The recent Ugandan court ruling to remove British colonial monuments and rename streets in the capital, Kampala, is a significant act of decolonial resistance, challenging the lingering presence of imperialist histories in public spaces (Campaigners celebrate court ruling to ‘decolonise’ Kampala, 4 March). It is great to see this positive outcome from the five-year campaign. The court ruling combats the persistence of colonial power structures in knowledge, culture and governance. I believe that decolonisation must extend beyond political independence to reshape how societies remember and represent their histories.
I disagree with the critique by Nicholas Opiyo, who says these colonial monuments should remain and serve as “a constant reminder of our past”. The problem with erasure is that it washes over past injustices and, in this light, I can see his desire for colonial history to remain visible. While this perspective acknowledges the importance of historical memory, it risks maintaining colonial power structures under the guise of passive remembrance.
By renaming streets and removing monuments, campaigners assert Uganda’s right to define its own historical and cultural landscape rather than continuing to honour figures associated with violence, exploitation and imperial dominance. This aligns with decolonial efforts globally, where former colonies reassess public commemorations that legitimise colonial oppression. As theorists such as Walter Mignolo and Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o argue, true decolonisation requires dismantling epistemic and symbolic forms of colonial control, including how history is memorialised.
Ultimately, the ruling is a step towards reclaiming Ugandan historical agency, shifting from imposed colonial commemorations to a heritage that reflects indigenous dignity and sovereignty.
Dina Ahmed
St Albans, Hertfordshire
