2021-B411-11717

QUESTION.

“Commissions of inquiry serve no purpose in Uganda. They are a mere tool used
by government to deceive the citizens that something has been done on a specific
matter. I long for that day when reports and recommendations of commission on
inquiry shall begin to be implemented by the Ugandan government.” As per
Bilowozo Bitono an LLB1 student at Butabika University. Do you agree with his
observation? With reference to authorities, critically discuss the foregoing
statement.
 2021-B411-11717

 A commission is a body of persons Acting under lawful authority to perform certain

public services.1
 Inquiry is a request for information, either procedural or substantive.2

Commissions of Inquiry have been defined as ad hoc advisory bodies set up by the government
to obtain information. In their working, they are expected to make an assessment of facts and
later recommendations to the government in power.3According to Musa Ssekaana4, a
commission of inquiry is essentially a fact finding body.

Background of commissions of inquiry in Uganda: In the aftermath of a period of mass

atrocity at the hands of the state, many societies to find a way to repair the damage caused to the
physical infrastructure in terms of things like roads, hospitals, and schools. One mechanism
often employed in such cases is the truth commission, which can act to foster sustainable
development on many different levels, as well as social trust 5.Hundreds of thousands of civilians
lost their lives under the military dictatorship of Idi Amin between 1971 and 1979 and under the
following government of Milton Obote from 1980 to 1985. Yoweri Museveni, who was still
president in 2009, overthrew Obote in 1986. Museveni attempted to improve his country’s
reputation concerning human rights while reducing the power of former officials. The National
Resistance Army arrested and tried several soldiers and civilians for crimes committed under
the two previous regimes. In May 1986, Museveni’s Justice Ministry set up a Commission of
Inquiry into Violations of Human Rights.6

There are different purposes for setting up the commission of inquiry and these include;

 To formulate policy and to recommend to the state broad policy guidelines in areas of
public life.
 To root out and expose any evil that may exist, to the public, and let the public be
satisfied as to its existence or non- existence.
 Though these inquiries are formed to function for a short time, they are set up to find or
provide long term solutions to problems other than attracting complaints.
1
Black’s law dictionary, page 306- ninth edition.
2
Black’s Law dictionary, page 864- ninth edition.
3
Study of Commissions of inquiries in Kenya ( AFRICA CENTRE FOR OPEN GOVERNANCE (AFriCOG) ) FIRST REPORT
2007
4
Public law in East Africa.
5
Journal by Joanna R. Quinn, Constraints: the un- doing of the Ugandan truth Commission- HUMAN RIGHTS
QUARTELY
6
Quinn, Joanna R. "Constraints: The Un-Doing of the Ugandan Truth Commission."
Human Rights Quarterly 26, (2004): 401-427.
 2021-B411-11717

Examples of commission of inquiry in Uganda include;

 The Land inquiry Commission 2017 which was being chaired by Lady Justice Catherine
Bamugemereire with seven members.
 The Commission of Inquiry into Violations of Human Rights 1986 was comprised of six
commissioners, all male, and was chaired by Ugandan Supreme Court Justice Arthur
Oder.
 The Global Fund commission of inquiry of 2012 led by Justice Ogoola to investigate on
the abuse of the global fund money for HIV, malaria and tuberculosis.
 Corruption commission of inquiry of 2002, chaired by justice Sebutinde to investigate on
the corruption in the Uganda Revenue Authority which by then President Museveni
termed it as a ‘den of thieves’.

The main functions or duties of commissions of inquiry in Uganda are to investigate, inform and
later recommend, which I believe all have been carried out by the commissions. The commission
of inquiry is guided by the Commission of Inquiry Act CAP 166 in Uganda. The Commissions of
Inquiry Act makes no provision for giving effect to the commission’s findings. The commission
is merely a fact-finding body having no power to pronounce a binding or definitive judgment or
orders. It collects facts through the evidence laid before it, and after considering the same, it
submits its report which the appointing authority may or may not accept. The Commission of
inquiry is not a court but it is merely clothed with certain powers of a civil court but it does not
have the status of court.

Yes, I agree with Bilowozo Bitono’s observation. From time to time arguments are raised to the
effect that inquiry commissions should be abolished entirely, or at least resorted to much less
frequently. The critics making these arguments suggest that inquiry commissions are
fundamentally unfair to the persons who are the subject of unfavorable comment, made either
during public hearings or in the commission’s report or even don’t show out the expected results
to the public.Despite the numerous commissions of inquiry, not much has changed in terms of
public perception of the ills the investigations were meant to cure. A cross section from
academicians to politicians believes the commissions of inquiry are a deliberate ploy by
government to defuse public rage on prevailing wrongs by the state.

