Parliament has demanded the full procurement file for a specialised fire-fighting vehicle bought by the Uganda Civil Aviation Authority (UCAA) for Shs5.3985 billion, as MPs investigate how the cost was determined.
The demand was made on Tuesday by the Committee on Commissions, Statutory Authorities and State Enterprises (COSASE) during a meeting with UCAA officials to examine issues raised in the Auditor General’s report.
The scrutiny followed an earlier inspection of Entebbe International Airport, where committee members examined the fire truck but said UCAA had not provided documents confirming its ownership and procurement details.
UCAA subsequently presented the registration book for motor vehicle UA38070AA, showing that it was registered on June 22, 2026, with the authority listed as the owner.
The vehicle is a Lion 6X6 Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) truck manufactured in Turkey and fitted with a Scania engine. Its registration documents classify it as an engineering plant.
However, the registration documents did little to ease MPs’ concerns over the Sh5.3985 billion price tag.
COSASE Chairperson Muwada Nkunyingi pressed UCAA officials to explain how the authority arrived at the purchase price and provide evidence of the procurement process.
“How much was this truck? How much did it cost? Who bought it?” Nkunyingi asked, demanding details of the vehicle’s specifications and features that would justify its cost.
UCAA Director General Fred Bamwesigye defended the expenditure, explaining that the vehicle is specialised aircraft rescue equipment rather than an ordinary fire engine.
Samuel Wonekha, the Acting Director of Airports, told the committee that the truck has a 12,500-litre water tank, foam equipment and specialised tools used to gain access to damaged aircraft and rescue passengers.
He added that it has a specialised generator capable of powering equipment used to cut through aircraft during rescue operations.
UCAA officials further told the MPs that the authority secured the vehicle at a lower price than similar aircraft rescue and fire-fighting equipment purchased by other airports in the region after negotiating with the suppliers.
The explanation did not satisfy the committee, which said it needed documentary evidence showing how the final price was reached.
COSASE directed its researchers to establish the market price of similar Lion 6X6 ARFF vehicles and compare it with the amount paid by UCAA.
The committee also asked the Criminal Investigations Directorate (CID) to verify the authenticity of the vehicle’s registration documents and establish whether it is genuinely owned by UCAA.
UCAA was given until close of business to submit the complete procurement file, including documents detailing the procurement process, supplier, technical specifications, negotiations and final purchase price.
The committee said the documents would help determine why UCAA paid more than Shs5.3 billion for the vehicle and whether the cost was justified by its specifications.
“What is the uniqueness? How did you arrive at this cost?” the committee asked.
Meanwhile, COSASE also raised concerns over a transformer reportedly procured from Vietnam at a cost of about Shs2.3 billion. The committee said the equipment had not been delivered by the time MPs inspected the airport.
In a blistering late-afternoon X post that sent Uganda’s political elite scrambling for cover, Chief of Defence Forces Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba has delivered a thunderous warning that has left Masaka City Woman MP and State Minister Justine Nameere reeling.
“There will be ABSOLUTELY no party for AAA. We shall arrest anybody involved in that nonsense! Forgiving someone does not mean they do not have unresolved cases,” the First Son and army chief declared, his words landing like a military order across the nation.
The target of the fury? A reported “massive party” allegedly being organised by Nameere to celebrate the dramatic release of former Speaker of Parliament Anita Annet Among — the once-untouchable AAA — from months of humiliating house arrest.
Just weeks ago, Muhoozi himself had announced that President Museveni had ordered Among’s release and ruled out prosecution, declaring that “Mzee has decided to forgive her” despite her “mistakes.” The nation watched as the former Speaker, whose luxury properties were raided in a high-profile anti-corruption sweep earlier this year, walked free after more than 100 days under restriction.
But celebration, it seems, is strictly forbidden.
According to circulating reports and social media storm, Nameere — a vocal figure who once clashed publicly in the bitter speakership battles of 2026 — had begun mobilising for a high-profile bash to mark Among’s return. In political circles, the move was seen as either a bold show of loyalty or a reckless gamble in the cut-throat world of NRM and PLU power plays.
Muhoozi’s response was swift and absolute. No cake, no music, no victory dances. Anyone daring to host or attend such an event risks immediate arrest. The message was clear: mercy has limits, and the unresolved cases against the former Speaker remain a live wire.
In a panicked follow-up that only added fuel to the fire, Anita Among herself rushed to X to distance herself completely. “My brother Gen, there are no arrangements by myself or individuals associated with me to host any party. God bless!” she pleaded, effectively throwing cold water on the entire idea and leaving Nameere looking isolated.
Political watchers are calling it pure theatre — and pure power. Just months after Among’s spectacular fall from the Speaker’s chair, the raids on her homes, the public parading of her luxury vehicles, and her political isolation, the same circles that once cheered her rise are now navigating a minefield. Nameere, previously linked in public feuds involving PLU Secretary General Daudi Kabanda and the speakership race, finds herself once again in the crosshairs.
Is this the final act of a carefully managed political rehabilitation — or the opening shot of a new crackdown? Insiders whisper that the “forgiveness” was never a blank cheque. Unresolved allegations of corruption and illicit enrichment still hang in the air, and Muhoozi’s intervention signals that the First Son is keeping a tight grip on the narrative.
