So why are some anti-corruption crusaders still unhappy?
In 2002 a row erupted at the country’s drug quality control body; the National Drug Authority (NDA). At the center were the head of the NDA Quality Control Laboratory, Atanasius Kakwemeire on one side and the Executive Director of NDA, Dr. William Nganwa and the Executive Secretary Dr. John Lule on the other.
Nganwa and Lule had authorised the importation of drugs from a Chinese company called Ningbo Pharmaceuticals that had been blacklisted for failing to meet Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP).
The two officials, despite not being drug inspectors, had forced themselves to travel to China to do drugs inspection. It took a lot of pressure from other members of the authority and 15 months to press them for the report. In the meantime, the drugs from Ningbo kept on coming on the Ugandan market. When the officials finally produced the report they confirmed that Ningbo fell below the GMPs, standards. Other members of the drugs inspection committee resolved to ban Ningbo Pharmaceuticals.
However, other assorted drug consignments were on their way into Uganda on orders of Nganwa and Lule. Of these, 90 percent were antimalarials.
When the drugs arrived, the duo asked Kakwemeire to clear the drugs by issuing a clearance certificate. “I refused,†he says firmly as if the incident just happened yesterday.
They asked him to test the drugs. “I was hesitant at first but I finally yielded to their pressure for fear of insubordination,†Kakwemeire says. I tested both the physical and chemical part of the drugs.
“I found the labeling was counterfeit and the injection water had particulate matter. I submitted my report to the National Drug Commission with a certificate of rejection.â€
The chairman of the commission and secretary were Nganwa and Lule. “My report was rejected. Kakwemeire was also given conditions: you either issue the clearance certificate or you lose your job. He refused to sign but the drugs were let in with the permission of the two drug officials.
“I took on the crusade role. I took the matter to Internal Security Organisation, Criminal Investigations Department and to Special Protection Unit that was headed by Kayihura then. The duo were later charged by the DPP for neglect of duty and abuse of office and imprisoned in Luzira.
But to my dismay, Kakwemerire says, they only spent there two days and were discharged.
When they came back to office they dismissed me, Kakwemeire laments, I reported the matter to the IGG who later did investigations and ordered them to reinstate me but they ignored him.
For three years the case dragged in court and finally when it was heard and after the prosecution making their submissions, the DPP made a U-turn and said the state had lost interest in the case.
Kakwemerere’s joblessness had to continue.
Uganda has experienced a number of bribery and corruption scandals and of course in many of these scandals huge sums of tax payers’ money have been lost and in the extreme of circumstances; the victims have paid with their lives. But one group of people who go unnoticed is the Kakwemereire-type – those who dare to lift the lid on some of these disturbing deals.
Fortunately for them, Parliament is debating the Whistleblowers Bill 2008, sponsored by  minister of Ethics and Integrity Nsaba Buturo.
The Bill seeks to protect the so-called whistleblowers; individuals in both private and public sector who may in the public interest and in good faith, disclose information that relates to irregular, illegal or corrupt practices against victimisation like dismissal, suspension or denial of promotion among other vices. The Bill provides for whistleblowers to be provided with security in case they feel their life, family, or property is in danger.
It requires a whistleblower to externally report to either the inspector of government, the director of public prosecution, the Uganda Human Rights Commission, the Directorate of Ethics and Integrity the Resident District Commissioner or all of them. The officials are required to reduce all information given to them in writing and maintain its confidentiality pending investigation.
The inclusion RDCs who are political appointees has, however, been criticised. It is feared that giving them authority to use their discretion to investigate and stay investigations in cases where the disclosures are not made in good faith and take appropriate action blurs the good will behind the bill.
“They are all NRM members suppose you’re whistle blowing about a member of NRM? There’s conflict of interest,†says Cissy Kagaba, the acting Coordinator of the Anti-Corruption Coalition of Uganda.Â
In case of the IGG, Kagaba says adding the whistleblower component might be too much on their plate unless government increases the money it gives to the institution. She also demands further safeguards for whistleblowers including relocation abroad.
Kenya’s Witness Protection Act 2006 provides for the protection of witnesses in criminal cases including whistleblowers by concealing their identities so as to shield them from victimisation. It establishes a witness protection programme, which is coordinated by the Attorney General on behalf of the police and other law enforcement agencies.
It has also been noted that as much as the Bill is important, it will not achieve much unless the public institutions responsible for investigation; prosecution and trial of corruption are effective in their work.
During the debate on the bill, William Nsubuga (NRM, Buvuma) said. “Unless nationalism is strengthened, this whistleblowers Bill cannot succeed; you report the corrupt and people disown you.â€
Kakwemerire differs. It’s not that we lack patriots, he says, its fear of lack of protection from those about whom the disclosures are made. This view is supported by Aruu MP Odonga Otto: “There is need to first strengthen the protection of the volunteers of information on the corrupt.â€
Subscribe to this comment's feed
