UIA IN TURMOIL: Board Moves to Oust Mukiza as Leadership Crisis Deepens
By Watchdog Reporter
KAMPALA — A deepening leadership crisis at the Uganda Investment Authority (UIA) has reached a निर्णptive stage, with insiders confirming that the board has moved to replace embattled Executive Director Robert Mukiza.
Multiple sources within the authority indicate that the board has settled on Mukiza’s deputy, Martin Muhangi, as the preferred successor. If effected, the move would bring an abrupt and controversial end to Mukiza’s five-year tenure at the helm of one of Uganda’s key investment agencies.
Mukiza’s contract is set to expire later this month, and in what insiders describe as a telling development, he has not applied for renewal. That decision has triggered intense speculation within both government and business circles.
“Either he knows his fate is sealed or he is counting on powerful connections to override the board,” a source familiar with the matter told Watchdog.
The board’s internal assessment appears to have sealed Mukiza’s fate. He reportedly scored just 37 percent in a performance evaluation, with board members citing a wide range of failures, including weak governance structures, failure to deliver on investment targets, and what sources describe as a steady institutional decline.
Particular concern has been raised over the handling of the Namanve Industrial Park, a flagship government project that has in recent years been dogged by controversy, delays, and allegations of mismanagement. Board members reportedly view the situation at Namanve as symbolic of broader failures within the authority.
Beyond performance concerns, the crisis has exposed what insiders describe as a near paralysis within the institution. Sources say Mukiza has been largely absent from office for close to a year, opting instead to work remotely amid fears of possible arrest following corruption investigations.
This has effectively left the day-to-day running of the authority in the hands of Muhangi, who is said to be chairing internal meetings, engaging stakeholders, and executing operational decisions.
“He is the one holding the institution together at the moment. Mukiza only comes in occasionally for critical approvals,” a source disclosed.
The situation has fueled perceptions of a leadership vacuum at an agency that is supposed to be at the forefront of Uganda’s economic transformation agenda.
Compounding the crisis are unresolved corruption allegations that continue to hang over Mukiza’s leadership. Last year, the Inspectorate of Government (IG) reportedly carried out investigations into activities at UIA. In findings that were never officially made public, Deputy IGG Anne Muhairwe is said to have recommended charges against Mukiza for abuse of office.
However, despite the gravity of the allegations, no prosecution followed. Sources claim that Mukiza’s close ties to powerful figures within the state, including connections to the First Family, may have shielded him from arrest.
“It would have caused unnecessary embarrassment at a very high level,” a source alleged, reflecting the sensitive political undertones surrounding the matter.
While these claims remain officially unconfirmed, they continue to shape public perception and raise broader questions about accountability within Uganda’s public institutions.
The UIA board, chaired by Robert Kyamanywa, now appears determined to take control of the situation. The decision to back Muhangi is being viewed as both a pragmatic and strategic move, given his current role in stabilizing operations within the authority.
Efforts to obtain an official comment from both Kyamanywa and Muhangi were unsuccessful by press time.
UIA plays a central role in Uganda’s economic strategy, particularly in attracting foreign direct investment and facilitating industrial development. Any instability within the authority carries significant implications for investor confidence and the country’s broader economic outlook.
Analysts warn that prolonged uncertainty at the top could undermine ongoing investment negotiations and weaken Uganda’s competitiveness in the region.
For now, Mukiza’s tenure appears to be ending under a cloud of poor performance, internal dissent, and unresolved allegations. Whether the board’s move will mark a turning point for the authority or simply usher in another phase of internal contestation remains to be seen.
What is clear, however, is that the unfolding developments at UIA are no longer just an internal administrative matter. They represent a critical test of governance, accountability, and the ability of state institutions to act decisively in the face of crisis.
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at Submit an Article
