High Court to Hear Legal Arguments on Disputed Extension of Retired Ministry of Water Commissioner’s Contract
KAMPALA, UGANDA – A controversial decision to extend the contract of a retired water official has ignited a firestorm of criticism, with the Ministries of Public Service and Water and Environment facing accusations of flouting Uganda’s public service laws. The case, which has drawn national attention, is set for a hearing before the High Court in Kampala this Friday.
The Controversial Extension
At the center of the dispute is Eng. John Mary Vianne Twinomujuni, who reached Uganda’s mandatory retirement age of 60 on July 13, 2025. Despite this, a proposed three-year contract would allow him to remain in his role as Commissioner for Urban Water Supply and Sewerage Services. The move is allegedly backed by Ms. Lucy Nakyobe, Head of Public Service, and has bypassed 11 qualified Assistant Commissioners within the Ministry of Water and Environment. Each of these overlooked officials boasts over two decades of experience and holds advanced degrees, making them eligible for promotion.
Legal Challenges Mount
On August 29, 2025, activist Mr. Atuhire B., represented by Tibaijuka & Co. Advocates, filed a petition (Misc. Cause No. HCT-00-CV-MC-0217) in the High Court. The suit names Twinomujuni, Nakyobe, Permanent Secretary Alfred Okidi, and the Attorney General as respondents. It argues that retaining Twinomujuni without advertising the post violates the constitutional rights of other officers under Article 43(1) of Uganda’s Constitution, which safeguards against actions prejudicial to public interest. The petition labels the decision a “deliberate manipulation” of public service rules.
Uganda’s Public Service Act (2008) and the Public Service Standing Orders (2010) mandate that appointments and extensions must follow merit-based, transparent processes. Section 13 of the Public Service Act designates the Public Service Commission (PSC) as the sole authority for appointing, promoting, and extending contracts of public officers. The Standing Orders (Section A-e) further require competitive recruitment for vacant posts, particularly at senior levels like Commissioner.
Critically, the Head of Public Service lacks the legal power to recommend reappointments, as this role is advisory and administrative, not executive. Nakyobe’s reported letter on July 11, 2025, which instructed Twinomujuni’s retention as an “administrative stopgap,” appears to exceed her authority. Only the PSC, with Cabinet approval for senior posts, can make such decisions. This letter has raised serious questions about whether external influences drove Nakyobe’s actions.
Internal Frustrations Boil Over
The Directorate of Water Development is home to a robust talent pool, including highly qualified professionals such as Dr. Eng. Felix Twinomucunguzi, Eng. Richard Matua, and Eng. Herbert Nuwamanya in the Urban Water Department. In the Water for Production department, Eng. Ronald Kasozi, Eng. Kizito Henry, and Eng. Kato Kayizi stand ready for advancement. Other departments feature equally experienced figures like Eng. Ahmed Sentumbwe, Dr. Eng. Frank Tumwine, and Eng. Ivan Birungi.
Insiders, speaking anonymously, express deep resentment at being overlooked despite decades of service. Court documents further allege that Twinomujuni’s 2021 appointment was controversial due to his limited experience compared to peers. Additionally, it is claimed that he was absent without leave for over 80% of working days in his final year, with reports suggesting he was heavily involved in campaigns for his wife, who is running for Member of Parliament in Mbarara District.
Nakyobe’s Contradictory Stance
The case exposes a glaring contradiction in Nakyobe’s public statements and actions. On September 2, 2025, during a Permanent Secretaries’ meeting, she directed that no retired officers should remain in office, emphasizing promotions for understudies. At the 5th Administrative Officers’ Forum, she reiterated, “If a senior person has retired, their understudy should occupy the position,” pledging to enforce this with the PSC.
Yet, her earlier authorization of Twinomujuni’s extension—allegedly tied to a presidential recommendation—undermines her reformist stance. Legal experts note that even a presidential directive cannot override the PSC’s authority under the Public Service Act. Section 14(2) requires all extensions to be justified on exceptional grounds, such as unique expertise, and approved transparently.
Stakes for Public Service Reform
The petitioners are seeking a permanent injunction against Twinomujuni’s reappointment, an order to advertise the post competitively, and legal costs. The outcome of the case could set a precedent for whether political influence will continue to trump merit-based principles in Uganda’s civil service. Governance analysts warn that Nakyobe’s actions, if unchecked, risk undermining the credibility of ongoing reforms aimed at curbing favoritism.
“This case tests whether public service rules apply equally or are just rhetoric,” one analyst remarked. The High Court’s ruling will determine not only Twinomujuni’s fate but also the integrity of Uganda’s public service framework.
As the hearing approaches, all eyes are on the judiciary to uphold the rule of law and ensure that public service appointments remain transparent, fair, and merit-based. The decision could have far-reaching implications for governance and accountability in Uganda.
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us? Email us at editorial@watchdoguganda.com
This article is a summary of an original report. Full credit goes to the original source. We invite our readers to explore the original article for more insights directly from the source. (Source)