In a wide-range interview with The Investigator last night, Brig. Gen. Henry Isoke, the head of SHACU, rejects suggestions that the unit has been inactive or that ministers are taking over its mandate. He says the current crackdown is the product of cooperation between government institutions, with SHACU providing intelligence, investigations and follow-up while ministers exercise their administrative and political mandates.

The interview comes against the backdrop of a nationwide anti-corruption campaign led by Minister Barugahara and his deputy Justine Nameere, which has seen inspections of local government institutions, investigations ordered against officials, and a growing number of interdictions.

The campaign has so far covered districts including Moyo, Maracha, Pakwach, Mbale, Namisindwa, Bulambuli, Isingiro, Sembabule, Mitooma, Mbarara, Fort Portal, Rakai and Masaka. By August 18^th, reports indicated that 110 local government employees were facing disciplinary action over allegations ranging from ghost beneficiaries and procurement irregularities, to misuse of public funds, absenteeism and poorly implemented projects.

In Jinja, Barugahara ordered the Chief Administrative Officer, Lilian Nakamatte, to step aside and directed SHACU and the Inspectorate of Government to investigate allegations of financial mismanagement, procurement concerns and maladministration.

The campaign has also resulted in interdictions in Mitooma, Isingiro, Buhweju and other districts. In Ankole alone, at least 26 officials were reported to be facing interdiction following recommendations for SHACU to facilitate investigations. At Buhweju, SHACU conducted investigations into several senior officials, while separate inquiries were ordered into alleged misuse of road funds. The two ministers have repeatedly insisted that the campaign is intended to restore accountability and improve service delivery.

The Ministry of Local Government says their inspections, follow-ups and interventions are part of President Yoweri Museveni’s renewed anti-corruption drive. However, the campaign has also attracted calls for caution. The Deputy Inspector General of Government, Dr Patricia Achan Okiria, recently advised the ministers to ensure that their operations remain within the law and respect due process.

Against this background, Brig Gen Isoke spoke to The Investigator about the origins and mandate of SHACU, its record, the role of ministers in the current crackdown, allegations of selective arrests and the money the unit says it has saved for the government.

The Investigator: Gen Isoke, elaborate on the mandate of the State House Anti-Corruption Unit since its creation in 2018.

Brig Gen Henery Isoke: As you may be aware, it is the executive duty and responsibility of the President of Uganda, Gen Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, to ensure that the State is running efficiently. Corruption has been a great concern of the President right from the five-year protracted bush war. Fighting corruption is among the top priorities of the NRM government. In fact, it is Point number seven of the ten-point programme.

After the war, it was not a bed of roses because other parts of the country were not fully liberated. Northern Uganda, Eastern Uganda, West Nile and some parts of Western Uganda remained volatile. Because the President and his government were preoccupied with many other issues, including uniting and liberating the other parts of the country, vices such as corruption received less attention.

When the country was finally liberated, the President turned his attention to other challenges, corruption being one of the diseases for which he sought mechanisms to combat. Institutions such as the Criminal Investigations Directorate, the institutions responsible for ethics and integrity, and the Inspectorate of Government became more visible after the NRA had fully liberated the country.

These anti-corruption agencies converge under the Inter-Agency Forum. Our operations are coordinated to avoid duplication of roles. We meet, plan our work and consult each other. Uganda has made significant efforts in fighting corruption through institutional and legal frameworks, government policies and the commitment of the President towards zero tolerance to corruption.

Despite these efforts, Uganda continues to feature in global and regional reports as a country affected by corruption. It is against this background that the President, acting under Article 99(4) of the Constitution, established the State House Anti-Corruption Unit on December 10th 2018. The unit was created to coordinate citizens’ corruption complaints to the Presidency with the population and constitutionally mandated agencies, with a view to obtaining speedy resolution of those complaints. Therefore, our core mandate is to help the President fight all forms of corruption and corruption tendencies.

The Investigator: What is the strength of SHACU and how do your officers execute their work?

Gen Henery Isoke: Our human resource is very minimal. We are not more than 30. To be precise, we are 25 and all of us are housed here at headquarters. We do not have regional offices. What we do is consult with sister agencies that have regional presence.

We receive a lot of communication from Resident District Commissioners, District Police Commanders and regional officers of the Inspectorate of Government. The fact that we are limited in numbers does not mean we have fallen short of our mandate. The team I lead is highly motivated. They are cadres and patriots motivated by the desire to serve Uganda. Our budget is also very small, but we have not failed to execute our mandate.

We have a 24-hour call center programmed in all languages of Uganda. Our officers are always available to receive queries from all parts of the country, from Kabale to Kotido. Besides the call center, we have a clients’ relations desk here. As you have witnessed, our front desk is one of the busiest in Kampala. Our front desk manager receives everyone who walks in with a complaint or any other issue. Indeed, we are more agile, faster and swifter.

The Investigator: Give us some figures. How many corruption cases has SHACU handled since its inception?

Gen Henery Isoke: The cases are so many. This is my fourth year here. Since this unit was formed, it has handled more than 800,000 cases. We have arraigned about 900 suspects in court and secured 165 convictions. Those arraigned include public servants, who represent about 55 per cent, while private-sector workers, mostly engineers and lawyers, represent about 45 per cent. Most of the cases we have handled are land-related, accounting for about 31 per cent.

The Investigator: Why is Local Government Minister Balaam Barugahara doing something that your unit should have done long ago? Some members of the public think SHACU is doing nothing.

Gen Henery Isoke: It is not correct to say that Hon Balaam is doing our job. As I have said before, we are working as a team. Following a directive by the President, Balaam responded very fast because the Local Government Ministry has a lot of corruption tendencies. Balaam is moving swiftly to clean the ministry, and that is a very big action. He is using our intelligence. Indeed, he moves where we have already conducted intelligence. We have strategized this with him and we are not complaining. It is us who make the arrests and follow up on the cases.

Hon Balaam is like any other Ugandan mandated to remain vigilant. He is acting within his mandate, and we give him all the support required. That ministry is too rotten, and most of the cases are perpetuated by technocrats. The current operation has therefore not been a competition between SHACU and the Ministry of Local Government. It is a coordinated effort.

The Investigator: People claim you have not done anything tangible since your appointment. How do you respond to Ugandans who say they have not felt your ‘tsunami’?

Gen Henery Isoke: I am not a media person. I am more comfortable working in the background. Given the nature of my training, most people may not see my face. We work very tirelessly in the background. We do not show off while executing our duties. That is how we were prepared for the job. Many people have different methods of work. I don’t subscribe to the culture of showing off. I prefer my actions to speak for my work.

