256 Newsroom — Uganda's Digital News Infrastructure
Politics

Minister Nameere defends public confrontation of corruption suspects

Share
Minister Nameere defends public confrontation of corruption suspects
Image · The Observer

What the report says

The Observer, citing Uganda Radio Network, reported that state minister for Local Government Justine Nameere has defended the practice of confronting and filming officials during government anti-corruption inspections. Speaking on Friday while in the Acholi sub-region, Nameere said the operations are informed by verified intelligence and professional inquiries, and rejected claims that the public questioning of suspects amounts to trial by media.

Nameere, who also represents Masaka City as Woman MP, has recently been taking part in inspection tours with Local Government minister Balaam Barugahara. According to the report, the tours have involved officials being questioned on camera over suspected misuse of public funds, poor-quality public works and payroll-related concerns. Nameere said the teams rely on whistleblower information checked by engineers, the State House Anti-Corruption Unit, the Chieftaincy of Military Intelligence and other agencies. She also said some arrest files are complete and ready for prosecution, with some suspects already before court or due to appear.

The minister argued that filming the operations is not barred by law and said the campaign is intended not only to punish wrongdoing but also to ensure delayed or compromised public projects, such as roads, bridges and health facilities, are delivered to communities. She cited a case in Gulu district in which a clinical officer allegedly acknowledged that his qualification documents were being used by another person.

The approach has prompted debate. The Observer reported that Gulu-based lawyer Kelly Komakech criticised the public confrontations, saying investigations and arrests should follow procedures set for legally mandated institutions. The article noted that Uganda’s Constitution protects the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair hearing, while not expressly banning the public identification of suspects before arraignment.

Read the full report at The Observer →

Loading debate for this article…

Other publishers covering this story

No additional verified coverage is currently clustered with this report.

Related reporting