Finally it has happened; National
Social Security Fund (NSSF) managing director David Jamwa and his deputy Prof.
Mondo Kagonyera have been fired. The use of the word suspension is meant to
keep them on Katebe till their contracts expire. And the reason for this is not
the irregularities during the investment in (or procurement of) Amama Mbabazis
Temangalo. That will be one of the official excuses. The actual reason is to
pave way for the political takeover of NSSF by State House.
That President Yoweri Museveni defended
the architects of political pressure on NSSF against censure but sacked its
victims should not be surprising. But to that we shall return later.
For now, I have met Jamwa twice in my
entire life. When I did, I found him intelligent and insightful. A background
check revealed many unsavoury things about him. So I cannot vouch for his
integrity. Yet the debate on Temangalo has been ill-informed, lacking in
perspective and full of partisan rancour.
Over the last 10 years, four NSSF MDs
have been fired amidst investment scandals. This means that average life
expectancy of management is 2.5 years. The exit of managers is often
characterised by a lot of political buccaneering. This has haemorrhaged
the Fund of any capital in the market for professionals with skills, experience
and the integrity to manage it well. Thus, even if government wanted a
competent person and advertised the job, only crooks would apply; Jamwas
successor can only be worse.
It is for this reason that in spite of
the question marks around his reputation, I was willing to let Jamwa serve his
term. This would preserve some name for the Fund to be able to attract
competent people. I wrote a series of articles defending NSSF and its decision
to buy Temangalo because I remain convinced that the price was good and the
project has potential to yield good returns on workers savings in spite of the
irregularities with which the purchase was done. In such matters, my advice is
consistent: punish the political culprits, don’t kill the project.
Many people responded to this by
accusing me of defending Mbabazi. While I could understand their frustrations
with government corruption in Uganda, it was also clear they were mixing NSSF
with Mbabazi. This mix-up armed Mbabazis political adversaries with sufficient
public support to settle scores with him. Yet in doing this (which is a
legitimate political action) Mbabazis opponents cared little about what
happened to NSSF. The public jumped onto the bandwagon out of ignorance,
gullibility or (for our chattering class) a desire to score political points.
NSSFs reputation was so badly battered.
As always happens, it provided Museveni with the justification to change
management. Yet Museveni is not going to appoint anyone competent but someone
loyal to him. Therefore the result of any changes is not going to be the
optimal one the public wanted i.e. competent management. It will be the political
one i.e. subjecting NSSF to the whims of the president.
I am very sceptical of many of the
fights against corruption in Uganda because corruption is the grease that turns
the wheels of our politics. The grand don of corruption in Uganda is the president
himself. If anyone sought to fight it, they need to begin with him. Short of
that, we are deceiving ourselves. That is why I am always reluctant to expend
my energy fighting a minister who, when fired, is replaced by yet another
corrupt minister. The reader should now understand why I have not written an
article on why I think Ezra Suruma and Mbabazi should be fired. Recycling
thieves in government cannot be a formula for creating accountability.
I have met few Ugandans who appreciate
the crisis in NSSF in the context of our nations political economy. Over the
last ten years, the Funds portfolio has grown from under Shs 200 billion to
over Shs 1.3 trillion in a country with total revenues of Shs 3.6 trillion per
year. It is probably the only institution that can easily sign a land-purchase
cheque of Shs 20 billion. Were this cheque to go to someone who can finance the
opposition, Musevenis candidacy can suffer a severe beating at the polls.
I was therefore not surprised by
Musevenis prolonged silence during the saga. I am sure he was trying to
internalise the real meaning of NSSF in Ugandas politics. His reaction to it
would aim at two things: First, he would ensure that the next manager is a
political cadre directly loyal to him a Noble Mayombo of sorts. He or she would
ensure that all decisions at NSSF protect Musevenis political interests. NSSF
would only buy land from a seller who is amenable to Musevenis political
interests.
Secondly, Museveni realised that NSSF
has a lot of money that can be used to advance his politics. For years,
Museveni has restrained himself on putting his fingers in NSSF coffers. Now he
is going to. The next managers he appoints will be guys who can use the Funds
money to promote the presidents campaign and even build a headquarters for the
NRM.
So we have come full circle again: a
genuine debate on accountability being used as an opportunity to extend
Musevenis personal control over institutions previously independent of him. It
began with the police in 1999. As Justice Julia Sebutinde attacked police
officers, she won the admiration of the public. I was lonely in criticising
her. When the dust settled, Museveni used the weakened reputation of the police
to appoint an army general to manage it. Now he has the police under his thumb.
Then he came to Uganda Revenue
Authority (URA). Again, Sebutinde made headlines and won public acclaim. I was
again lonely in warning that Sebutinde was laying a foundation for State House
takeover of URA. When dust settled, Allen Kajina was appointed to head URA.
Although she has proved to be a competent manager, her primary goal is to
advance and protect the interests of Museveni over and above those of Uganda.
Please watch who the next managing director of NSSF is going to be.
No comments:
Post a Comment