For example, SHACU under my leadership did great work during the infamous mabaati investigations, arrests and eventual prosecutions. We looked at the files one by one and, based on our recommendations, action was taken, including arrests and prosecutions. In government, personal assistants can do a lot of the donkey work. That is one reason you may not see a ministers arrested. These ministers and the so-called `big fish` are sharp. Many of them do not leave behind trails of their wrongdoing. They use other people. That is why in many cases the small fish is the one that gets hooked because everything can be traced to them.

The Investigator: We have been approached by our readers complaining about selective arrests. What is your response?

Gen Henery Isoke: No one is big. We do not leave any stone unturned. In fact, we have arrested several top officials. But as I explained earlier, most top officials, including ministers, do not necessarily leave a trail showing their personal involvement in wrongdoing. They use their subordinates. Most personal assistants are therefore not safe. Our work is to follow the evidence. Whoever is implicated by the evidence must answer.

The Investigator: Brig Gen Moses Lukyamuzi, the head of the State House Land Protection Unit, has recently come under scrutiny, with some readers alleging that he abets land grabbing. Does SHACU have the mandate to bring him and his associates to book?

Gen Henery Isoke: No one is above the law, me inclusive. Anyone who has involved themselves in wrongdoing must answer for their crimes. We follow leads. If anyone has a trace of corruption, they are free to visit our offices and report. The principle is simple: nobody should be protected because of their position. However, our cause of action is always prompted by evidence, not assumptions.

The Investigator: In figures, how much money has SHACU helped to save for the country since you started your mission?

Gen Henery Isoke: We have so far recovered or saved UGX700 billion. Of this amount, under my tenure, we have saved over UGX500 billion. We have also managed to save UGX9 billion since the nationwide Local Government operation by Hon Balaam started, and we are seeing more money being saved.

The Investigator: Finally, what should Ugandans expect from SHACU as the Local Government crackdown continues?

Gen Henery Isoke: Ugandans should expect more action. The fight against corruption cannot be won by one institution. SHACU, the Inspectorate of Government, police, ministries, local governments and other accountability institutions have different responsibilities. But we must work together. The President’s message has been very clear; public resources must serve the people.

Our role is to receive complaints, gather intelligence, investigate and coordinate with the relevant agencies so that cases are resolved. We may not always be visible, but that does not mean we are not working. The work is continuous. And where there is evidence of wrongdoing, nobody should expect to be protected because of their office, rank or connections.

Across Uganda’s district headquarters, health centres, schools and roads, a new form of high-visibility government oversight has taken centre stage. Surprise field inspections led by the Minister of Local Government, Balaam Barugahara, alongside the Minister of State, Justine Nameere, have generated intense national debate. Their visits have exposed alleged ghost workers, payroll irregularities, questionable projects, poor construction and failures in service delivery.

For citizens exhausted by abandoned roads, dysfunctional health facilities and entrenched corruption, watching ministers leave their offices, descend on the field and demand answers feels like a long-overdue reckoning.

That public response should not be dismissed. As Vice-President Jessica Alupo recently observed, corruption is experienced most acutely by the ordinary Ugandan when a borehole breaks down, a school roof collapses or a health centre lacks basic medicines. Local government is where the citizen encounters the state most directly; it is therefore where public trust is either built or broken.

Balaam’s campaign has revealed something important: Ugandans want to see government acting. The energy is also spreading. Health Minister Dr Chris Baryomunsi has conducted surprise inspections at regional referral hospitals, while Works Minister Fred Byamukama has stepped up field inspections of infrastructure projects.

The question, therefore, is not whether this energy should be extinguished. It should not. The critical question is: what political architecture can sustain it and turn it into permanent state capacity?

Uganda already possesses a number of institutions charged with fighting corruption. The Inter-Agency Forum against Corruption brings together these public accountability institutions, with the Directorate for Ethics and Integrity serving as its Secretariat. Yet corruption remains deeply entrenched. The Inspectorate of Government has estimated that corruption costs Uganda roughly Shs9–10 trillion a year.

If highly visible ministerial interventions generate more public confidence than an elaborate accountability bureaucracy, the problem is not simply the absence of institutions. It is the failure to make those institutions function as a coherent national system. Uganda should therefore not extinguish Balaam’s spark. It should institutionalise it.

From Political Energy To State Capacity

The controversy surrounding some of the field methods has drawn legitimate warnings from local-government leaders and the legal fraternity. Public arrests, humiliation, prejudgment and disciplinary action without due process can raise serious constitutional and administrative-law concerns, particularly under Articles 28 and 42 of the Constitution. But it is equally important not to confuse unlawful enforcement with lawful inspection.

The Local Governments Act expressly gives the central ministry responsible for local government functions of guidance, inspection, monitoring and coordination. It also empowers authorised inspectors to enter premises, inspect records and investigate matters on their own initiative or following complaints. Those powers are intended to promote accountability, good governance and service delivery.

The problem, therefore, is not that ministers inspect local governments. The problem arises when inspection becomes trial, publicity becomes punishment and political pronouncement substitutes for lawful disciplinary or criminal proceedings.

The distinction matters

A district engineer who once treated an audit query as routine paperwork now knows that government may physically appear at a project site. A health worker accustomed to absenteeism knows that an unannounced inspection is possible. That visibility can have a deterrent effect.

But political energy is not institutional capacity. A campaign driven by individual personalities can expose failures; it cannot, by itself, build a durable accountability system.

The challenge is to convert visibility into systems, fearlessness into policy, and political energy into institutional capacity.

Follow The Money — And Follow It To The Centre

Local government officials found culpable of diversion, fraud or negligence must be held accountable. But Uganda’s corruption problem cannot be solved by policing the administrative periphery while failing to follow the money to its source.

The FY2026/27 Local Government Budget, including Parish Development Model funds, is about Shs8.2 trillion against a national budget of roughly Shs84.4 trillion. Local governments therefore account for less than 10 per cent of the national resource envelope.

Yet some of the country’s largest corruption risks lie beyond district headquarters: major procurement, infrastructure contracts, energy projects, debt-financed programmes, central ministries, classified expenditures, public enterprises and other large transactions where billions of shillings can be lost in a single decision.

The corruption that destroys a district road is tragic. But corruption embedded in a major central procurement contract can destroy dozens of district roads before a single tractor reaches the field.

This is why the current inspection campaign should travel up the accountability chain.

