Effectiveness of anti-corruption measures in Uganda

Abstract

The government of Uganda has put in place and is implementing different home-grown and internationally proven anti-corruption measures such as rescission of contracts obtained through corrupt means, monetary fines for those implicated in corruption, debarment/blacklisting of companies or individuals known to have been corrupt in the past, asset declaration by leaders and government officials to detect and minimize corrupt accumulation of assets, whistleblowing to expose corruption by those who know about it, criminalizing money laundering to stem the flow of illegally or corruptly acquired money, and confiscation of assets or proceeds obtained through corruption, all aimed at curbing endemic corruption in the country. Nevertheless, corruption (both petty and grand) is still endemic in public institutions at all levels in Uganda. This article uses secondary and key informant primary data sources to critically explain why these anti-corruption measures have not been effective in the fight against corruption in Uganda. The main argument made in this article is that anti-corruption measures in Uganda have not been effective because they are inherently weak, a challenge that is compounded by political interferences in anti-corruption prosecutions and a dysfunctional anti-corruption institutional framework. This article recommends that anti-corruption measures should be fine-tuned to confront sophisticated corruption and be applied to all impartially.