STATEMENT BY THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR ETHICS AND INTEGRITY, OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT UGANDA AT THE 4TH IAACA

ANNUAL SEMINAR DALIAN, CHINA

25TH TO 28TH JUNE, 2012

Introduction

The government is committed to proving the highest quality of leadership in the fight against corruption. We believe that the quality of governance system is determined by the quality of leadership as well as commitment of the leaders.
Thus the government has put in place measures to enhance the leadership commitment so as to crate an environment in which the public believes and trust in government commitment to eradicate corruption through clear and consistent policies, decision and actions.

DEI
The Directorate for Ethics and Integrity (DEI) was established in 1998 as a Government Agency under the Office of the President and is headed by a Cabinet Minister. It is mandated to empower the citizens to uphold and cherish moral values and principles. It is responsible for the development of anti corruption Policy, the coordination of the Anti corruption Government agencies in their efforts to fight corruption, creation of awareness on ethics and integrity in public office, enhancing ethical standards among the public and to build coalitions with Civil Society Organisations and other Government anti corruption agencies.

Zero tolerance to corruption

The Zero Tolerance to corruption is the policy framework that spells out Government approach to tackle corruption and details priority actions and targets. This is the implementation of the expression of the NRM 2006 election manifesto where it declared, NRM shall implement a zero-tolerance policy on corruption In this context, zero tolerance has been defined to mean the following: Taking prompt and decisive action to respond to all incidences of corruption actively promoting ethical conduct; effectively implementing measures to prevent occurrences of corruption in society; and widely disseminating the results of the actions taken

Inter Agency Forum

Directorate of Ethics & Integrity Inspectorate of Government Directorate of Public Prosecutions Office of the Auditor General Ministry of Internal Affairs Inspectorate of Courts Local Government Finance Commission Uganda Revenue Authority Criminal Investigations Directorate

Inter Agency Forum

Public Procurement & Disposal of Public Assets Authority Public Service Commission Ministry of Public Service Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development Ministry of Public Service Ministry of Local Government Education Service Commission Health Service Commission Judicial Services Commission

Asset Recovery

The Directorate is in the process of initiating the proceeds of corruption Law which will simplify the prosecution of cases relating to asset recovery and strengthen the prosecution of corruption cases.

Purpose of the Asset Recovery Law

The Law is intended to provide an effective tool to make corruption a very risky business even where the legislative framework has been unable to recover proceeds of corruption. The Law will prescribe the procedure to enable the country to recover assets which are proceeds or instrumentalities of corruption, where a person has been convicted of an offence or where there has been no prosecution but it can be proved on a balance of probabilities that property represents proceed of a corrupt activity.

Purpose of the Asset Recovery Law The Law will enable compensation of victims of corruption and recovery of resources lost to corruption, maladministration and misconduct. The law will put in place the Assets Recovery processes and the appropriate management of seized proceeds and instrumentalities of corruption as well as the possibilities of their confiscation.

Challenges

The effectiveness of asset recovery provisions or confiscation orders is largely diminished by the likelihood that once a suspect or defendant is made aware of the investigation, the assets will quickly disappear. Indeed, we have no doubt that a large percentage of the proceeds of crime in Uganda is already being efficiently laundered. There is no specific law in place giving power to prosecution authorities to immobilise property prior to and pending trial. This gap will be addressed by the Proceeds of Corruption Legislation.

Challenges

Lack of specific law on asset forfeiture, the existing laws are not comprehensive enough. Most of our laws are conviction based and the investigators tend to focus their efforts more on conviction than asset recovery. The enforcement of the Leadership code has been rendered inadequate since some of its provisions were challenged in court. The Leadership Code limits the declaration of assets to selected leaders while in actual sense most corrupt practices are by lower cadres.

Challenges

This renders it difficult to prove progress of asset accumulation like in cases of illicit enrichment. As a country we lack a consolidated national identification system, this has made it possible for culprits to hide property since their identity cannot be easily traced form a national databank.

Conclusion

The establishment of the anti corruption court is in line with UNCAC and it has positively impacted on the enforcement of the anti corruption legislation and other policy framework against corruption. Corruption however is a huge problem that requires a holistic approach to deal with. A number of different measures, both legal and non-legal therefore need to be emphasized. Thank you