When an inspection uncovers a suspicious payroll, the question should not end with the district officer. Who authorised the payroll? Who verified it? Who failed to act on earlier audit warnings? If a road is badly constructed, who awarded the contract? Who certified the work? Who authorised payment? If a procurement price is inflated, who designed the specifications, who evaluated the bids, who approved the contract and where did the excess money go?

And when the Auditor General’s report identifies serious irregularities, the system should have a defined pathway for action.

That does not mean an audit finding should automatically produce a prosecution or forfeiture. Different institutions have different statutory mandates and evidentiary thresholds. But a serious finding should trigger mandatory consideration for the appropriate next step: procurement review, administrative action, criminal investigation, financial intelligence analysis, referral to the Inspectorate or Leadership Code machinery, or another lawful intervention.

The objective should be simple: nothing significant should disappear between detection and accountability.

Lessons From Matembe’s Tenure

Uganda’s own anti-corruption history offers a sobering lesson about what happens when political will encounters entrenched interests at the centre.

When Dr Miria Matembe became the country’s first Minister for Ethics and Integrity in 1998, heading a docket at full Cabinet level, she sought to use it as a serious political instrument for confronting abuse of power, corruption and the erosion of public integrity.

In her memoir, The Struggle for Freedom and Democracy Betrayed, Matembe recounts not simply individual battles but the gradual erosion and containment of the institutional architecture intended to make ethics and accountability effective. Her account is important because it demonstrates that the weakening of an accountability institution or framework does not necessarily occur through one dramatic abolition. It can occur gradually—through political resistance, conditional lukewarm support, institutional fragmentation, diminished authority and the marginalisation of the very offices expected to confront abuse of power.

Matembe’s eventual departure in 2003 did not end that process. Uganda continues to operate the portfolio under a State Minister in the Office of the President, while underfunding remains a persistent complaint and institutional challenge.

The lesson here is more important than the precise administrative chronology.

It is politically easier to demand integrity from a district officer than to construct institutions capable of demanding it from the political and financial centre.

That is why an anti-corruption strategy confined to inspections of district engineers, teachers, health workers and local officials risks treating symptoms while leaving the larger architecture of patronage and centralised procurement untouched.

Uganda’s anti-corruption institutions have grown in number and sophistication. What has not kept pace is the capacity to make them operate as a single, coordinated and effective accountability chain.

Restore A Full Cabinet Ministry And Strengthen The LAF

This is why Uganda should restore Ethics and Integrity to full Cabinet status. The proposal is not to create another command centre over the Inspectorate of Government, the Auditor General, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Judiciary, the Police, the Leadership Code Tribunal or other independent institutions.

Those institutions must retain their constitutional and statutory independence. The proposal is instead for a dedicated, full Cabinet Ministry for Ethics and Integrity, with an independent budget vote, providing political leadership to the national anti-corruption strategy and strengthening the Secretariat of the Inter-Agency Forum.

This would be coordination without capture. The Minister would not command the IGG, direct the DPP, instruct the Auditor General, interfere with judicial decisions or dictate the outcome of investigations.

Rather, the Minister would ensure that the institutions responsible for different stages of accountability are connected by clear protocols and measurable national objectives.

An audit finding should not languish in an audit report. A procurement red flag should not disappear into a file. A criminal investigation should not become indefinitely dormant. A Leadership Code breach should not remain unresolved. Recovered assets should not disappear from public view.

The IAF should therefore be strengthened into a genuine national coordination mechanism, capable of tracking the movement of serious cases from detection and verification through investigation, prosecution, adjudication and recovery, while leaving each institution to exercise its own statutory powers.

Uganda has already recognised the need for inter-agency coordination. The problem is that coordination without sufficient political weight, institutional capacity and case-tracking mechanisms can become another layer of bureaucracy.

What is required is a Cabinet-level political champion capable of asking, at every stage: What happened to this case? Who has it? What action was taken? What remains outstanding?

Redirecting The Catalyst

This is where the present campaign can become transformative. Balaam Barugahara and his active Cabinet colleagues have demonstrated the political power of visible accountability. Their interventions have shown that government can leave its offices, go to the field and confront failures that citizens have long complained about.

That political energy should not become another temporary campaign. It should become the catalyst for a national accountability architecture.

Indeed, if Government is persuaded that Hon. Balaam Barugahara’s fearlessness, activism and capacity to mobilise public attention are assets in the fight against corruption, there is an obvious way to deploy them beyond the district headquarters. He could be entrusted with the restored Cabinet portfolio for Ethics and Integrity, where that political energy could be brought to bear not merely on local officials but on the entire national accountability chain.

That would not make him a super-Minister. His role would be to provide political leadership and coordination, while the Inspectorate of Government, Auditor General, DPP, Police, Leadership Code Tribunal and other statutory institutions retain their independent mandates.

The same determination displayed at a district health centre should be applied to a central procurement agency. The same urgency brought to an abandoned road should be brought to a multi-billion-shilling infrastructure contract. The same question asked of a missing local worker should be asked of an unexplained payment at the centre.

Where did the money go? Who authorised it? Who benefited? Who knew? Who failed to act? And what happened after the red flag was raised? That is how Uganda can move from spectacle to statecraft.

The goal should not be to create a super-Minister who arrests, prosecutes and punishes. That would merely replace one institutional weakness with another form of executive overreach.

The goal is more ambitious: to create a political and institutional system in which no anti-corruption agency operates in isolation, no serious finding disappears without follow-up, and accountability reaches as confidently into the centre as it does into the districts.

Uganda does not need fewer anti-corruption institutions. It needs institutions that work together, institutions backed by political authority, and an accountability chain that reaches from the village project to the national procurement file. Do not extinguish the spark. Institutionalise it.

The writer is a senior advocate and former Minister

When committee leaders systematically abandon structured interrogation in favor of televised personal attacks and procedurally flawed fishing expeditions, they actively dismantle the credibility of the legislative process and signal to the public that personal political posturing matters far more than genuine statecraft.

This continuous drift by the Committee on Commissions, Statutory Authorities and State Enterprises is a stark reflection of that institutional failure. Rather than adhering strictly to the Auditor General reports and interrogating accounting officers on financial compliance, committee leadership repeatedly strays far beyond its constitutional boundary.

Just as previous leadership vulgarized the committee scope by prying into the private life, marriage, and personal background of Uganda Airlines CEO Jenifer Bamuturaki, Hon. Muwadda Nkunyingi is repeating the exact same procedural error with the Uganda Human Rights Commission.