The first ever commission under the NRM government was established in 1986 by the Justice
minister and attorney general Joseph Nyamihana Mulega, now deceased. The commission was
assigned to inquire into alleged human rights violations which had taken place from
 2021-B411-11717

independence on October 1962 to January 1986 when president Museveni took over power. The
commission was led by justice Arthur Oder. It began its hearings in December 1986. However,
after a few proceedings, it was brought to an abrupt halt due to lack of money. After a while it
was funded back to run its activities and also present ints report from the investigations made. A
720 page report was published in 1994 with findings, conclusions and recommendations.
Nevertheless, many people asser that the commission only served a political strategy to provide
legitimacy to the NRM government which had captured power through the gun.

In 1990, a commission was formed after the shooting of two Makerere University students in
that same year. The incident occurred on December 10, 1990, when university students
protested the government’s abolition of stationery and travel allowances. Police fired into the
crowd of the protesting students, killing two that is Patrick Okema and Patrick Onyango. Mr.
Ofwono Opondo the government’s spokesperson, said the two police officers involved in the
shooting together with their commander, Henry Tukairwa, were arrested and prosecuted. As the
commission of inquiry was created to investigate about this incident, there was no formal report
made to the public but rather mere comments of what was happening. Mr Opondo said” Mr.
Tukahirwa was later acquitted and was taken by the force again but he has not commanded any
operations”7. Additionally in the same newspaper, the formal Arua County MP Odonga Otto
added that commissions of inquiry are a state tool used to distract public attention from
sensitive issues.

Furthermore, in 2002, Justice Sebutinde again chaired another commission of inquiry into
corruption in the Uganda Revenue Authority before being appointed Judge with the
international Court of Justice. The commission started its work in May 2002 and was expected
to deliver its report three-four months later. However, the inquiry overshot its deadline. Even
when it was finally presented to government in February 2004, two of the commissioners
disowned the report and the public did not get access to it. Later in August 2004, the High Court
nullified the report. Another waste of tax payer’s money on a fruitless inquiry incurred. This
brings up the case of Kabugo v The Commissions of Inquiry and the Attorney General 8, the first
respondent was appointed as an advisory commission to gather information, study a problem
and advise the government on questions of land policy and possible changes. In this case, the
respondent (the commission of inquiry) acted beyond its statutory authority by issuing and
passing orders to the applicant stopping her from utilizing her land. The 1 st respondent acted

7
Daily Monitor journal- Saturday, April 05, 2014( Why an inquiry into Uganda’s numerous inquiries is needed)
8
misc. cause no. 108 of 2019
 2021-B411-11717

beyond given to him in the Commissions of Inquiry Act, Cap 166. That is, section 6 9, stipulates
the duties of the commissioners. The 1st respondent passed an order which was not in his duties
and powers instead of carrying out the activities and duties that where stipulated to it as when it
was formed. This brought out no result as no report was submitted to the public but rather
wastage of money through payments of personals and costs to pay to the applicant. Thus in
summary, the commission passed the deadline of submitting the report and even when it
submitted it later, it was disowned by the other members of the commission.

In the Kanungu cult massacre of 17 March 2000, where more than 1000 followers of Kibwetere’s
Restoration of Ten commandments of God cult in a church in Nyabugoto in Kanugu district.
Accordin to The Guardian10, the president promised to form a commission to investigate about
the incident in Kanugu. The after some months in the same year, the government followed up on
December 2 2000, with formation of a seven member judicial commission of inquiry led by
Justice Augustus Kania to investigate the homicide. The commission has never commission has
never started its work, the members say their work ended at receiving appointment letters. The
inquiry was re- launched last year after locals from kanugu petitioned Parliament. In this year, it
marks 22 years of the kibwetere mayhem, but no perpetrato has been arrested. So, nothing has
ever come out of this commission.

Besides, the justice Ogoola- led commission investigating the abuse of the global Fund money
for HIV, Malaria and tuberculosis implicated three ministers in misappropriation of 113 billion
Ugandan shillings. The commission recommended prosecution against three ministers who
were later acquitted although they lost their jobs in cabinet. But Soroti Mp Mike Mukala, who
was then minister of state for health, was last year convicted and sentenced to four years in
prison for embezzling shs210 million by the Anti- Corruption Court but the conviction was later
quashed on appeal. In this, it shows that they are no need for the commissions of inquiry if the
guilty parties are reported but later not punished by the government. Capt Mukula was co-
accused with Dr Alex Kamugisha and Ms. Alice Kaboyo, an employee at State House by then. On
June 12, 2012, Ms kaboyo pleaded guilty to all charges. All the accused were convicted to
different monies to pay. In the previous year, Human Rights Watch and Yale Law School’s
Allard K. Lowenstein released a 63- page report11, the report accused the government of failing
to punish senior officials implicated in theft of public funds. The report cited Global Fund
scandal 2010 as one of the failed investigations.