As night falls on Kampala, the champagne remains uncorked, the guest lists shredded, and one question echoes through the corridors of power: Who else is next on the list of those who dare to celebrate too soon?
In Uganda’s high-stakes political arena, one wrong party invitation can still land you in the basement. Nameere has been put on notice. AAA is walking a tightrope. And Gen. Muhoozi has reminded everyone who holds the remote control.
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at Submit an Article
Two people have been killed and nine others injured in a fatal road crash involving four vehicles at Nkoowe along the Kampala–Hoima Road in Wakiso District.
The crash occurred on Tuesday, September 8, 2026, at around 1:33 p.m., according to police.
The vehicles involved were a Sino Truck, registration number UBK 495F; a Toyota Hiace commuter taxi, UAT 272J; a Subaru Forester, UBB 353D; and a Toyota Wish, UBE 918T.
Preliminary police investigations indicate that the Sino Truck, which was carrying stones and travelling from Kakiri towards Kampala, lost control at Nkoowe before ramming into the three other vehicles.
Among the vehicles hit was the commuter taxi, which had reportedly stopped to load passengers.
The impact killed the taxi driver and conductor on the spot.
Nine passengers travelling in the commuter taxi were injured in the crash. The injured comprised five adults and four juveniles.
Police said investigations into the circumstances surrounding the crash are ongoing.
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at Submit an Article
Ugandan singer Rahma Pinky has made it clear that she has no plans to part with her tattoos — even in death.
The singer was addressing the long-running conversations among Muslims about tattoos, including claims that they should be removed from a deceased person’s body. Pinky’s response was characteristically firm: she does not want hers removed when she dies.
“If you pass on in Islam, they remove all your tattoos, please don’t dare remove mine. Leave them on, I will explain to God when I face Him,” Pinky said.
For Pinky, the tattoos are not simply fashion accessories. She describes them as intentional markings that document different parts of her life, with each one carrying a meaning known to her.
“I don’t owe any human being any explanation,” she said. “My tattoos are so intentional.”
The singer says she has more than 12 tattoos, including markings on her face as well as her name and date of birth.
Among the tattoos is one dedicated to her late brother, giving the collection a deeply personal connection to her family and memories.
“My face, date of birth, my name, my lost brother and how delicate I am,” she explained.
While tattoos have often attracted debate within Muslim communities, particularly over whether they are permissible and what should happen to them after death, Pinky appears uninterested in allowing such discussions to dictate what she does with her body.
Instead, she views the tattoos as a permanent record of experiences, relationships and aspects of her identity.
Her comments underline a broader attitude she has maintained about her appearance — that the decisions she makes about her body are personal and do not require approval or explanation from other people.
For Pinky, even the possibility of answering for those choices in the afterlife is something she is prepared to face herself.
“I will explain to God when I face Him,” she said.
Don’t want to miss out on any story? For updates on all Sqoop stories, follow this link on Telegram:https://t.me/Sqoop
As Uganda’s financial sector continues to evolve, driven by growing pension savings, collective investment schemes, and increased participation in capital markets, one critical yet often underappreciated service is playing a central role in safeguarding investor wealth. While the term custodial services may sound technical, these services are fundamental to protecting investments, enhancing transparency, and strengthening confidence in Uganda’s financial system.
Behind every pension contribution, unit trust investment, government bond purchase, or corporate security lies a custodian ensuring that investors’ assets are safe, properly accounted for, and managed in line with regulatory requirements.
Who Regulates Custodial Services in Uganda?
Custodial services operate within a tightly regulated framework designed to protect investors and maintain market integrity. In Uganda, custodians are licensed and supervised by key regulators, including the Capital Markets Authority (CMA), which oversees capital market activities, and the Uganda Retirement Benefits Regulatory Authority (URBRA), which regulates retirement benefits schemes. In addition, the custodians are domiciled within licensed banking institutions, and their activities are subject to oversight by the Bank of Uganda, which regulates and supervises banks. Custodians also comply with requirements issued by securities depositories and other market infrastructure institutions.
This robust regulatory oversight ensures that investor assets are held independently, transactions are properly recorded, and financial institutions adhere to the highest standards of governance, risk management and accountability.
What Is the Role of a Custodian?
A custodian is an independent financial institution trusted to safely hold and administer investors’ assets, such as government securities, shares, bonds, pension fund investments and unit trusts.
A custodian does more than keep assets safe, they help complete investment transactions, receive income such as dividends and interest, update ownership records, check investment balances and provide reports to investors and regulators. In simple terms, it is like a trusted record keeper who ensures every investment is received, recorded and accounted for.
This independence is important because it separates the people who manage investments from the institution that holds them. Like keeping house keys with a trusted caretaker rather than the tenant, this separation helps reduce fraud, errors and misuse of investor funds.
Why Custodial Services Matter
Uganda is at a pivotal stage of financial development. Pension funds, insurance companies, asset managers and collective investment schemes are managing increasingly larger pools of capital, creating a need for stronger financial infrastructure.
Custodial services safeguard investor assets by ensuring they are held securely and separately from the assets of service providers. This means that regardless of challenges faced by an institution, investor assets remain protected.
Custodians also provide independent oversight of investment transactions. Every trade is verified, reconciled and accurately recorded, reducing operational risks and enhancing transparency. This visibility enables regulators, trustees, fund managers and investors to make informed decisions while promoting confidence in Uganda’s capital markets.