Bypassing clear audit findings to chase internal administrative squabbles, matters already explicitly assigned by the Speaker to the Committee on Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, is a reckless overreach that preempts sister committees while allowing a suffocating backlog of unreviewed audit reports to accumulate.

This persistent breakdown raises an urgent question regarding value for money and the taxpayer investment in these public officials. Citizens pay substantial public funds to maintain these lawmakers, complete with extensive technical support, allowances, and administrative backing.

Is the taxpayer getting any real return on investment when highly compensated representatives, guided by clear procedural frameworks, prove entirely incapable of reasoning logically within those established guidelines? It is baffling how individuals backed by such significant institutional resources continuously choose media antics over substantive oversight.

Are these members utterly uninducted on their legal scope, or are they consciously exploiting camera time to harvest cheap political capital because they fail to command the floor during plenary sessions? The quiet passivity of the technical staff makes the situation even worse.

Committee clerks and legal counsel are stationed in those chambers precisely to enforce the Rules of Procedure, keep proceedings grounded in empirical evidence, and prevent oversight from devolving into a media circus. When these highly paid technical experts remain silent while lawmakers dismantle statutory norms for personal visibility, the entire institutional framework fails the citizens who fund it.

The complaint, addressed to the Inspector General of Government (IGG) and copied to several senior government officials, asks the Inspectorate of Government to launch what it describes as an urgent investigation into the recruitment and continued employment of a one Ocen Jacob, who the complainants allege works as a Front Desk Officer at the Parliament of Uganda.

The petition alleges that Jacob is a former intelligence lieutenant with the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and questions whether he possesses a valid Amnesty Certificate required under Uganda’s Amnesty Act. It also alleges that his recruitment into public service may not have complied with established public service procedures and that his qualifications should be independently verified.

However, the complaint itself does not provide documentary evidence proving the allegations, and, at the time of publication, none of the claims had been independently verified. The complaint was filed by Abba Advocates on behalf of unnamed clients described as concerned citizens and whistleblowers acting under Article 225 of the Constitution and the Whistleblowers Protection Act, 2010.

The complainants requested that their identities remain confidential for now, citing fears of victimization. In the petition, the whistleblowers commend the Inspectorate of Government for recent anti-corruption enforcement actions involving officials at Parliament before arguing that accountability efforts should also extend to alleged beneficiaries of irregular recruitment into public service.

Allegations Raised

The complaint raises several issues it wants investigators to examine. First, it claims Jacob may not possess a valid Amnesty Certificate issued under the Amnesty Act, legislation that governs the reintegration of former rebels who renounce armed rebellion. The petition alleges that uncertainty surrounding his alleged amnesty status has generated concern within sections of the community, although it presents no official records from the Amnesty Commission supporting that claim.

Secondly, the complainants question whether Jacob met the minimum academic and professional qualifications required for employment in Parliament. The petition alleges that because of his purported involvement with the LRA during the insurgency in northern Uganda, investigators should verify the educational credentials and qualifications used during his recruitment.

The whistleblowers also ask investigators to establish whether the recruitment process complied with the Public Service Standing Orders and the Employment Act. In addition, the complaint requests an audit of Jacob’s payroll status, alleging that if his appointment was unlawful, public funds may have been improperly spent on his salary.

Security Concerns Raised

The petition further argues that, if the allegations regarding Jacob’s past are substantiated, his employment within Parliament would raise broader questions about vetting procedures for staff working in sensitive government institutions. The complainants contend that public confidence in state institutions depends on transparent recruitment processes and proper background checks for all public officers.

No evidence was attached to the complaint establishing that Parliament failed to conduct the necessary security vetting. The whistleblowers argue that the alleged conduct, if established, could amount to violations of several Ugandan laws, including the Constitution of Uganda regarding accountability and transparency in public service, the Leadership Code Act, the Public Service Standing Orders governing recruitment, the Amnesty Act and the Anti-Corruption Act.

Legal experts note that any determination of wrongdoing would depend on evidence gathered during an official investigation and cannot be presumed solely from the filing of a complaint. The complainants are asking the Inspectorate of Government to investigate the recruitment, appointment and payroll status of Jacob, to confirm with the Amnesty Commission whether he holds a valid Amnesty Certificate, verify his academic and professional qualifications, suspend salary payments if investigators discover irregularities and, recommend administrative, civil or criminal action against any individuals found responsible.

The petition also asks that the Inspectorate report its findings to Parliament and other relevant authorities.Copies of the complaint were addressed to the Speaker of Parliament, the Clerk to Parliament, the Inspector General of Police, the Chairperson of the Amnesty Commission, the Executive Director of the State House Anti-Corruption Unit and the Director General of the Internal Security Organisation.

As of publication, there was no public indication that any of the institutions had opened an investigation or reached findings regarding the allegations. Efforts to obtain a comment from Ocen Jacob, Parliament of Uganda, the Inspectorate of Government and the Amnesty Commission were futile as some didn’t pick there known telephone numbers and others were off every time we tried them.

The United States dollar funds were allegedly stolen from the office of Counsel Roberts Fridays Kagoro, while the Ugandan currency was reportedly stolen from the office of his co-managing partner, Counsel Frederick Jeremiah Muwema. Bizarrely, whereas fifteen police officers were present during the impugned exercise, the firm underscores that they did not bother to stop the violence, chaos and, criminal acts and impunity witnessed on that black day.

Instead, the police reportedly actively and directly participated in the commission of those crimes, benefitted from them, and supported, as well as encouraged on their alleged partners in crime.  The law firm explains that a lawyer company called Downtown Investments and its director, Puresh Kumar Ratital Mehta were the principal masterminds of the entire chaos.

They ostensibly acted alongside their lawyers, Rukia Adam, Ahmed Bongo and Fredrick Byatokoreire who are heavily blamed for reportedly abandoning their legal decorum to join armed goons in causing untold havoc, despite being officers of court and vanguards of due process.

Joining this park, the aggrieved law adds, was a security company known as A1 Security Systems. Together with the rest of the actors they allegedly ransacked the premises and dragged to the waiting get-away trucks confidential clients’ files, title documents and, valuable office equipment estimated at close to Ushs200 million.

The plaintiff emphasizes that whereas the actors concealed the impugned operation as merely a re-entry by the Downtown Investments, it was an illegal eviction conducted against the backdrop of a subsisting and ongoing court case. That original case had been filed by the company and it’s directors through their aforementioned lawyers, and it was intended to resolve the tenant-landlord lease-and-buy agreement status quo after the company claimed the tenant( Muwema and Company Advocates) had breached the contract and failed to pay rent.

