If public or kingdom resources are involved, however, the answer should be simple: open the books.
Let Tooro subjects know how much was received, where it was deposited, how much was transferred to the official kingdom account, what was spent, and who authorised the expenditure.
Accountability should not frighten anyone who has nothing to hide.
There are now ambitious conversations about preserving the legacy of the late Omukama Oyo through projects such as memorial initiatives, museums, a cancer hospital and a stadium.
Those projects could potentially serve generations of Tooro people.
But there must be a clear institutional framework for them.
If projects are genuinely intended to benefit Tooro Kingdom and its people, then questions of ownership, accountability, management and reporting must be settled from the beginning. They should not become private fiefdoms controlled by a few individuals under the banner of royal legacy.
Oyo’s legacy belongs to history and to the people of Tooro. It should not become a vehicle for financial opacity.
The same principle applies to the kingdom itself.
Tooro cannot continue celebrating its history while neglecting the people who have spent their lives defending that history.
Musuuga Kamurasi may have his weaknesses, as every human being does. But after decades of service, he deserves dignity, institutional recognition and an honest conversation about the support given to his office.
The question is no longer whether friends can buy him a car.
The question is why friends had to do it in the first place.
And to the custodians of Tooro’s institutions, the message is simple:
Do not wait until another royal elder is struggling before remembering his value.
Build institutions that respect service while people are still alive to benefit from that respect.
If Tooro is truly entering a new chapter after the passing of Omukama Oyo, then this is the moment to confront uncomfortable questions, open the books, strengthen accountability and restore dignity to every institution and royal office that serves the kingdom.
Because protecting the throne should never mean forgetting the people who protected it.
I speak what others fear…!