In addition, custodians facilitate the efficient functioning of financial markets by supporting trade settlement, asset servicing and investment participation across local and international markets. Their presence is widely regarded as a hallmark of a mature and trustworthy financial system.
Who Are the Typical Clients of Custodial Services?
Custodial services usually work behind the scenes, but they serve clients whose investments affect many Ugandans.
Typical clients include pension and retirement benefits schemes, unit trusts, insurance companies, asset managers, corporate institutions, government entities, high-net-worth individuals and other institutional investors.
Through these clients, custodians help protect the retirement savings, insurance funds and investment portfolios of ordinary Ugandans.
How Do Custodial Services Benefit an Ordinary Ugandan?
Many Ugandans may never meet a custodian, but they benefit from the protection custodians provide.
For example, when a worker contributes to a pension scheme, a custodian helps ensure that the savings are safely held and independently monitored. When someone invests in a unit trust or government security, the custodian helps ensure the investment is properly recorded and reconciled.
At a national level, strong custody services attract more investment, support business growth, and strengthen confidence in Uganda’s financial markets. This can contribute to jobs, economic growth, and broader financial inclusion.
Simply put, custodial services help ensure that when Ugandans invest for the future, their money is protected, properly recorded and independently checked.
What New Innovation Is Centenary Bank Bringing to the Custody Market?
Centenary Bank is entering the custody market with solutions aimed at improving access, transparency, and confidence for investors.
Through its custodial services, the Bank will support different investment products and institutional investors while using technology to improve safekeeping, reporting, transparency, and efficiency.
This is an important step for Uganda’s financial market. By combining its national presence, governance standards and technology-led service model, Centenary Bank aims to provide investors with a trusted local partner for custody services.
A Catalyst for Uganda’s Financial Transformation
As Uganda continues to grow its savings and investment culture, custodial services will become even more important. They provide the trust and structure needed for long-term savings, institutional investment and capital market growth.
Think of custodial services as the quiet security system behind an investment. The investor may not see it every day, but it protects assets, supports accountability and helps the market operate with confidence.
In simple terms, custodial services are not just a back-office function. They are a key part of financial trust. They help ensure that every shilling entrusted for investment is protected, accounted for, and positioned to grow.
The writer is the Manager Custodial Services, Centenary Bank.
A Sh41 billion government investment meant to turn Uganda into a silk-producing powerhouse has been plunged into fresh controversy, with Parliament probing stalled projects amid questions over the motive and timing of its Sheema visit, who knew the MPs were coming and who actually organised the controversial Sunday inspection.
Members of the Parliamentary Committee on Science, Technology and Innovation visited government-funded sericulture projects in Sheema and Kiruhura over the weekend as part of their oversight duties.
But in Sheema, the inspection quickly turned into a confrontation of accounts, with the legislators failing to access the factory and district officials subsequently challenging the manner in which the visit was organised.
WHO ACTUALLY INVITED WHOM?
Sheema District officials maintain that they were never properly informed about the parliamentary inspection and, more importantly, question why TRIDI, an entity at the centre of the project’s accountability questions, was the one communicating the planned visit to the district.
Committee chairperson Patrick Musinguzi, the Kashari North MP, told RedPepper otherwise.
“First of all for Kiruhura, all stakeholders including DLG and all officials were present which means they knew of our coming and they all attended,” he said.
“In Sheema, we have an acknowledgment letter from the district which clarifies that they received the letter.”
Musinguzi also said he personally spoke to Chief Administrative Officer Huddu Nsubuga, who told him that he had delegated one of his staff, the entomologist, to represent him.
“The CAO that you are referring to I personally talked to him and he said he had delegated one of his staff the entomologist,” he said.
But documents obtained by RedPepper now add another twist to the dispute.
The communication received by Sheema District was not a letter directly from the parliamentary committee to the district leadership.
Instead, it was a letter from TRIDI Executive Director and Sericulture Project Principal Investigator Dr Clet Wandui Masiga, inviting district officials to participate in the parliamentary visit.
The letter, dated September 3, 2026, was addressed to a wide range of Sheema stakeholders, including the District Chairperson, Sheema Woman MP, Sheema Municipality MP, Chief Administrative Officer, District Police Commander, District Internal Security Officer, District Operation Wealth Creation Coordinator, District Production Officer, District Planner, District Entomology Officer and other local officials.
It also copied the TRIDI Board of Directors and legal team.
Its subject read:
“MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE OF SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION OF THE PARLIAMENT OF UGANDA VISIT TO THE COMMERCIALISATION OF SERICULTURE TECHNOLOGIES AND INNOVATION PROJECT.”
In the letter, Masiga stated that TRIDI had received a communication from Members of Parliament on the Committee on Science and Technology informing the institute that they would visit the Commercialisation of Sericulture Technologies and Innovations in Uganda at Rubare Sericulture Research and Development Centre, Sheema District, on Sunday, September 6, 2026 at 2:00pm to assess its progress.
The letter explained that the project was partly funded as a Presidential Initiative by the Government of Uganda through Science, Technology and Innovations, Office of the President.
Masiga then invited the listed district officials to participate in the visit, saying the purpose was to update themselves about the project and learn about TRIDI’s model of sericulture development in Uganda.
That letter has now become central to the dispute because the Sheema District Chairperson responded two days later by rejecting the proposed visit.
