FORT PORTAL — The succession dispute that has followed the death of Omukama Oyo Nyimba Kabamba Iguru Rukidi IV has revived an old question in Tooro: who has the authority to determine who sits on the kingdom’s throne when the king dies?
Oyo, who became Tooro’s Omukama at the age of three in 1995 and died on August 27, 2026, aged 34, was succeeded in a controversial process by his cousin, Prince Edward Rukidi Kijanangoma, after the Babiito Royal Succession Committee rejected an alternative claim that Oyo had left behind a biological son named in his will.
The dispute has since taken a legal turn after Attorney General Sam Mayanja advised President Yoweri Museveni that Oyo’s will should guide the succession and that its validity can only be challenged in court. He also advised that the traditional ritual of throwing nine coffee beans into the deceased king’s grave should be suspended until the succession question is resolved.
But the controversy is not without historical precedent.
The history of the Tooro monarchy shows that disputes over royal succession are almost as old as the kingdom itself.
Tuko Pamoja docuseries paints a clearer picture
“Tuko Pamoja: Tooro” documentary segment traces the origins of Tooro, its relationship with Bunyoro-Kitara, the rebellion of Prince Kaboyo Kasusunkwanzi, the succession struggles that followed, the reconquest of Tooro by Omukama Kabaleega, and the restoration of the kingdom under Kasagama.
The segment also examines the 19th-century conflicts between Tooro princes and the events that eventually brought British intervention into the kingdom.
Some of the questions raised by that history remain relevant today: How has Tooro historically handled succession? What happened when princes disagreed over the throne? And how did those disputes shape the kingdom?
Tuko Pamoja was written by journalist Rogers Atukunda and directed by Dr Cindy Evelyn Magara, a film academic and lecturer at Makerere University. The 13-part documentary explores the historical and cultural connections among Uganda’s peoples and kingdoms.
“Tuko Pamoja: Tooro” has been airing on UBC TV, Thursdays at 9:00pm since September 3, 2026. More episodes are available on the Nyatiflix app.
The history of Tooro did not begin with the current succession dispute. And understanding where the kingdom came from may help us understand why its history continues to matter.
A kingdom born from rebellion
Tooro emerged as an independent kingdom in the 19th century after Prince Kaboyo Kasusunkwanzi, later known as Omukama Olimi I, rebelled against his father, Omukama Kyebambe III Nyamutukura of Bunyoro-Kitara.
Historical accounts place the rebellion in the 1820s, with the independent kingdom formally emerging around 1830. The Tooro Kingdom itself traces its origins to Kaboyo, who became its first Omukama.
According to historian James F. Wilson’s account cited by Daily Monitor, Kaboyo’s rebellion was encouraged by Kasoro ka Kyahurwa, a local chief who wanted him to replace Kyebambe’s daughters, Bagaya and Mpanja, who were governing the area. An army of Bakonjo and Batooro defeated Kyebambe’s forces, allowing Kaboyo to establish his authority in Tooro.
That origin is significant to the present dispute because Tooro’s first succession was not simply a peaceful transfer of power from father to son. The kingdom itself was born out of a challenge to an existing royal authority.
Kaboyo’s death triggers the first succession war
Kaboyo ruled for decades before his death around 1861.
His death produced Tooro’s first recorded major succession struggle.
His son Kazana Ruhaga, who succeeded him, reportedly summoned rival princes to the palace. According to Wilson’s account, several princes were killed on their way to the royal residence, while Prince Nyaika Kasunga escaped after learning of the plot.
Nyaika subsequently challenged Kazana, overthrew him and seized the throne.
Kazana fled to Nkore, raised an army and returned to fight Nyaika but was defeated. He eventually fled to Rusekere, where Nyaika pursued and killed him, according to the historical account cited by Daily Monitor.
The conflict established a pattern that would repeatedly appear in Tooro’s 19th-century history: a succession was not merely a question of lineage. It involved royal princes, maternal clans, military alliances and competing centres of support.
Wilson, as quoted by Daily Monitor, observed that maternal clans were particularly important in determining the success or failure of competing princes.
Nyaika and Kato Rukidi fight for the throne
Nyaika’s own reign was interrupted by another challenge from within the royal family.
Prince Kato Rukidi rebelled against Nyaika and secured military assistance from Buganda. Nyaika was forced to flee, while Kato briefly occupied the throne.
Nyaika later returned after Kato’s Buganda allies had withdrawn. He attacked Kato, killed him and reclaimed the throne.
As a result, Nyaika became both the third and fifth Omukama of Tooro, with Kato Rukidi’s brief reign between his two periods on the throne.
The episode demonstrates that the succession struggle was not necessarily settled permanently by the installation of a king. A defeated prince could return with new allies and reverse the outcome.
From royal succession to war with Bunyoro
The instability eventually extended beyond the royal family and became intertwined with the relationship between Tooro and Bunyoro-Kitara.
Nyaika’s forces became involved in conflicts over territory, cattle and political authority. One particularly important episode involved cattle belonging to Omukama Kabaleega of Bunyoro.
