Minister Nameere Justifies Public Confrontation of Corruption Suspects

Updated by Faith Barbara N Ruhinda at 1128 EAT on Monday 20 July 2026

State Minister for Local Government Justine Nameere has defended her approach of publicly confronting and filming public officials during anti-corruption inspections, insisting the operations are evidence-based and conducted within the law.

Speaking to Uganda Radio Network (URN) on Friday during a visit to the Acholi sub-region, Nameere said the ongoing anti-corruption crackdown is grounded in verified intelligence and thorough investigations.

She dismissed criticism that publicly exposing suspects amounts to trial by media, maintaining that the inspections are intended to promote accountability and transparency in the management of public resources.

Nameere, who is also the Masaka City Woman MP, has in recent weeks led anti-corruption inspection tours across the country alongside the Minister for Local Government, Balaam Barugahara.

The inspections have seen several public officials questioned on camera over allegations of misappropriation of public funds, shoddy government projects and payroll irregularities.

Defending the operations, Nameere said each inspection is preceded by comprehensive investigations carried out by technical experts and security agencies, ensuring that those confronted are not targeted arbitrarily.

Nameere said the investigations are based on information provided by whistleblowers and subsequently verified by engineers, officers from the State House Anti-Corruption Unit, the Chieftaincy of Military Intelligence (CMI) and other security agencies.

She maintained that the arrests made during the inspections are backed by comprehensive case files that are ready for prosecution.

“All the files are ready. Some suspects have already appeared in court, while others are being arraigned. A state attorney cannot sanction a file without sufficient evidence because they know they will have to defend it in court,” she said.

According to Nameere, some suspects have also admitted wrongdoing during the inspections.

She cited an incident in Gulu District where a clinical officer at a government health facility allegedly acknowledged that his professional certificate had been used by another individual employed by Reproductive Health Uganda.

The minister further defended the government’s decision to record and broadcast the inspections, arguing that no law prohibits the public identification of individuals suspected of corruption. She said the recordings are intended to promote transparency and reassure the public that allegations of corruption are being acted upon.

Beyond prosecution, Nameere said the government’s anti-corruption campaign is also aimed at ensuring that stalled or fraudulent public projects are completed before criminal cases are concluded.

“If money meant for a road was stolen, we shall arrest the culprit but also return to the community and complete the road. If it is a bridge or a maternity ward, we shall ensure it is completed so that people do not continue suffering while court processes go on,” she said.

The government’s high-profile anti-corruption inspections have attracted mixed reactions. Supporters say the approach demonstrates a strong commitment to fighting corruption, while critics argue that publicly confronting suspects before conviction risks undermining the constitutional principle of presumption of innocence.

Kelly Komakech, a lawyer based in Gulu City, criticised the ministers’ approach, saying that publicly exposing suspects before the conclusion of formal investigations is inconsistent with established legal procedures.

Komakech acknowledged the importance of fighting corruption but argued that investigations and enforcement should be handled by institutions legally mandated to do so and conducted in accordance with due process.

“Legally, it is not right. There are bodies that are tasked with carrying out investigations, and there are laws that clearly outline how those investigations should be conducted,” Komakech told Uganda Radio Network.

He further accused the ministers of overstepping their mandate by publicly directing arrests and interdictions of officials based on allegations that had not been independently verified.

“Whatever they are doing is illegal because they do not have the powers to execute anybody or direct arrests. I even saw permanent secretaries being directed to interdict officers based merely on suspicions. If we interdict everyone based on suspicion, who will be safe?” he said.

Uganda’s Constitution does not expressly prohibit the public identification or exposure of criminal suspects before they appear in court. However, Article 28(3)(a) guarantees every person charged with a criminal offence the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, while Article 28(1) provides for the right to a fair, speedy and public hearing before an independent and impartial court.

-Observer

Invest or Donate towards HICGI New Agency Global Media Establishment – Watch video here