SHEEMA CHAIRPERSON FIRES BACK
In a letter dated September 4, 2026, Sheema District Chairperson Tumwijukye Jemimah Buhanda acknowledged receipt of TRIDI’s communication.
But rather than welcoming the parliamentary team, she told TRIDI that the district leadership had objected to the station visit until proper procedures were followed and outstanding issues addressed.
The letter was titled:
“CALL OFF OF THE COMMITTEE OF SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION OF PARLIAMENT VISIT TO RUBARE SERICULTURE STATION ON 6/9/2026.”
The District Chairperson stated that Rubare Sericulture Centre is a joint venture between UNCST and Sheema District Local Government, which she said are the shareholders, and therefore argued that the facility was not part of the TRIDI model.
She further pointed to unresolved issues and recommendations contained in the 11th Parliament committee report of May 2023, which she said had also been adopted by the district council but had never been acted upon.
The letter raised an even stronger objection to TRIDI’s involvement.
The Chairperson stated that TRIDI was one of the respondents in a petition that had been handled, and questioned its authority to invite the district leadership to participate in the parliamentary visit.
She argued that the main stakeholder in the matter was the district council, which she described as the custodian of district assets on behalf of the public.
The Chairperson also objected to the timing of the inspection, pointing out that Sunday is not a working day and therefore the district leadership would not be in a position to participate.
She consequently informed TRIDI that the district leadership had objected to the visit until proper procedures were followed and the issues raised were handled.
She then directed the Chief Administrative Officer to take charge and ensure that the station property was “heavily guarded and protected.”
Copies of the letter were sent to the CAO, Resident District Commissioner, District Police Commander and District Internal Security Officer.
The exchange leaves a significant contradiction.
While Musinguzi says the district had been informed and had acknowledged the communication, the District Chairperson’s written response shows that, after receiving TRIDI’s invitation, the district leadership objected to the proposed visit.
‘HOW DID TRIDI GET TO MPs?’
A prominent member of Sheema District Local Government, who asked not to be named because he is not authorised to speak on behalf of the district, has now questioned the committee’s conduct, accusing it of seeking publicity rather than solutions.
He said the committee’s visit was not properly organised and that established procedures should have been followed.
“They are gathering popularism instead of looking for solutions. Their colleagues, our MPs, should guide them on how to conduct themselves when they are executing their oversight role. Their visit was not properly organized,” he said.
According to the official, when a parliamentary committee intends to inspect a project, it should communicate with the relevant stakeholders and allow them to organise the visit.
He argued that in the case of the Rubare silk factory, the principal stakeholder is Sheema District Local Government, and therefore the committee chairperson, Patrick Musinguzi, should have formally written to the District Chairperson, who would then invite the relevant district officials and other stakeholders, including TRIDI.
But, he claimed, that is not what happened.
“What happened? It’s TRIDI which invited the district leadership. How did the contractor get in touch with MPs committee to invite them?” he asked.
The official questioned how a contractor facing accountability questions over a stalled project could effectively become the channel through which the district was invited to a parliamentary inspection of that same project.
“TRIDI was given UGX41bn and they have a lot of accountability issues. The factory has been closed since many years ago,” he said.
He further questioned why the committee did not first consult Prime Minister Rt Hon Robinah Nabbanja, whom he said is already handling the silk factory matter.
“Secondly, the PM, Rt Hon Robinah Nabanja is handling this matter. Why didn’t these MPs seek the attention of PM first; find out where she is with the project and inform themselves?” he asked.
Instead, he accused the committee of allowing itself to be led into the matter by an entity he described as a contractor culpable of having failed the project.
“Instead, they are being led by a contractor who is culpable of having failed the project,” he said.
AREA MPs WERE NOT TOLD
The official also complained that none of the area’s MPs, including the municipality MP where the project is located, had been informed about the committee’s visit.
He said that although Parliament was on recess, basic courtesy and teamwork would have required the visiting MPs to alert their colleagues.
“To make matters worse, none of our MPs or even our municipality MP where the project is located was/were aware of their visit. Parliament is now on recess. Team work, comradeship, courtesy would require that you inform your MPs colleagues when you are visiting their constituencies or district. None of the above,” he said.
He accused the committee of being more interested in publicity than solving the underlying problems.
“Instead they were looking for camera and cheap popularism. Therefore, accordingly, their visit was not properly sanctioned,” he said.
He argued that TRIDI, as a contractor, had no mandate to invite MPs into the district and then invite the district administration to a project inspection.
“TRIDI, a contractor has no mandate to invite MPs into a district and invite the district administration. Can you imagine your contractor engineer inviting you and guests to your project?” he asked.
Musinguzi, however, rejected the suggestion that area MPs had to be informed before the inspection.
“All members of Parliament fall under committees and at the moment they are all busy doing committee work, so we are not mandated to inform them,” Musinguzi said.
He added that the committee visited the area MP, Dickens Kateshumbwa, after the inspection.
WHY A SUNDAY INSPECTION?
The timing of the visit has also attracted attention.
The committee arrived on a Sunday, when district offices would ordinarily not have their full administration in place.
Questions have therefore been raised over why the inspection was conducted over the weekend and whether the timing made it more difficult for district officials and other stakeholders to participate.
Musinguzi dismissed the concern, telling RedPepper that Parliament’s oversight mandate does not prescribe the day or time when committees should inspect government-funded projects.