According to the historical account used in Tuko Pamoja: Tooro, Nyaika raided Kabaleega’s cattle, including his favourite cow, Rwakoma. Kabaleega responded by sending an army into Tooro.
The Bunyoro forces defeated Nyaika’s troops, although they did not capture him. The conflict was followed by further instability in Tooro.
After Nyaika’s death, Tooro fractured further. His son Olimi Mukabirere controlled one part while Prince Mukarusa declared himself ruler of Busongora.
Kabaleega subsequently intervened militarily and reconquered Tooro, capturing Mukabirere and eventually pursuing Mukarusa into the Rwenzori region.
Tooro was incorporated into Bunyoro until its restoration in 1891 under Daudi Kasagama Kyebambe IV. The official Tooro Kingdom history also records the 19th century as a period of conflict and changing political authority before the kingdom regained independence in 1891.
Kasagama and the return of the monarchy
Kasagama’s route to the throne was itself shaped by the earlier conflicts.
After the fall of Tooro, members of the royal family sought refuge outside the kingdom. Kasagama eventually returned with British backing and was installed as Omukama in 1891.
His reign, from 1891 to 1928, marked a period in which the kingdom sought to stabilise royal authority after decades of violent succession disputes.
Daily Monitor‘s historical account describes Kasagama’s approach as one based increasingly on balancing competing clans and using appointments and alliances to consolidate the monarchy.
The succession wars had therefore produced an important lesson for the institution: the survival of the monarchy depended not only on identifying a prince, but also on managing the networks of clans and royal interests surrounding him.
The will of Rukidi III
The question of a king’s written wishes is also not entirely new to Tooro.
When Omukama George David Matthew Kamurasi Rukidi III died in 1965, his will reportedly named his son Patrick David Matthew Kaboyo as his successor. It also specified alternative successors if Kaboyo died or became unable to take the throne.
Kaboyo succeeded his father as Olimi III and ruled until his death in 1995. His son Oyo then became Omukama at the age of three.
That history gives particular significance to the present argument over Oyo’s will.
According to Attorney General Mayanja’s September 12 legal opinion, Oyo’s will, dated September 14, 2022, states that if he died with a son lawfully recognised as his biological son, that son would be his heir to the Tooro throne.
The will also reportedly names Prince Komwiswa Yomeri, son of Omusuuga Charles Kamurasi, as an alternative successor if Oyo had no son able to assume the throne.
The Oyo question
The current dispute therefore sits at the intersection of custom, royal lineage, clan authority and written instructions left by a deceased king.
The Babiito succession committee selected Prince Edward Rukidi Kijanangoma after another candidate, George Desmond Kamurasi, initially emerged as its preferred choice but asked for more time to consult his family. The committee subsequently proceeded with Kijanangoma.
Oyo’s mother, Queen Mother Best Kemigisa, and his sister, Princess Ruth Komuntale, opposed the process and cited the late king’s will.
The existence and identity of Oyo’s alleged son have also become central to the dispute. Reuters reported that Oyo’s Prime Minister Calvin Armstrong Rwomiire announced after the king’s death that Oyo had left behind a prince whose identity would be formally revealed at an appropriate time. The identity of the child had not been publicly established when the succession committee selected Kijanangoma.
The Attorney General’s intervention has now shifted the immediate question from who the clan has chosen to whether Oyo’s will is valid and, if valid, what legal and customary effect it has on succession.
Mayanja said a valid will should be respected and that any challenge to its validity should be determined by a court.
History repeating itself?
There is a striking historical parallel, although the circumstances are different.
Tooro’s first Omukama, Kaboyo, became king after rebelling against his father.
His successor, Kazana, faced a rebellion from his brother Nyaika.
Nyaika later lost the throne to Kato Rukidi and then reclaimed it.
The kingdom subsequently fractured between rival princes, became embroiled in conflict with Bunyoro and eventually lost its independence before Kasagama restored the monarchy.
Even after the violent 19th century, questions about succession continued to be managed through royal lineage, wills, clan structures and carefully negotiated arrangements. Daily Monitor notes that Tooro’s clans remained central to determining royal succession well into the 20th century.
What distinguishes the Oyo dispute is that the traditional succession mechanism has produced one answer while the late king’s reported written instructions appear to point in another direction.
The 1999 Tooro Kingdom Constitution provided for a successor to be nominated under specified circumstances, but Oyo suspended the constitution in 2021 as amendments were being pursued. The Attorney General has said the constitution remains suspended and that succession must instead be considered under Uganda’s Constitution, the Institution of Traditional or Cultural Leaders Act and Tooro customs and traditions.
For now, Prince Edward Rukidi Nyabongo I has begun traditional rituals associated with the kingship. But the Attorney General’s opinion indicates that the succession question itself remains unresolved.
The irony of Tooro’s history is that a kingdom born from a succession-related rebellion has repeatedly had to confront the same fundamental question: when royal lineage produces competing claims, who ultimately has the authority to decide which claimant becomes Omukama?
In 19th-century Tooro, such questions were sometimes settled by armies, alliances and exile. In 2026, the competing institutions are the royal clan, the royal family, customary authorities and, potentially, the courts.
That is the historical context in which the dispute over King Oyo’s succession is now unfolding.
