Legislation: The Anti-Corruption Act 2009, the Penal Code 1950, the Inspectorate of Government Act 2002, the Public Finance and Accountability Act 2003 (PFAA), the Leadership Code Act 2002 (LCA), and the Public Prosecution and Disposal of Public Assets Act 2003 (see 'Public Procurement' below) compose the core of Uganda's legal framework against corruption. The Penal Code 1950 provides instruments to deal with various corruption offences including embezzlement, causing financial loss, abuse of office, and fraud. The LCA is designed to increase transparency and to curb corruption. It sets out minimum standards of behaviour and conduct for political leaders and requires them to declare their incomes, assets and liabilities. It also criminalises attempted corruption, active and passive bribery, extortion, bribing a foreign public official, and abuse of office. The Code of Conducts and Ethics for Uganda Public Services was published by the Ministry of Public Services which lists the standards of behaviour for public officers. Under the Code, bribery is defined as any gratification with a value equal to UGX 20,000 or above that is given to Public Officers by anyone with the intention to influence any current or future decisions in favour of someone, or that involves conflict of interest. Uganda is a signatory to both the UN and AU conventions against corruption. However, although both were ratified in 2004, the conventions have not yet been fully domesticated into Ugandan laws. In July 2009, the Anti-Corruption Bill was enacted, and according to a 2009 article by AllAfrica, the act gives special investigation powers to the Inspector General of Government and the Director of Public Prosecutions. The new law is intended to deal with corruption in both the public and private sector, and those who are found guilty of corruption may face up to 10 years in prison and a fine of UGX 100 million. According to AllAfrica, the government passed the Whistleblowers Protection Bill in April 2010, which intends to protect whistleblowers and provide money rewards in return for reporting. Two other pieces of anti-corruption legislation, the Anti-Money Laundering Bill (AMLB) and the Qui Tam (False Claims) Bill, are in the legislative pipeline. According to a February 2010 article by AllAfrica, leading financial institutions in Uganda and in the world are pressuring the Ugandan government to enact the Anti-Money Laundering Bill as a measure to counter corruption and drug trafficking. As of October 2010, the AMLB is still in Parliament, and Uganda is one of the last countries in the East Africa Community states that have not passed the bill, as reported by AllAfrica in 2010. Access the Lexadin World Law Guide for a collection of legislation in Uganda.

Government Strategies: The government's economic and development policies require it to work closely with donors, who in turn demand the government to make progress in its commitment to anti-corruption programmes. Donor coordination and dialogue seem to work well in Uganda. Several commissions of inquiry have been installed by the President. Two of these commissions are investigating, respectively, corrupt practices in the police force and in the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA), although their effectiveness has been questioned. The Danish development agency, Danida, signed a USD multi-million anti-corruption pact through the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs with the Government of Uganda in 2004. The anti-corruption programme is currently in its second phase from the period of July 2008 to June 2011, and was designed to strengthen ethics and integrity and respect for rule of law in the public sector. The programme aimed at supporting the implementation of the Leadership Code Act, imparting good governance in key corruption-prone government agencies handling public procurement and tax collection, and supporting civil society organisations (CSOs) and media. The government has declared a zero tolerance policy towards corruption and developed several anti-corruption strategy policy documents, including the Poverty Eradication Action Plan 2004-2007 complemented by the National Anti-Corruption Strategy 2004-2007, and the National Strategy to Fight Corruption and Rebuild Ethics and Integrity in Uganda 2008-2013. These plans address corruption as part of capacity-building and good governance strategies and encourage continuing support for anti-corruption agencies and anti-corruption reforms in corruption-prone sectors. Read more about the government's anti-corruption efforts.

Anti-Corruption Agencies: Uganda has several anti-corruption agencies that are discussed in more detail below. The Inspectorate of Government (IGG, see below) is the primary anti-corruption agency and, together with the others, has made progress in combating corruption and abuse of office. According to African Peer Review Mechanism Country Review Report 2009, anti-corruption agencies generally lack the human and financial resources required to fulfil their mandates effectively and are subject to political and executive influence. This has resulted in a number of alleged grand-scale corruption cases that have not been fully pursued. However, the Anti-Corruption Act 2009 seeks to empower, in particular, the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (see below) and the IGG to better fulfil their mandates.