“When we are doing oversights as mandated by Rules of Procedure Article 193, there is nowhere it’s stipulated that we should visit at such a day or time, so that does not suffice,” he said.
He said the absence of a particular district official could not stop Parliament from carrying out its mandate.
“When the leadership is not around they don’t move with the office…” he said.
But the Sheema official insists the issue goes beyond the choice of Sunday.
He argues that the fundamental question is who organised the visit, who authorised it and whether the relevant district authorities were given an opportunity to participate in an oversight exercise concerning an asset they consider theirs.
DID TRIDI ‘PAY’ MPs FOR THE PROBE?
Questions are now emerging over who actually initiated the parliamentary inspection — whether the Committee on Science, Technology and Innovation independently planned the visit as part of its oversight mandate, or whether TRIDI invited or facilitated the MPs’ inspection.
The questions have been fuelled by allegations that TRIDI may have sought to use the parliamentary probe to revive its stalled project and potentially secure fresh government funding for the same Sh41 billion investment.
Musinguzi, however, dismissed allegations that TRIDI “facilitated” the committee’s trip, saying Parliament, not TRIDI, facilitated the MPs’ travel.
“About TRIDI of course they are funded by the government so we knew how much funding they had received from Government and that’s the reason we had come to assess and find out on what was happening,” he said.
He added: “How can TRIDI facilitate us when we had come to audit them and assess what they have done with the fund!!?”
According to Musinguzi, Parliament facilitated the committee’s travel.
“Parliament facilitated our travel and we are moving all over the country to assess all funded projects not TRIDI alone,” he said.
He said committees write to funded projects before conducting oversight visits and that, where such projects have a relationship with a district, the project is expected to notify the district.
“For us when we are to assess projects we write to the funded projects and if they have any relationship with the district they are the ones that notify them and TRIDI informed Sheema,” he said.
The TRIDI letter now confirms that TRIDI did communicate with Sheema District about the planned parliamentary visit.
However, the District Chairperson’s response shows that the district leadership did not simply accept the invitation. It expressly objected to the visit, citing ownership, unresolved accountability issues and the fact that the inspection was scheduled for a Sunday.
That leaves the central questions hanging: How did TRIDI become the link between the parliamentary committee and the district? Who initiated the contact? Did TRIDI merely pass on information from Parliament, or did it play a larger role in organising the inspection? And could the parliamentary scrutiny ultimately become a route for renewed government funding to TRIDI?
Those questions remain allegations and are not established by the documents or statements so far.
SH41BN INVESTMENT UNDER SCRUTINY
Beyond the dispute over the visit, the bigger concern is what happened to the money and why the projects have not become operational.
In 2022, government planned to invest Sh756 billion over five financial years to promote sericulture across 50 districts.
The Sh41 billion TRIDI project was intended to promote silk production and commercialisation in Sheema, Kiruhura, Bulambuli, Kween, Kamuli, Mubende, Mukono, Iganga, Luwero, Kayunga, Nakaseke, Bukedea, Zombo, Nwoya, Buikwe, Pallisa, Busia, Amolatar, Otuke, Lira, Agago and Pader.
The ambition was to create employment, increase household incomes, support rural communities and generate revenue for Uganda.
Instead, Parliament is now examining why the initiative has remained stalled for more than three years.
TRIDI Executive Director is Dr Clet Wandui Masiga.
KIRUHURA: 25 ACRES BUT NO PROJECT
In Kiruhura, District Chairperson Dan Mukago Rutetebya said the district allocated 25 acres of land for the project.
According to Rutetebya, however, the initiative failed after the contractor allegedly invested the funds allocated for the project in other projects across different districts.
The district eventually lost hope of benefiting from the project, he said.
Rutetebya said the district later wrote to the contractor seeking an explanation but had not received a response.
The allegation is expected to feature prominently when the contractor appears before Parliament.
CONTRACTOR TO EXPLAIN
Tororo Municipality MP Shyam Jay Tanna said the committee had identified several gaps in the implementation of the project.
He said the contractor would be summoned to Parliament to provide a detailed account of the project’s implementation and explain why it stalled.
The committee is therefore expected to seek answers on the money released, what was delivered, what remains incomplete and why the facilities have failed to become operational.
Musinguzi said the committee’s findings on the utilisation of funds are already contained in its report.
“About utilization of funds it’s in our report and it shall become a public document after presentation on floor of Parliament,” he said.
The public will therefore have to wait for the report before the committee’s full findings on the Sh41 billion investment become known.
Musinguzi said Parliament is interested not only in establishing what went wrong but also in finding ways to revive the initiative.
He said the project could create jobs, improve household incomes, support rural communities and generate revenue if adequately funded, properly managed and developed on a commercial scale.
‘WE ARE FOLLOWING THIS MATTER WITH THE PM’
The prominent Sheema District Local Government member said the district is already pursuing the silk factory issue through the Prime Minister’s office and does not want the matter turned into a political spectacle.
“We are following this Silk factory issue with PM. We don’t want to be diverted by camera hungry committees. Ours, is to bring strategic employment through this factory functionality and we don’t need stupid politics,” he said.
He linked the district’s position to the wider NRM government agenda of industrialisation and job creation.
“Remember, as NRM party, we pledged in our manifesto that we shall industrialise our country and create employment. This is part of NRM historical mission. Therefore, our efforts are aimed at making this factory work,” he said.
