Uganda’s public accountability system is confronting an uncomfortable question: who audits the people whose job is to audit government?
The question has gained fresh urgency after Auditor General Edward Akol interdicted about 20 auditors over allegations of corruption and extortion, while more than 60 others are reportedly under investigation.
The developments follow growing scrutiny of the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) over why financial irregularities recently uncovered in several local governments were allegedly not detected during routine annual audits.
The affected officials include principal auditors and other staff stationed in Arua, Masaka, Moroto, Hoima, Jinja, Mbale and Soroti, as well as employees based at the Audit House in Kampala.
The allegations include extortion and possible collusion with accounting officers and accountants in institutions the auditors were assigned to scrutinise.
27 auditors are under investigation, with four already interdicted. Mr Akol confirmed the action, saying it followed several reports and allegations of corruption and misconduct. He said the affected officers would undergo administrative procedures and that action would be taken depending on the findings.
The allegations are particularly damaging because the OAG is constitutionally mandated to independently audit public accounts and report its findings to Parliament.
The scrutiny comes amid a wider government crackdown on suspected corruption in local governments.
Inspections led by Local Government Minister Balaam Barugahara have reportedly uncovered allegations involving misuse of public funds, procurement irregularities, questionable recruitment, ghost beneficiaries and poorly implemented projects.
At least 110 local government staff are facing disciplinary action following the inspections.
In the Ankole sub-region alone, 26 officials from Isingiro, Buhweju, Mitooma and Mbarara City have faced interdiction or investigations over alleged corruption and financial mismanagement.
The coincidence has raised difficult questions about the effectiveness of annual audits. If inspectors can uncover serious irregularities months or years after auditors examined the same institutions, were the warning signs missed, overlooked or deliberately suppressed?
There are, however, no findings of guilt against the interdicted auditors at this stage. The allegations remain under investigation, and the affected officials are entitled to due process.
The controversy also revives President Museveni’s warning to Mr Akol when he assumed office. The President cautioned him about auditors who could allegedly take money and produce false reports, urging him not to rely solely on paperwork but to verify what is happening on the ground.
So, who audits the Auditor General?
Uganda’s constitutional framework provides for external scrutiny of the OAG, while Parliament exercises oversight over the institution. But the current investigations raise a more fundamental issue: whether those safeguards are strong enough to prevent the country’s accountability watchdog from becoming vulnerable to the very corruption it is mandated to expose.
For an institution entrusted with protecting billions of shillings in public resources, credibility is its most valuable asset.
The coming investigations will therefore be watched closely not only for whether individual auditors are cleared or sanctioned, but for whether they expose weaknesses in the systems designed to keep Uganda’s watchdog itself accountable.