Anti-Corruption Court: Parliament passed a provision in 2005 creating a special Anti-Corruption Court, which became operational under the High Court in May 2008. According to the initial evaluation of the Anti-Corruption Court made by Uganda Law Society 2009, the performance of the Anti-Corruption Court is considered satisfactory. Although all cases of corruption and embezzlement have to be heard and handled by the Court with only three judges and five magistrates, these cases are now able to be settled in 40 to 60 days, which is regarded as very fast according to the evaluation report. The down side is that all the country's corruption cases can only be handled in the Anti-Corruption Court in Kampala, which has caused some delays and loss of files due to the process of transferring from other cities into Kampala. According to the US Department of State 2009, the Court convicted seven individuals of corruption throughout 2009.

Directorate of Ethics and Integrity (DEI): The DEI was established in 1986 to raise the issue of corruption to a cabinet level, to coordinate government efforts in its fight against corruption through the Inter Agency Forum, and to establish an integrity system that promotes good governance. The DEI is mandated to implement the government's zero tolerance towards corruption policy, and maintains an extensive collection of anti-corruption resources that are open to the public. The DEI is carrying out its functions to address issues related to ethics and corruption has acquired a considerable amount of information and materials and therefore a resource centre has been established to make this material available. The DEI was mandated to implement the National Anti-Corruption Strategy 2004-2007 which aimed at improving enforcement and coordination of existing law and at ensuring public involvement in the fight against corruption. This strategy has been followed by the National Strategy to Fight Corruption and Rebuild Ethics and Integrity in Uganda 2008-2013 (see above). The DEI is supported by the Danish development agency, Danida, and the UK Department of International Development.

Inter Agency Forum (IAF): The IAF has been developed by the government and is chaired by the Directorate of Ethics and Integrity (DEI, see above). It aims at ensuring effective coordination of agencies on corruption issues and is comprised of Uganda's major anti-corruption institutions, including the judiciary and police among others. The IAF has been used by anti-corruption agencies to work together in the design and implementation of national anti-corruption strategies and to promote awareness and advancement of reforms. However, due to the DEI's lack of funding and its insufficient staff, the IAF is yet to become effective at facilitating dialogue between public and private anti-corruption stakeholders.

Ombudsman / Inspectorate of Government (IGG): The IGG is an independent agency under the 1995 Constitution. While it also functions as Ombudsman, its mandate is wider than that of a traditional Ombudsman. According to Transparency International 2006, IGG has the power to investigate, arrest and prosecute cases involving corruption, abuse of authority or public office, as well as gaining access to documents whenever necessary. The IGG has faced difficulties with respect to the declaration of income, as many Members of Parliament have refused to submit income information. According to Global Integrity 2009, the independence of the IGG has been questioned due to the fact that the President has power over the appointment of IGG, and this may create bias. Furthermore, IGG has sometimes experienced threats by some ministers, in particular those who are under investigation. According to African Peer Review Mechanism Country Review Report 2009, the IGG appears vigorous in its attempt to curb corruption, nevertheless, its efforts are disrupted by the fact that the agency lacks qualified staff and sufficient funding. Moreover, IGG recommendations and reports are also rarely followed-up by Parliament or the executive, as reported by Global Integrity 2009

Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP): The DPP has the mandate over all criminal prosecutions in the country and is further empowered by the Prevention of Corruption Act (1970) to prosecute cases of corruption and bribery. According to Transparency International 2006, the DPP advices the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and other government agencies on matters of criminal investigation. In 2004, the Fraud Unit, a specialised body, was created within the DPP to handle fraud and corruption cases and works closely with the CID National Fraud Squad. Nevertheless, the DPP does not have the power to carry out investigations. The Director of Public Prosecutions is appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Public Service Commission and with the approval of Parliament. The DPP is not known for corruption within its ranks, but it struggles with a lack of capacity. It has been criticised for not making reports and findings available to the public. The CID, though, is known for both bribery and embezzlement, as reported in a 2010 article by Institute For War & Peace Reporting.

Auditor General (AG): The AG audits and reports on the public accounts of Uganda and on all public offices. According to Global Integrity 2009, the AG works closely with other government departments to initiate and conduct financial and value for money audits in regard to any project involving public funds. The AG also audits the Local Councils (local government bodies) and submits reports to Parliament and other relevant authorities on local cases. Nevertheless, the same report also states that the AG is under presidential influence, and that the head of the AG is appointed and can be removed by the President. The African Peer Review Mechanism in its 2009 report recommends that more resources to the AG will be needed in order for it to be more effective in fighting corruption.