He insisted that the district’s priority was to get the facility functioning rather than engage in political exchanges.
“Not going around shouting with defamatory stories which don’t make sense or even help our society,” he said.
For now, the Sh41 billion silk project remains caught between parliamentary scrutiny, district objections and questions over what happened to the investment.
And as the contractor prepares to face Parliament, the biggest question remains: where did the Sh41 billion go, why is the silk project still stalled, and who stands to benefit if government decides to pump more money into it?
Watch this space!
GOT A HOT STORY? LET US KNOW!
Got breaking news, explosive secrets, or hard evidence?
Access to climate adaptation finance remains a significant challenge for smallholder farmers and rural businesses across Africa, with available capital often failing to reach those who need it most.
To help bridge this financing and delivery gap, the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and Equity Group on Friday, kicked off the Africa Rural Climate Adaptation Finance Mechanism (ARCAFIM) – a US$200 million, private sector-led mechanism built to close that gap for smallholder farmers and rural businesses across East Africa – at the Africa Food Systems Forum 2026 in Kigali, Rwanda.
ARCAFIM is convened with the co-financiers of the Green Climate Fund, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland and the Nordic Development Fund and also co-financed by the Government of Denmark and the European Union.
The mechanism runs for twelve years and is structured in two parts: US$180 million of lending capital and approximately US$20 million of technical assistance. Because the lending capital revolves over roughly four investment cycles, it is expected to generate in the order of US$266 million in loans to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) and smallholder farmers across East Africa’s food systems.
What distinguishes ARCAFIM is a detailed climate change adaptation taxonomy ensuring critical knowledge transfer of viable climate adaptation investment options to participating financial institutions and smallholder farmers and agro-businesses and that a commercial bank is carrying the risk alongside the public capital rather than administering it.
Of the US$180 million lending base, US$90 million comes from Equity Group’s own balance sheet, matching the concessional contribution one for one. Credit protection is tranched across the portfolio, with international financing partners covering a first-loss layer, a mezzanine layer shared with the bank, and the bank carrying the senior risk.
The programme will operate in Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Rwanda, with the ambition of providing financing to approximately 260,000 smallholder producers and 500 rural MSMEs. At least 50 per cent of the intended beneficiaries will be women and 30 per cent youth.
Seated L-R: Equity Bank Kenya Managing Director, Moses Nyabanda, and Gérardine Mukeshimana, IFAD Vice President, during the signing ceremony of the Africa Rural Climate Adaptation Finance Mechanism.
The initiative is expected to strengthen food security for approximately 1.2 million people and to benefit an estimated 1.5 million people in total, directly and indirectly, while helping rural communities and businesses invest in measures that enable them to better withstand the effects of climate change.
The measure of success is commercial permanence. ARCAFIM is designed so that lending for climate resilience survives as an ordinary business line for African financial institutions long after the concessional capital has been spent.
Speaking during the launch, Dr. Gérardine Mukeshimana, Vice President IFAD, said the success of climate adaptation finance will ultimately depend on its ability to translate global commitments into tangible investments in rural communities.
“ARCAFIM’s ambition is to make rural climate adaptation a recognizable, viable and sustainable business line for African financial institutions. It will support tailored financial products and a climate adaptation financing taxonomy, so that participating institutions gain the experience, systems and confidence to continue expanding adaptation finance. The mechanism is starting in East Africa, but it is designed to be adapted and replicated across Africa,” said Mukeshimana.
The technical assistance component is part of the financial architecture rather than an add-on. It builds the capacity of participating microfinance institutions and SACCOs to originate adaptation lending and gives farmers and rural enterprises the technical knowledge to identify which investments will actually protect them — irrigation and water harvesting, dairy and livestock resilience, post-harvest storage, renewable energy, and climate-resilient agro-processing.
Dr. James Mwangi, Group Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of Equity Group Holdings Plc, said the mechanism reframes how African finance sees the rural borrower.
“Africa’s smallholder farmers are not waiting to be rescued. They are entrepreneurs operating in the most demanding risk environment on earth, and what they have lacked is a financial system built to back them. ARCAFIM changes that equation. By committing our own balance sheet alongside concessional capital, we are not funding a project — we are building a market, one in which lending climate resilience becomes an ordinary banking business rather than an act of charity. Dignity begins with being seen as bankable. If we prove this in East Africa, the model belongs to the whole continent,” said Dr. Mwangi.
Moses Nyabanda, Managing Director of Equity Bank Kenya Limited, said the bank will play a direct role in translating climate adaptation finance into practical investments for farmers and agricultural value chain businesses.
“Through ARCAFIM, we will finance smallholder farmers and agricultural producers directly and through microfinance institutions, SACCOs and value chain companies, while extending financing to rural MSMEs. We will also build capacity on climate adaptation finance and promote sustainable agricultural practices and technologies. The goal is simple: enable farmers and agricultural businesses to adapt, increase production, grow revenues and incomes, and become more resilient to the effects of climate change,” said Nyabanda.
L-R: Equity Bank Kenya Managing Director, Moses Nyabanda, and Dr. Gérardine Mukeshimana, IFAD Vice President, during the signing ceremony of the Africa Rural Climate Adaptation Finance Mechanism.
