Court nullifies report implicating NSSF manager
KAMPALA – The High Court in Kampala has quashed key findings and recommendations made by Parliament’s Select Committee on the National Social Security Fund (NSSF), among others the prosecution of the Fund’s Chief Finance Officer Stevens Mwanje.
The Civil Division Judge Musa SSekaana in his October 31st 2024 decision nullified the March 9th 2023 recommendations by Parliament saying the decision was marred with procedural impropriety, irrationality, and unfairness.
Mwanje’s issues started on January 25th 2023, when the Speaker of Parliament Anita Annet Among constituted a Select Committee on the Affairs at the National Social Security Fund (NSSF).
According to Court records, the terms of reference of the Select Committee were to examine the corporate governance structures at NSSF, the circumstances surrounding the appointment of management director, to evaluate the status and safety of savers’ money in NSSF and the extent of stakeholder engagement in decision-making at NSSF. The Committee was also expected to inquire into any other matter incidental to the aforementioned points.
This was done after the Uganda Police Force had alleged that Mwanje caused financial loss to NSSF through fraudulent payments totalling 1.43 billion shillings and operated as Chief Finance Officer without a practising certificate.
As a result, on March 9th 2023, Parliament adopted the Report of the Select Committee and made several resolutions under the title “Resolution of Parliament on the Report of the Select Committee on the State of Affairs at NSSF.
Parliament had recommended that Mwanje should step aside and face prosecution for allegedly practising accountancy without a practising certificate.
The report had specifically targeted Mwanje in recommendations 8, 9, and 25, directing the Inspector General of Government (IGG) to investigate him for alleged abuse of office, corruption, and conspiracy to commit a felony.
Additionally, resolutions 7(c), 8, 16, 25, and 27 of Parliament’s Resolution on the Report of the Select Committee on the State of Affairs at NSSF had also implicated Mwanje and ordered his subsequent prosecution.
But Mwanje was not happy with the findings and recommendations and thus challenged the report, arguing that he was not given adequate notice or opportunity to respond to allegations made against him.
Mwanje told the Judge that as a Chief Finance Officer at NSSF, his role is a leadership one involving planning, coordination, implementation, and management of activities. He said he does not practice accountancy as defined in the Accountants Act 2013.
Court heard from Mwanje that at NSSF, services such as auditing, verification, and certification of financial statements are performed by the Financial Controller, and the Board of Directors signs off the audited financial statements.
Mwanje thus said that the Select Committee’s conclusion that he should step aside, that the Board should terminate his employment, and that he should be prosecuted for practising accountancy without a practising certificate was tainted with illegality, arbitrariness, unfairness, and unreasonableness.
He added that several findings, conclusions, recommendations, or directives made by the Select Committee and adopted by Parliament, such as the directive for a lifestyle audit and the investigation of all NSSF departments, are generalized, blanket, and fishing expeditions.
On his part, the Attorney General argued that during the inquiry into NSSF, the management and staff, including Mwanje, were duly represented. The Government said Mwanje was given several opportunities to respond to questions regarding financial affairs, operations, qualifications, and job descriptions at NSSF. His submissions were considered, and all related evidence was evaluated by the committee before making its findings.
In his ruling, Justice Ssekaana ruled that this recommendation was irrational and unreasonable, as Mwanje’s role as Chief Finance Officer did not involve practising accountancy and that Parliament exceeded its powers.
“The terms of reference were made clear and concise and the Select committee did not have the power to make findings and recommendations not within the terms of reference given by Parliament. The exercise of power not vested under the terms of reference is a reviewable error committed by the decision-maker (select committee) which will lead to an excess of jurisdiction (power). This in turn would imply that all unlawful acts are void on account of their having never had any legal basis”, held Ssekaana.
The Judge thus quashed the findings saying that the Select Committee of Parliament cannot purport to dismiss the applicant who holds the position of Chief Finance Officer as per the terms of Employment in accordance with the qualifications that were deemed sufficient.