E-Governance: The Ugandan government announced in September 2008 that it will establish a national e-Government Web Portal to consolidate the individual websites of various government institutions. The aim of the portal is to create a one-stop shop for all government information. Uganda Central consists of a range of government portals, including those of government ministries and the judiciary.

Public Procurement: The Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Authority (PPDA) is an independent agency managed by the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act 2003, which sets the rules and regulations for procurement. The PPDA Act establishes ministries, government departments and agencies as procuring entities. The PPDA Act further specifies Accounting Officers, Contracts Committees, Procurement and Disposal Units (PDU), Evaluation Committees and User Departments, each with different responsibilities. The normal method for procurement is the open domestic bidding method and sole sourcing is legally limited. The PPDA provides links to procurement guidelines, open opportunities, contract awards and notices, and public procurement forms on its website. The PPDA advises the various government departments on procurement, monitors compliance, audits, evaluates performance, and provides capacity training. The PPDA is the central actor in the fight against rampant corruption in public procurement and enforces regulations addressing conflicts of interest for public procurement officials, although enforcement is sometimes subject to political interference. The PPDA is mandated to ensure the exercise of regularity and propriety in the handling and expenditure of resources and public money, and, in particular, that goods or services are procured in a fair, equitable, competitive and cost-effective manner. However, like most of the other government institutions, the PPDA is understaffed and subsequently impeded in its ability to investigate corruption cases. Local government procurement has been harmonised with national standards in 2006. A Register of Providers has been established to ensure that data on providers is more transparent and available to all actors in the procurement process, and serves as a basis for monitoring their performance and compliance with the law. The PPDA has also developed complaints procedures regarding public procurement. The PPDA has the power to blacklist providers and maintains a list of suspended providers. However, according to Global Integrity 2009, although companies that violate procurement regulations are legally prohibited from participating in future bids, the enforcement of the law is weak, and companies guilty of major violations of procurement regulations sometimes bid again using their influence, particularly if those companies are politically well-connected. According to a 2009 news article by Monitor Online, the Ugandan government announced its plans to launch an e-procurement system, where among others the details of public spending, such as procurement deals, will be published. This initiative is expected to increase transparency and reduce corruption within public procurement; for instance, it has been argued that this system will prevent blacklisted companies from bidding for government contracts. As of April 2010, the funding had already been allocated, and the authority will therefore seek for appropriate bidders to provide the service, as reported by AllAfrica. In addition, the government has launched an online Register of Providers system, which is a database of suppliers of works, services, and goods to government. This system is also aimed at transparent and corruption-free practices in procurement activities. The World Bank has previously estimated that Uganda loses around USD 300 million each year due to corruption and procurement malpractices; hence, the idea behind the e-procurement initiatives is to close the loopholes in the public procurement and protect public funds.

Whistle-Blowing: The Whistleblowers Protection Act was enacted into law in April 2010. Until then there was a lack of a solid legislative framework for whistleblowers protection as the Leadership Code Act and Access to Information Act only provide indirect legal protection for whistleblowers. The Act provides for high prison terms for people disclosing whistleblowers' identity, but also for whistleblowers who come forth with maliciously wrong allegations. The Act also includes monetary incentives for blowing the whistle on corruption: whistleblowers will in fact receive 5% of the total amount recovered thanks to their denouncement. According to Global Integrity 2009 and Freedom House 2010, public and private sector employees are for now generally reluctant to report corruption for fear of reprisals and a lack of actual protection in practice. The Inspectorate of Government (IGG) Act provides a framework for whistleblower protection including identity protections, financial reward and protection from recrimination or other punishments, and the criminalisation of the unlawful disclosure of whistleblower identities and their victimisation. The IGG has established a hotline where the public can report cases of corruption anonymously.

General Comments on the Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives: The nature of corruption in Uganda is a subject of some debate. Despite fairly elaborate formal control mechanisms, corruption continues to be a major problem. Anti-corruption agencies are understaffed and underfinanced, which greatly curbs their practical capacity to enforce legislative measures to combat corruption. While the government argues that corruption has not increased, but rather that investigations have simply brought the existing problems to light, the lack of government action and the negligence of recommendations made by central anti-corruption agencies calls into question the government's commitment or ability to combat corruption. Despite the Inter Agency Forum, the activities of anti-corruption agencies continue to lack coordination and information gathering within the agencies and sharing of such information between them is poorly developed. The Anti-Corruption Act 2009 has the potential to affect positive developments in Uganda's fight against corruption. Although the nature of the results of this act will be dependent upon the effectiveness of its implementation.