“ARCAFIM is an important example of Green Climate Fund’s (GCF’s) catalytic role in bringing partners and capital together to scale up investment in climate-resilient agriculture. Through its US$55 million commitment and close collaboration with IFAD and the program’s financing partners, GCF helped structure a mechanism that mobilizes substantial commercial investment from Equity Group and expands access to adaptation finance for smallholder farmers and rural businesses across East Africa,” said Catherine Koffman, Director of the Department of Africa Region at the Green Climate Fund.
“Mobilizing private capital for sustainable development is central to Finland’s development policy. ARCAFIM demonstrates how public-private collaboration can unlock financing for sustainable investments and channel capital to where it is needed most. Strengthening the resilience of agriculture to climate change is a smart investment that benefits both communities and businesses: it increases productivity and incomes for smallholder farmers while reducing the risks associated with agricultural finance,” said Juha Savolainen, Director General at the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland.
Nordic Development Fund (NDF) Managing Director, Satu Santala, said the fund’s support for ARCAFIM from its inception reflected the importance of building mechanisms capable of unlocking greater investment in climate adaptation.
“NDF is pleased to have supported ARCAFIM from the very beginning, helping lay the foundations for a mechanism that can unlock greater investments in climate adaptation. Together with our Nordic and international partners, we are proud to reduce investment risk and mobilise financing for smallholder farmers and rural MSMEs. ARCAFIM demonstrates how innovation, partnerships, risk-sharing, and catalytic finance can help accelerate climate adaptation where it is needed most,” said Santala.
The launch brought together representatives of IFAD and the financing institutions, alongside government representatives from Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Rwanda, private-sector investors, development partners and climate finance institutions. The agreements were signed by Gérardine Mukeshimana for IFAD and Moses Nyabanda for Equity Bank Kenya, in a ceremony presided over by Hannington Namara, Managing Director of Equity Bank Rwanda.
By strengthening financial intermediation and private lending channels across agricultural value chains, ARCAFIM seeks to demonstrate how climate adaptation finance can become a sustainable business line while improving access to finance for underserved rural communities.
The initiative also seeks to generate practical lessons that can inform the replication of blended climate finance approaches in other regions of Africa facing similar challenges in financing climate resilience. IFAD and Equity Group have identified Southern and West Africa as the next candidate regions.
United Bank for Africa (UBA) has been ordered to pay more than Sh128 million after the High Court in Mbale found the bank liable for allowing a fraudster to open an account in another man’s name, receive his compensation and withdraw Sh108.23 million despite glaring red flags.
The explosive judgment has raised fresh questions about possible internal failures and the role of bank staff who processed the account, particularly after court heard that employees involved in opening the suspicious account were subjected to disciplinary action.
Justice Farouq Lubega ordered UBA to refund Sh108.23 million to Michael Wilson Mazuno, the money that was fraudulently withdrawn from an account opened in his name, and awarded him another Sh20 million in general damages.
The bank was also ordered to pay the costs of the suit, with the total award attracting eight percent annual interest from September 7, 2026 until payment is made in full.
Mazuno had sued UBA in 2024 for negligence, fraud, breach of duty of care and conversion after discovering that an impostor had opened an account using his identity and subsequently received his compensation from the United States Department of Labor.
The case exposes what appears to have been a spectacular breakdown in the bank’s customer verification and transaction monitoring systems.
According to court records, Mazuno had been working in Afghanistan as an armed security guard for American private security company Trip Canopy Global Operations Inc. when he fell from a guard tower in 2020 and suffered serious injuries, including spinal damage, hearing impairment and psychological trauma.
He later pursued compensation through his lawyers before the United States Department of Labor’s Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs.
His lawyers eventually informed him that his claim had been settled and that US$30,000 had been approved and remitted to an account in his name at UBA.
But when Mazuno followed up on the money, he discovered that someone had beaten him to his own compensation.
Court found that an account bearing Mazuno’s name and NIN had been opened at UBA on April 22, 2023, but the photograph attached to the account belonged to an entirely different person.
The account subsequently received Sh108.23 million, which was withdrawn in two instalments on August 10 and 11, 2023.
And this is where the bank’s internal controls came under the microscope.
Justice Lubega found that UBA had failed to properly verify the photograph of the person presenting Mazuno’s NIN and had also failed to verify the physical address supplied when the account was opened.
The court further found it suspicious that the account had been opened only months before receiving more than Sh108 million, after which virtually the entire amount was removed.
Even more striking was the fact that the account had a daily withdrawal limit of Sh15 million, yet the money was withdrawn in a manner that the judge found should have triggered further scrutiny.
The court described the circumstances as red flags that should have prompted additional due diligence and intervention by the bank to prevent the suspected fraud.
The judgment also relied on evidence from a former UBA branch manager, who told court that bank employees involved in opening the account had subsequently faced disciplinary action.
That revelation has raised uncomfortable questions about what happened inside the bank when the account was being opened and how an impostor managed to get through the bank’s customer verification process using another person’s identity.
While the judgment does not establish that the disciplined employees colluded with the fraudster, their involvement and subsequent disciplinary action have put the spotlight firmly on UBA’s internal controls and staff conduct.
Justice Lubega ultimately found that the bank had failed to exercise the required care and good faith when opening the account and allowing the funds to be withdrawn.
“I find that the Defendant Bank acted fraudulently in opening Bank Account No. 0768025176 without properly verifying the identity and physical address of the purported account holder,” the judge stated.