The law illuminates that the security company was not legally permitted to participate in the operation – let alone considering it’s illegality- and yet the police and Downtown Investments lawyers supposedly simply looked on and just encouraged them as they reportedly broke all of the laws with reckless impunity. For the presumed illegal activities and negligence of the police officers present at the illegal operation, the law firm has joined the learned Attorney General  to the lawsuit to atone for their rogueness and unprofessionalism, crimes, and illegalities in damages.

In a recap, the law firm – now comfortably settled in the leafy Upper Nakasero part of Kampala Capital City- want all of the cited defendants to foot the cost with Ushs12 billion, excluding the legal fees to be quantified following the conclusion of the lawsuit. The defendants are legally expected to file their respective defenses within 15 days of being served with the necessary court process in regards to this lawsuit. We shall keep you posted about all of the breaking developments related to this matter.  Stay well and take care.

Among the high-profile witnesses lined up by the state are current military intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Richard Otto, former Chieftaincy of Military Intelligence (CMI) boss Maj. Gen. Abel Kandiho, and detained senior military officer Maj. Gen. James Birungi.The inclusion of the three generals has immediately sparked controversy, with Besigye’s lawyers questioning why intelligence and military officers are central to a case the state claims is based on evidence of an alleged plot to overthrow the government.

Besigye lawyers weighs in

Veteran city lawyer and Kampala Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago, who is part of Besigye’s defence team, described the prosecution’s latest move as a sign that the state intends to heavily rely on intelligence reports and security assessments.”The defence is entitled to sufficient time and facilities to examine every piece of evidence that the prosecution seeks to rely upon,” Lukwago reportedly argued before court.

He questioned the decision to provide hundreds of pages of statements and hours of recordings while at the same time demanding that the defence prepare within seven days.According to Lukwago, the constitutional right to a fair hearing includes adequate time to study evidence, consult clients and prepare an effective defence.”The prosecution cannot overwhelm the defence with volumes of material and then expect us to meaningfully respond within such a limited timeframe,” one member of the defence team reportedly observed after the proceedings.

Mixed reactions

The legal fireworks erupted after Justice Baguma directed the accused persons to review the disclosed material within one week and return to court for further proceedings.Besigye immediately instructed his lawyers to challenge the directive, insisting that the timeline is unrealistic given the complexity and gravity of the charges.

Several legal experts contacted by this publication expressed surprise at the choice of witnesses.Prominent constitutional lawyer Nicholas Opiyo said the appearance of senior intelligence chiefs suggests that the state’s case may be built around intelligence gathering and national security assessments.”When military intelligence officers become central witnesses, it means the prosecution intends to rely heavily on intelligence-led evidence. The challenge is always whether such evidence can withstand rigorous testing in open court,” Opiyo observed.

Another senior lawyer, Isaac Ssemakadde, noted that intelligence information often raises questions regarding admissibility, sourcing and verification.”Courts do not simply accept intelligence claims at face value. Witnesses must still satisfy evidentiary standards and be subjected to cross-examination,” said Ssemakadde who is also the president of Uganda Law Society.Legal analyst and human rights lawyer Ladislaus Rwakafuzi argued that the defence will likely focus on testing the credibility and consistency of testimony from intelligence officers.

“The burden of proof remains entirely on the prosecution. It is not enough to present senior officers. The evidence itself must prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt,” he said.The prosecution alleges that between 2003 and November 2024, Besigye, Lutale and others still at large participated in activities intended to overthrow the Government of Uganda through force of arms.According to the charge sheet, the alleged meetings and activities took place in several international locations, including Geneva in Switzerland, Athens in Greece, Nairobi in Kenya and Kampala.

Chargesheet

Prosecutors contend that the accused persons were involved in meetings and activities linked to plans aimed at removing the government through unlawful means.In the alternative charge of misprision of treason, the state alleges that Besigye and Lutale had knowledge of treasonous plans by other individuals but failed to report the information to authorities. Both men have strongly denied the accusations.The People’s Front for Freedom (PFF), the political platform associated with Besigye, has accused the state of conducting a politically motivated prosecution.Party officials claim the government delayed disclosure of evidence for months before suddenly presenting a mountain of documents and recordings.”The mask of justice has completely fallen,” the party said in a strongly worded statement following the court session.

Political observers say the decision to call senior intelligence chiefs could transform the proceedings into a rare public examination of Uganda’s security establishment.Maj. Gen. Richard Otto currently heads military intelligence and is regarded as one of the country’s most influential security officers. His expected testimony is likely to attract intense public interest.Maj. Gen. Abel Kandiho previously led the Chieftaincy of Military Intelligence and played a prominent role in national security operations during his tenure.Maj. Gen. James Birungi, another former senior intelligence figure, is also expected to feature prominently in the prosecution’s case despite currently facing his own legal troubles.

The mysterious British businessman on the witness list has further heightened public curiosity, with many wondering what role his testimony could play in the state’s attempt to establish an alleged international conspiracy.For now, lawyers on both sides are preparing for what promises to be a bruising legal contest.As constitutional challenges loom and some of Uganda’s most senior security figures prepare to enter the witness box, the Besigye trial is rapidly evolving into a courtroom showdown with major political, legal and national significance.Whether the testimony of the generals strengthens the prosecution’s case or provides fresh ammunition for the defence will become clearer when proceedings resume.What is certain, however, is that all eyes will be fixed on the courtroom as Uganda witnesses one of the most closely watched treason trials in its recent history.

 To many of her friends, aquaitances, colleagues, staff and relatives, it is no longer at ease. Our sources have offered that among the said lot above is the outgoing Deputy Speaker Thomas Tayebwa, Among`s husband Moses Magogo, two ministers and 24 (twenty four) Members of Parliament. Whereas the latter lot is expected to appear before Detectives at Kibuli tommorow (May 18th 2026), Among is supposedly expected on Tuesday.

The operation named `Maliza Ufisadi`(Swahili for “Finish Corruption), started with summons to Speaker Among, by Gen. Yoweri Kaguta Museveni on Thursday. After the meeting composed of clergymen, Itesot King Emolimoli, former Speaker Rebecca Kadaga, and NRM Vice Chair Moses Kigongo among others, President Museveni condemned and placed Among under house arrest.

It is reported that the old man with a Hat also directed Among to stay put and restrain self from contacting any MPs. However, upon reaching her home in Nakasero, Among defied her Master and started making frantic calls to several MPs, directing them to keep their loyalty to her and not to attend her supposed replacement, Hon. Jacob Markson Oboth-Oboth`s thanks-giving service in Mukono.