9
Commissions of Inquiry Act, Cap 166
10
Fri 24 Mar 2000
11
Letting the Big Fish Swim: Failure to Prosecute High Level Corruption in Uganda
 2021-B411-11717

Commissions of Inquiries have turned to be organs or bodies for revenge and personal interests
with the government rather than investigating, informing and recommending the government
about various duties attached to them. For Justice Kanyeihamba chaired an inquiry into alleged
mismanagement of funds at the Uganda Wildlife Authority. His probe team investigated the
management of the Shs95 billion Protected Areas Management Sustainable Use (PAMSU)
project meant for promoting tourism through improved infrastructure and training
facilities.however during the submission of the report some commissioners were against it thus
Justice Kanyeihamba acted according to the Commisions of Inquiry Act 12
According to Justice
Kanyeihamba’s comment on media, it seemed to indicate that his commission’s
recommendations were not taken seriously. The Minister of Tourism by then lamented that the
chairperson of the commission used wrong procedure to publish the report in media which
Justice Kanyeihamba was against. The minister continued saying that Justice Kanyeihamba
used that opportunity to tarnish and black mail people who were against him including the
minister himself that is Prof. Ephraim Kamuntu. 13
so many commissions have tended to blind
out the public that the government is trying to solve the problem yet in background, nothing is
received back by the public.

In 2016, President Yoweri Museveni, appointed a land commission of inquiry with seven
members to inquire the effectiveness of Law, Policies and processes of Land Acquisition, Land
administration, Land management and Land registration in Uganda. It was chaired by Hon.
Justice Lady Catherine Bamugemereire. The other Commissioners are:- Owekitibwa Robert
Ssebunya, Mrs. Mary Oduka Ochan, Mrs. Joyce Gunze Habaasa, Dr. Rose Nakayi, Hon. Fred
Ruhindi former Attorney General, and Mr. George Bagonza Tinkamanyire. Having handed in
their report to the president on Wednesday, July 29, 2020 according to the Uganda Media
Center, nothing has been put in place by the government though the commission did its part of
investigating, informing and recommending. Up to today, Uganda still faces many land cases
yet all these were addressed by the commission of Justice Bamugemereire. For example in the
case of Kabugo v Commission of Inquiry and the Attorney General 14, where the applicant was
using land yet the commission wanted to carry out investigation on. However this land was for
the applicant, so the 1st respondent ordered the applicant to stop his activities o that land which
was not in the commission’s jurisdiction. All such issues were addressed in the report of the

12
Commission Of Inquiry Act Cap 166 section 7
13
Daily Monitor, Sunday, September 25, 2011 — updated on January 24, 2021.

14
misc. cause no. 108 of 2019
 2021-B411-11717

commission of Justice Catherine Bamugemereire, thus the commission’s of inquiry have turned
to be a cloth used to blind Ugandans that a certain problem is being worked upon but in the end,
nothing is addressed to the public about investigations and the necessary recommendations.

In early 2001, Justice Sebutinde was appointed to lead another commission of inquiry into the
purchase of four defective helicopter gunships from Belarus. The attack helicopters were bought
in 1997 to fight the raging LRA insurgency in northern Uganda at that time. The fraudulent
chopper transaction sparked off heated defence in Parliament after it was discovered that senior
army and Ministry of Defence officials manipulated the deal for personal gain. The government
lst $12m. justice Sebutinde had recommended prosecution of several army and ministry of
defence officials. But after the report was submitted to the ministry of defence in august 2001,
some of the implicated officials were instead being prosecuted were turned into state witnesses
to exonerate Emma Kato, the supplier of the defective helicopter. Recently, retired justice of the
Supreme Court, Prof George Kanyeihamba, said:” it seems commissions of inquiry are useless
because no one listens to them”

However, these commissions of inquiry have to a less extent contributed to some developments
and changes in the country.

The most recent commission of inquiry to breed out results as expected by the public was the
commission which was chaired by Lady Justice Catherine Bamungereirwe. It was set up by
Minister in charge of Kampala Capital City Authority Frank Tumwebaze in June 2013 to
commission of inquiry act 15investigate the Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago after some councilors
voted to impeach him. Unlike other probes, its work was accomplished within pre-set 60 days
and the report was made public. Its recommendations saw the impeachment of the Lord Mayor.

In December 2009, president Museveni commissioned an inquiry just as the provided in th into
corruption in Universal Primary Education (UPE) and Universal Secondary Education (USE)
program . The commission of inquiry unearthed a lot of rot including “ghost” pupils and
teachers in nearly all schools around the country. The commission was chaired by Justice
Ezekeil Muhanguzi. It produced its report in October 2012. The country wide investigations cost
around shs4.3 billion. Corruption in USE and UPE derailed the program of the government. A
survey by Transparency International a Year after the probe showed mass enrollment into UPE
schools. It signaled success of the Justice Muhanguzi- led commission. Thus many commissions
have provided reports to the public and also recommendations to solve a certain problem .

15
Commissions Of Inquiry Act Cap 166 section 1
 2021-B411-11717

To conclude, to the greater extent, it is agreeable that the commissions of inquiry have been a
total waste of time, state resources because they are of no benefit to the tax payer since there is
no explanation on whatever amounts of money is spent, reports that have been produced by the
commissions, or even carrying out the recommendations that have been recommended by the
commissions by the government besides, we see that they are always lost of track and a total
disappointment to the citizens whom they are meant to instead benefit.