UBA had attempted to distance itself from liability, arguing that Mazuno was not its customer and therefore the bank did not owe him a duty of care.
The argument failed.
Justice Lubega ruled that a bank’s duty of care can extend to third parties where negligent or unlawful conduct causes foreseeable harm.
The judge also rejected the bank’s argument that it could not be held responsible because it was not UBA itself that physically took Mazuno’s money.
Instead, the court found that UBA’s own failures created the circumstances that enabled the financial loss.
The ruling means UBA must now shoulder the cost of a fraud in which a stranger allegedly walked into the banking system using Mazuno’s identity, received a huge compensation payment and walked away with the money.
Beyond the Sh108.23 million refund, Justice Lubega awarded Mazuno Sh20 million in general damages, taking into account the trauma and financial burden he suffered while pursuing recovery of his compensation, on top of the serious injuries he had already sustained in Afghanistan.
However, the judge declined to award exemplary damages, saying that imposing an additional punitive award would be excessive after ordering the bank to compensate Mazuno and pay general damages.
The case has nevertheless left a bigger question hanging over UBA’s systems: How did an impostor get an account opened using another man’s NIN and a different photograph, receive more than Sh108 million months later, and successfully withdraw the money despite the glaring red flags?
For the court, the answer lay squarely in the bank’s failure to exercise the required care.
And for UBA, the judgment could prove far more costly than the Sh128 million award if it triggers deeper scrutiny of how staff vet customers, who approves suspicious accounts, how withdrawal limits are monitored and what happens when internal red flags are ignored.
GOT A HOT STORY? LET US KNOW!
Got breaking news, explosive secrets, or hard evidence?
Mbarara City authorities are facing fresh questions over the mushrooming of illegal structures, with local leaders accusing physical planning and enforcement officials of turning a blind eye as buildings reportedly go up overnight without approved plans.
The concerns have emerged only months after the city embarked on a crackdown against businesses and structures operating in violation of city regulations, raising questions about whether the enforcement drive has lost steam.
The latest complaints are concentrated in Kijungu-Nyamityobora in Mbarara City South Division, an area already notorious for its crowded settlements and slum-like conditions.
Local leaders and residents claim some developers have resorted to constructing structures at night, allegedly taking advantage of periods when senior city officials are away from the city.
One of the structures at the centre of the controversy is a lock-up reportedly constructed in a single night recently in Kijungu, opposite Shukuran, near the weekly market area.
The structure is allegedly owned by a businessman identified as Shaban, who reportedly intends to use it as a butchery.
Local sources further allege that the structure sits within a road reserve, potentially complicating future plans to expand or improve the road network in the area.
These lockups were allegedly built at night without plans opposite Shukuran in Kijungu
The latest structure is reportedly part of a growing cluster of lock-ups in the same area. Other structures allegedly put up earlier this year have since been joined together, creating a row of about five lock-ups owned by different individuals, which local leaders say were constructed without approved building plans.
The developments have triggered allegations of possible collusion between some structure owners, enforcement personnel and officials in the physical planning department.
Although the allegations have not been independently established, local leaders insist the rapid appearance of the structures should have attracted the attention of city enforcement authorities.
They question how structures can be erected, sometimes reportedly within hours, without the responsible authorities noticing or intervening.
The complaints come at a time when the city is under pressure to control unplanned development, particularly in densely populated areas where buildings are increasingly encroaching on roads and other public spaces.
Barnabus Amwine Mugabi, councillor representing Nyamityobora 2 in Mbarara City South Division, said the situation could turn Kijungu and neighbouring areas into even bigger slums if authorities fail to act.
Mugabi said some developers are constructing without approved plans, while others are allegedly occupying road reserves and narrowing or completely blocking access roads.
He warned that recovering the affected road reserves in future could prove extremely difficult and expensive, particularly if compensation claims emerge after the city begins road construction.
According to Mugabi, some developers deliberately target road reserves, allegedly hoping that they will eventually demand compensation when government or the city seeks to reclaim the land for infrastructure projects.
He confirmed that some of the illegal structures are reportedly being erected at night, making it difficult to understand how they can be completed without the knowledge of city authorities responsible for physical planning and enforcement.
Mugabi appealed to physical planning officials at both the division and city levels to urgently intervene before the situation gets out of control.
He warned that failure to stop the developments now could leave the city with a much bigger planning crisis in the coming years.
One of the lockups under construction before in Kijungu opposite Shukuran
Kijungu is not the only part of Mbarara grappling with unplanned settlements. Other areas identified as having significant slum-like developments include Kisenyi, Byafura, Katete and Kiswahili, among others.
The latest allegations have also raised questions about the capacity of the city’s physical planning department to enforce development controls at a time when some of its senior officials have themselves come under scrutiny.
The Mbarara City Physical Planner, Carol Owarugaba, is reportedly on interdiction following the corruption crackdown associated with Minister Baram Barugahara, further adding to questions about the current state of the city’s planning enforcement system.
When contacted, a physical planner identified as Miracle, who handles Mbarara City South Division, said he was not aware of structures allegedly being constructed at night without building plans.
Miracle, however, declined to discuss the matter with the media, saying he would first require permission from his boss, the Town Clerk.
GOT A HOT STORY? LET US KNOW!
Got breaking news, explosive secrets, or hard evidence?