At the function, Oboth-Oboth was expected to officially announce his bid for Speakership. However, by afternoon, the turn-up at the host`s residence was still wanting as several MPs were relactantly dragging their feet to show up. A quick check with intelligence gathered how Among and her helpers were behind the glitch at Mukono. Getting to the reason why this stance, the angry President directed Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba to swing into action.

“The security forces under the direction and instructions of the Commander-in-Chief launched Operation ‘Maliza Ufisadi’ the other day. We shall expand this operation and apprehend all culprits. No one will be spared,” Gen Muhoozi roared via his X account last night, hence partially confirming what we are relaying in these pages.

The Story

By mid-day on Saturday, intelligence had gathered that the MPs` loyalty to Among is connected to money. Known to be one of the biggest Money-Lenders around town, Anita Among is rumored to have advanced to over 200 MPs, soft loans of between 100M to 200M, depending on one`s need. When the big man asked how she expected to recover the monies, he was told how the Speaker targeted the UGX315M meant for the MPs vehicles, to recover the loaned dime.

The above revelation left the President with no option apart from expedite his plans to launch the operation, starting from the top. Indeed, on Friday, the Clerk to Parliament, Hon. Adolf Mwesigye is rumored to have been the first to record a statement. Starting with Adolf is a story by itself, but for another day. Yesterday, sources have it, more technical staff were supposedly interrogated. These reportedly include Chris Obore, and Richard Kunobwa the Head Finance.

The above include cops who were hithert deployed at Parliament but were reportedly lured by Among into early resignation before she supposedly assigned them to private business with her person. Notably among the 24 MP is the four commissioner including Mathias Mpuuga, Ministers Peter Ogwang and Henry Musaasizi, Hon. Kateshumbwa, Prossy Mbabazi, Afwoyo Chan, Didan Muwanguzi, and Najjuma Sarah.

The Auditor General Conduits

Intelligence has it that Among was also using the Office of The Auditor General to her personal benefit. Known to be good in tapping into ministries and government agencies, Among reportedly head-hunded the current Auditor General Edward Akol, from within Parliament corridors. This stance, away from him being from her home of Bukedea. Appointed and sworn in in July 2024, succeeding John F. S. Muwanga, Edward Akol is reported to have been working for both Government and the person of Among. To help him experdite his duties, two of his Directors Martin Bamulumbye and Joseph Hirya are supposedly handy.

Who is Martin Bamulumbye

A resident of Bunga, a holder of a Bachelors of Commerce degree in Accounting from Makerere University and a Certified Public Accountant of over 17 years with membership of the Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Uganda, Bamulumbye also holds a Masters of Business Administration.

He Joined the Office of the Auditor General in 1994 as an Auditor and rose through the ranks to the current position of Director Central Government 1, the same government that audits the office of the President, office of the Prime Minister, Ministry of Agriculture, Office of the Director of Public prosecutions, Ministry of Defence, Uganda Police, State House and all classified expenditures.

Bamulumbye has audited the above named institutions for the last 20 years as the Director. He has has been, reportedly successful in overriding staff rules that require rotation of staff every three years because of the power he wields in the office of the Auditor General. “He [reportedly] dictates what happens in the office that should be the custodian of public trust,” offers the source.

Word has it that because he had always had the Speakers ear, he would hol the Bukedea-born Auditor General Akol by the waist. This is commonly known as “okukwaata jeeke” in Luganda. Like in the case of Ex Speaker Among, Bamulumbye is said to weild super powers before Uganda Police, Public Prosecutions, the Judiciary and Uganda prisons. This stance, because he has closely worked with them for the last twenty plus years, and is allegedlly on their monthly retainer.

Of Joseph Hirya

Joseph Hirya is a prominent audit professional, serving as the Director of Audit (Central Government II) at the Office of the Auditor General. He frequently represents the Auditor General in official government, petroleum sector, and international audit engagements. Hirya is as well responsible for directing major government audits, representing the Auditor General in national policy matters, and overseeing institutional capacity-building initiatives. How are the above connected to the on-goings? … Watch the Space…

Even with the bulging number of examples of the hitherto powerfuls who were humiliated before being dumped, Among couldn’t stop for a minute, just to imagine or suggest herself in their position. Names like Samson Babi Mululu Kisekka, Amama Mbabazi, Baalibaseka Bukenya, Gen. Kale Kayihura or at worst, Nobel Mayombo and or, Gen Nyakayirima, at no time made any sense to Among!

An old Luganda adage goes thus; Olunatta Wambwa lumuziba ennyindo. This loosely mean that a desease targetting to kill a Dog attacks its nose first. That way, the poor dog can easily eat anything poisonous since it lost the sense of smell. To the knowledgeable, Speaker Among had long lost her sense of smell. She did all it takes to drag her close to any tribe of danger and, kaboom. The Rolls Royce triggered everything back, sending her into house arrest in just a brink.

Sadly, as she goes off the stage, her hitherto vibrant helpers, acquitances, potential accomplices, and or, condiuts within Parliament, Government agencies and ministries remain not at ease. While the public continues to decry the theft of taxpayers` money in the August House, the real focus is now directed to the Auditor General`s Office, the Clerk to Parliament Adolf Kasaija Mwesigye and Head of Finance at Parliament, Patrick Kunobwa among others.

Whereas the others are obvious, starters will wonder how the Auditor General relates with Parliament affairs. And here, we shall give prominence to AG`s connection, in this first of the `No Longer at Ease` series in these pages. For starters, the Auditor General`s Office was established under Article 163 of the Constitution and is the supreme audit authority.

The Auditor General`s primary role is to audit and report to Parliament, on the public accounts of Uganda, ensuring transparency, fiscal discipline, and value for money in the management of public funds. Under Rt. Hon. Anita Among`s reign, the AG has been supposedly reduced to be working for the Speaker`s person and not the public as required.

Who is Who at The AG`s Office

With so much reported graft within the August House itself, one would wonder who is in charge of audit at Parliament! There are many more institutions that such graft is happening in an unchecked manner. And were told that these are audited by two directors at the AG`s Office, who have wielded so much power to the extent that they supposedly have overpowered the Auditor General himself, Edward Akol, making him a ceremonial official!

The above mentioned sectors include among others, Water, Education, Security, Agricultural, JLOS and Public Administration sector. These are under the two powerful directors Martin Bamulumbye and Joseph Hirya. Inernal information reaching our desk has it that one of them, Bamulumbye, is under the CDF`s team watch over corruption.

