Uganda recovers Shs41.9 billion as whistleblower fears test oversight

People who report wrongdoing to Uganda’s Inspectorate of Government can end up facing retaliation from the institutions they expose, its chief has warned. The warning came alongside a financial result: the watchdog said it recovered 41.9 billion Ugandan shillings from cases involving complaints about public administration in the 2025/2026 financial year, according to Daily Monitor Uganda (direct).

The inspectorate also ordered the payment of Shs2.4 billion in employment benefits. Speaking to reporters in Kampala on Monday, Inspector General of Government Aisha Naluzze Batala put those figures alongside a broader challenge: workers and citizens still face unpaid benefits, unfair employment decisions and lengthy waits for government services. She warned public institutions against punishing whistleblowers, saying such treatment restricts constitutional rights and weakens the rule of law.

Recovered money, unresolved frustrations

Batala said the inspectorate resolved at least 1,011 ombudsman cases last year—complaints concerning unfair treatment or failures in public administration—across central and local government. Such cases represented 37% of the investigations completed by the watchdog. The source places the recovery figure in the 2025/2026 financial year and describes the case total as covering last year; it does not explicitly align the two reporting periods.

Employment-related complaints form a major part of that workload. They include salaries, pensions and gratuities, or end-of-service payments, that are unpaid, calculated incorrectly or released late. Batala also identified irregular recruitment and malicious suspensions from duty among the administrative problems holding back development. She said the inspectorate had intervened to halt numerous recruitment processes involving the Public Service Commission and other institutions.

For citizens, the obstacles extend beyond the workplace. Batala pointed to unreasonable delays in obtaining national identity cards, land titles and passports, as well as getting onto the government payroll. She said the inspectorate’s role was to make sure that complicated procedures or a lack of money did not prevent a person’s complaint from being addressed. She called on regional inspectorate teams, Resident District Commissioners, district chairpersons and mayors to carry out spot-checks at public-service delivery points.

Protection depends on follow-through

But whistleblower Denis Yubu challenged the inspectorate over its own response times. He said slow feedback eroded confidence and made reporting wrongdoing dangerous. Yubu questioned the pace of handling complaints, including allegations involving former Speaker Anita Among and URSB Registrar General Mercy Kainobwisho. The source gives no findings on those allegations or a timetable for resolving the complaints.

Yubu argued that exposing corruption should not make whistleblowers targets of hostility or accusations that they serve foreign interests.

Yubu also said legitimate overseas funding for research or anti-corruption work should not automatically be treated as evidence of activity against the government. He cited cases of non-governmental organisations facing closure, frozen accounts or intimidation of staff, and urged the authorities to distinguish lawful accountability work from activities that break the law.

The next test is follow-through: the public-service checks Batala called for, responses to outstanding complaints and protection for those who bring them forward. Yubu called for mandatory whistleblower protection and for those reporting wrongdoing to be treated as partners in fighting corruption. The inspectorate’s recovery and payment figures show one part of its work; the warnings from both its chief and a whistleblower put the handling of complainants firmly in focus.