By Richard Okuku
Uganda’s District and City Service Commissions have recently come under intense public scrutiny. Allegations of bribery, nepotism, political interference, forged documents, manipulation of recruitment processes and lack of transparency have sparked calls for recruitment of local government staff to be transferred back to the central Public Service Commission.
These concerns cannot and should not be ignored. Corruption in public recruitment erodes trust, denies qualified Ugandans opportunities based on merit, weakens service delivery and ultimately hurts ordinary citizens who rely on competent teachers, health workers, engineers, agricultural extension workers, parish chiefs and other frontline public servants.
However, while these allegations deserve thorough investigation and those responsible should face the full force of the law, they do not justify dismantling one of Uganda’s most important decentralization institutions. The solution is to reform District and City Service Commissions—not abolish them.
District and City Service Commissions are far more than recruitment bodies. They represent one of the clearest and most practical expressions of decentralization in Uganda. They embody the constitutional principle that public services should be managed as close as possible to the people they are intended to serve.
The framers of Uganda’s decentralization policy deliberately entrusted local governments with the responsibility of recruiting, promoting, confirming and disciplining their own staff. This was not an administrative accident but a conscious decision aimed at ensuring that districts and cities have control over the human resources needed to deliver essential services.
Recruitment is not simply a technical exercise. It is an important accountability mechanism. When local governments recruit their own personnel, citizens, elected leaders and communities can more easily demand answers for staffing gaps, absenteeism, delayed service delivery and poor performance.
Critics argue that local recruitment has become susceptible to corruption and political influence. Indeed, media reports and oversight institutions have documented cases where applicants were allegedly asked to pay bribes for jobs, recruitment procedures were manipulated and qualified candidates overlooked.
These are serious governance failures. Yet they are symptoms of broader institutional weaknesses rather than evidence that decentralization itself has failed.
Weak oversight, inadequate funding, manual recruitment systems, insufficient training, political interference and delayed wage clearances all contribute to these challenges. These problems require institutional strengthening—not institutional dismantling.
Recentralizing recruitment may appear attractive because it promises greater uniformity and control. But centralization comes with its own risks.
A centralized Public Service Commission would inevitably become responsible for recruiting staff for every district and city across Uganda. Such a system could easily become overwhelmed by workload, slower in responding to vacancies and less familiar with local service delivery needs.
More importantly, moving recruitment to Kampala does not eliminate corruption. It merely shifts where corruption may occur while making it more difficult for citizens to monitor recruitment decisions or hold decision-makers accountable.
For districts facing shortages of teachers, health workers, engineers or parish chiefs, delayed recruitment translates directly into poorer public services. Local governments require recruitment systems that can respond quickly to emerging staffing needs and understand the realities on the ground.
District and City Service Commissions are uniquely positioned to recruit individuals who understand local communities, languages, development priorities and service delivery challenges. That local knowledge is a strength, not a weakness.
Rather than abandoning decentralization, Uganda should invest in making these commissions stronger, more transparent and more professional.
Recruitment processes should be digitized to reduce human interference and improve transparency. Vacancy announcements, shortlisting criteria, interview schedules and final recruitment results should be publicly accessible. Complaint mechanisms should be strengthened, and whistleblowers protected.
Commission members should undergo rigorous vetting before appointment, receive continuous professional training and be adequately facilitated to perform their duties effectively. Conflict-of-interest declarations should become mandatory, while independent performance audits should regularly assess compliance with recruitment standards.
District councils should exercise stronger oversight without interfering in recruitment decisions. Likewise, Chief Administrative Officers and Town Clerks should provide technical support without compromising the commissions’ independence.
The central government also has an important role to play—not by taking over recruitment but by strengthening standards, conducting regular audits, providing training and ensuring that those found guilty of corruption are prosecuted.
Uganda’s decentralization policy has long been recognised as one of the country’s major governance reforms. District and City Service Commissions are among its strongest institutional foundations. Weakening them through recentralization would undermine local autonomy, distance decision-making from communities and reduce citizens’ influence over the quality of public services they receive.
It would also be unfair to paint every commission with the same brush. Many District and City Service Commissions continue to perform their responsibilities with professionalism and integrity. Development partners and oversight institutions have acknowledged the good work of numerous commission members across the country.
The existence of corruption in some commissions should not become an excuse to dismantle an entire institution that remains central to effective local governance.
Uganda’s response should therefore be clear: punish corruption wherever it exists, strengthen oversight, modernize recruitment systems, adequately resource District and City Service Commissions and reinforce accountability at every level.
That approach will protect merit, improve service delivery and preserve the original promise of decentralization—bringing government closer to the people.
District and City Service Commissions should be strengthened, not replaced. Reform—not recentralization—is the path that best serves Uganda’s local governments and the citizens they exist to serve.