Strong allegations have it that Bamulumbye covers up payment for services in those sectors, costing tens of billions that are never delivered. “He has made the heads of these institutions as `strategic allies`”. Our source offered. On the other hand, his colleague, Hirya is supposedly no different. “They run the office of the auditor general like a cartel where they are in charge of institutions that have the biggest budgets in the country,” says the authoritative source.

The same is witnessed in the audits at the ministry of Water and Environment, Office of the Prime Minister, Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Agriculture and at the National Planning Authority. Whereas the Bukedea born AG Edward Akol was reportedly head-picked and recommended by the outgoing Speaker Anita Among, his two Directors are reported to have been closely working with the Speaker.

As investigatigations in Anita Among`s illicit wealth case takes form, the three officers at the AGs office are reportedly targetted along with other officials at the Parliament. The latter include the Clerk to Parliament Adolf Kasaija Mwesigye, the Head of Finance Patrick Kunobwa and the already arrested Chris Obore among others. Sources have it that Amongs raid was sparked by her attempts last night, to block MPs from attending the incoming Speaker, Jacob Oboth-Oboth`s thanksgiving in Mukono.

In the above efforts, she was being helped by the already netted Chris Obore and Justin Nameere. Before taking this edition to bed, Police and SFC had already raided the already House Arrested Speaker`s home in Nakasero. Whereas Police`s Crime Investigations Directorate (CID) detectives initially took the shot at the home search, SFC took over the command to recover hard cash, files and her travel documents. By the time we uploaded this article, plans were underway to have some of the posh cars towed to the police.  Watch this space…

From a rebuttal addressed to the Investigator and delivered by the Commission spokesman Alex Bukumunhe, to a public press release, to a complaint at Crime Investigations Directorate (CID) boss Maj. Tom Magambo, to threatening a law suit against the Investigator CEO Stanley Ndawula, to cancelling contracts of some of the Commission senior staff she suspects to deal with the media, Wangadya has walked and trotted the trail!

“Let me state that I am an advocate of Courts of Judicature, a seasoned public officer having served as a member of the Commission [UHRC] for 17 years, Deputy Inspector General of Government for 8 years and Chairperson [of UHRC] for more than 4 years.” She wrote in the 16page response to our reports that, when read between lines, could have depicted her as someone without a single grain of intergrity.

She adds; “In all this time, my proffessionalism and intergrity have been a hallmark of my career to the extent, at great personal risk, I was a whitsle blower against high level syndicated corruption.” She further lamented about the allegations levelled against her via these pages, the same, when read clearly, can be used against her as she nearly pleaded guilty to all the allegations, yet in her own and self-authored rebuttal. The full dossier will be reproduced here in the coming days.

Upon realising we were not moved by her rather wanting response, Madam Wangadya trotted to her lawyers of Signature Advocates. Here, she instructed them advocates to pen Yours Truly, Stanley Ndawula, a lengthy notice of Intention to Sue, “regarding the defamatory publications against Ms Mariam Wangadya.”

Delivered to our Lawyers of Muwema and Co. Advocates on Wednesday last week, the intention reads in part; “Our attention has been drawn to a recent post on your X handle to wit Stanley The Investigator dated 7th /03/2026 and an article you authored and published online dated 8th /03/2026, wherein you make grave, unfounded, and unsubstantiated allegations against our Client,” they wrote before lining down the said allegations in detail.

About Lady Mariam Wangadya

Are we scared by the lawyers and their client`s threats? Oh yes, we are very scared! For, who wouldn’t be scared by a giant, eye-rolling lady judge, who once hurled a flask full of hot tea at her co-widow, Ziada Wangadya, just over a trivial issue! Well, lying deep into the internet achieves, is a story with even stronger allegations, depicting her as a woman with little or no intergrity in her.

Based on historical records from 1999, “Mariam Wangadya, who now serves as the Chairperson of the Uganda Human Rights Commission (UHRC), was accused of assault by her co-wife, Ziada Wangadya,” recalls the internet, adding; “In July 1999, Mariam Wangadya (then 33 years old) was charged with assaulting Ziada Wangadya and causing bodily harm, along with a charge of threatening violence.”

Then in the New Vision at the time, they reported. “The Police have preferred charges of assault causing actual bodily harm against Uganda Human Rights Commissioner (UHRC) Marriam Wangadya. Mariam, 33, allegedly beat her co-wife Ziada Wangadya, last Thursday at the UHRC offices on Buganda Road. Kampala Central Police CID officer Hillary Odoch also preferred another charge against Mariam, of threatening violence.”

The alleged assault reportedly occurred at the Uganda Human Rights Commission offices along Buganda Road. The altercation stemmed from a dispute over the distribution of property following the death of their husband, Muzamir Wangadya, who had died in 1998. Wangadya was charged with assault and threatening violence against her co-wife.

Appearing before Buganda Road Chief Magistrate, Andrew Bashaija, she denied the charges, stating they were brought in “bad faith”. According to the allegations and court proceedings at the time, Mariam Wangadya was accused of physically attacking Ziada on two separate occasions. On July 13th 1999, she allegedly attempted to hit Ziada with a flask full of tea but was restrained by some staff. On July 15th 1999, she again, reportedly beat Ziada, resulting in bodily injuries, including an eye injury and bruises.

The dispute suposedly stemmed from a disagreement over the distribution of their late husband’s estate. Both women, Ziada and Mariam were among the four widows of the late Muzamir Wangadya. Upon denying the charges, Wangadya was granted a bond of UGX1M.  million Ugandan Shillings. Now you know why we, at The Investigator, are greatly scared!

The Friuts So Far Garnered 

In our earlier reports scooped out of the whistle blowers` dossier from within the UHRC corridors, are allegations surrounding the procurement of two generators worth approximately UGX160 million. When the generators were delivered to UHRC headquarters, technical staff reportedly had no idea who had ordered them or where they were destined.

Sources say, many refused to associate themselves with the procurement once rumours began circulating that the generators were intended for the private homes of the Chairperson, Mariam Wangadya, and Commissioner Crispin Kaheru. The mystery was later clarified through a memo written by Commission Planner, Mukasa Charles.

In the clarification document, the generators were reportedly allocated to the two officials’ residences, while Mr. Omitta Sulaiman, the Commission’s Systems Manager, was listed as the “user department!” But insiders say Omitta never budgeted for the generators and was unaware of the arrangement!

According to inside sources privy with the matter, Planner Charles Mukasa is alleged to have quietly inserted the generators into the Commission’s budget, before later attempting to distance himself from the transaction. Upon our consistent reports, Commissioner Kaheru, through his Assistant, on Sunday night returned the generator and handed it over to the night shift guard, Corporal Daniel Akandwanaho.

Whereas Lady Chair Wangadya is defiant and would love to fight back instead of repenting, her `co-accused` is doing to the contrary. Before the generator`s return, Kaheru had also, on the night of March 15<sup>th</sup> 2026, returned one of the long `missing` vehicles back to the Commission parking yard. The vehicle, we had earlier reported, was among the four Toyota Land Cruisers (Hard Body) left behind by the United Nations Commission of Human Rights.

The explosive document, already filed with the Inspectorate of Government, the Criminal Investigations Directorate, and the office of the Speaker of Parliament, Anita Annet Among, paints a troubling portrait of an institution accused of diverting public funds toward personal comfort, while its core mandate struggles for resources.

This mighty website has obtained details of the second part of the dossier, which accuses senior officials at the Commission, of questionable budgeting, controversial procurements and creating a workplace climate described by staff as a “fear and psychological torture” ground. Contacted earlier, the Commission`s mouthpiece Alex Bukumunhe confirmed knowledge of the missive under review, but refrained self from commenting in detail.

Luxury Vehicles as Core Work Starves

One of the most contentious allegations revolves around the purchase of new high-end vehicles for the selected Commission leadership of the Chairperson, Lady Justice Mariam Wangadya and Commissioner Crispin Kaheru. According to the dossier, the duo budgeted for brand-new vehicles despite already possessing relatively new official cars.

Insiders say the process supposedly began with private consultations with vehicle suppliers to determine market prices prior, after which, the exact figures they influenced and inserted into the Commission’s budget. Once the money was secured, the dossier claims, internal procurement documentation was allegedly aligned to match the predetermined plan.

Sources deep inside the hitherto trusted and respected Commission, and whose chairperson recently exposed to the President, the supposed corrupt politicians who reportedly asked for a bribe in order to pass the Commission`s supplementary budget, say the transport officer, a one Ochitiga Ratibis, is fully aware of how the suspicious and fraudulent process unfolded.

What has particularly angered staff, is the timeline. The Chairperson’s current vehicle was reportedly purchased around July 2023, yet by 2025 a replacement was already being demanded! To many officers within the Commission, the expenditure symbolized misplaced priorities. “Those funds could have enabled inspection of detention centres or civic education programs ahead of elections,” one staff member we contacted after the first story, said, adding; “Instead, they were used on vehicles that were not necessary.”

The UGX 160M Generators for Private Residences

More shocking are allegations surrounding the procurement of two generators worth approximately UGX160 million. When the generators were delivered to UHRC headquarters, technical staff reportedly had no idea who had ordered them or where they were destined. Confusion quickly spread through the office corridors.

Staff say, many refused to associate themselves with the procurement once rumours began circulating that the generators were intended for the private homes of the Chairperson, Madam Mariam Wangadya and Commissioner Crispin Kaheru. The mystery was later clarified through a memo written by Commission Planner, Mukasa Charles.

In the clarification document, the generators were reportedly allocated to the two officials’ residences, while Mr. Omitta Sulaiman, the Commission’s Systems Manager, was listed as the “user department!” But insiders say Omitta never budgeted for the generators and was unaware of the arrangement! According to inside sources privy with the matter, Planner Charles Mukasa is alleged to have quietly inserted the generators into the Commission’s budget, before later attempting to distance himself from the transaction. The dossier now calls for investigators to obtain the memo he sent to the Asset Management Committee and determine in what capacity he authorized the allocation.

Of The Suspicious Foreign Trips

The dossier further claims that foreign travel has become one of the most lucrative activities within the Commission’s leadership circles. Recent trips allegedly taken by senior officials include visits to the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia and Nairobi. Sources claim these trips appear to function less, as official assignments and more as opportunities for travel allowances and per diem payments.

According to insiders, the Wangadya`s leadership of two reportedly removed the responsibility for purchasing air tickets from the procurement unit and took control of the process themselves. It is said that the head of procurement, a one Clare, is under immense stress and may possess critical information about the travel arrangements.

Particularly controversial is the claim that business class tickets have allegedly been purchased for Ms. Pauline Nansamba, despite her not being entitled to that level of travel. Even more puzzling, staff say, some activity reports submitted after these trips are not supported by boarding passes. “What happens sometimes is unbelievable,” said one of the sources adding; “They first allocate money for travel in the budget, then they start looking for conferences or meetings to justify it.”

Inside the Culture of Fear

Beyond financial questions, the dossier paints a disturbing picture of internal management practices. Several staff members from the Directorate of Complaints, Investigations and Legal Services reportedly describe a work environment characterized by harassment, intimidation and bullying.

According to internal accounts, at least five staff members have resigned in recent months, citing psychological pressure and what they describe as cruel and degrading treatment. Many of those who remain, insiders say, stay only because they lack alternative employment opportunities. Unluckily, these complaints come from within the very institution mandated to protect citizens from abuses of power.

The Dramatic Rise of a Trusted Insider

Another focal point of the dossier is the rapid ascent of Ms. Pauline Nansamba Mutumba. Sources say she joined the Commission in September 2021 as a Personal Assistant to the Chairperson, Lady Mariam Wangadya. Within a few years, she had reportedly risen to become the Director of Complaints, Investigations and Legal Services and, the Caretaker Director of Monitoring and Inspections!

Critics inside the Commission say the promotions came at the expense of experienced officers who had served the institution for years. Her influence reportedly extends across several powerful committees. She currently serves as Chairperson of the Contracts Committee, and, Head of the Fleet Oversight Committee.

Staff allege the appointments were made directly under the instruction of the Chairperson, raising concerns that she may be unable to challenge questionable procurement decisions. Meanwhile, insiders say she also receives UGX3 million per month, in additional allowances for “supporting the Secretary,” duties critics argue, fall squarely within her existing role.

Pressure For Investigations Mount

With the dossier now reportedly in the hands of the Inspectorate of Government and the Parliament of Uganda, pressure is mounting for a full investigation into the operations of the Uganda Human Rights Commission. If proven positive, the allegations could amount to abuse of office, procurement irregularities and financial mismanagement.

For many observers coming on board after our breaking story last week, the scandal strikes at the heart of a troubling irony. The institution established to defend citizens from abuse of power is now itself facing accusations of misusing public resources and intimidating its own staff. As investigators begin examining the dossier, one question looms large; Can the country’s top human rights watchdog survive the growing storm within its own walls? Watch this space…