BILLIONS IN CHAOS, LAND GRABBED, PROJECTS ABANDONED! Leaked Dossier Blows Lid Off the Rot That Killed Dairy Development Authority
The lid has finally been blown off the rot that consumed the Dairy Development Authority, revealing an institution that staggered into its own death under a mountain of financial confusion, stalled projects, land wrangles and broken systems—just as it was being swallowed into the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries.
What was supposed to be a smooth government rationalisation has instead exposed a troubled legacy. By the end of 2024, DDA was formally abolished and its functions transferred to MAAIF, but not before leaving behind a trail of unresolved issues that now read like a catalogue of institutional failure. Out of 88 staff at closure, only 55 were absorbed into MAAIF, while 33 were left out, many stuck in uncertainty as billions in terminal benefits remain in dispute.
At the centre of this troubled chapter are the former leadership figures, including the late Dr. Michael Kansiime, who served as Executive Director until his passing in November 2022, and Samson Akankiza Mpiira, who acted as Executive Director and previously served as Director of Technical Services. As Kansiime’s deputy and a key member of the core management team, Mpiira was part of the leadership structure during the period now under scrutiny—a period the Auditor General has effectively described as deeply flawed.
The audit opinion itself is qualified, immediately signaling that something was fundamentally wrong with how the Authority handled its finances. The inconsistencies begin with Letters of Credit. DDA reported LCs worth UGX 2.393 billion, yet UGX 1.695 billion had already been executed by the reporting date, meaning the actual outstanding balance should have been UGX 0.698 billion. This mismatch raises questions about the accuracy of financial reporting and whether figures were being properly tracked.
Even the reporting of warrants shows discrepancies. The financial statements listed total warrants of UGX 6.235 billion, yet the audited figure stood at UGX 6.458 billion, exposing inconsistencies in basic financial documentation. At the same time, the Authority failed to present a clear, entity-specific budget for terminal benefits, instead relying on a combined UGX 16 billion allocation covering five rationalised entities under MAAIF, leaving auditors without a clear breakdown of DDA’s obligations.
The human impact of this confusion is staggering. A total of UGX 9.079 billion was computed and approved for terminal benefits, yet payments tell a story of imbalance and delay. Among the 55 staff absorbed into MAAIF, only four received their terminal benefits, totaling UGX 496.28 million, while 51 staff remain unpaid, with outstanding claims of UGX 4.67 billion hanging in the balance. For the 33 staff not absorbed, 31 were paid UGX 3.73 billion, but two individuals were left out entirely, their dues unpaid.
Out of the UGX 4.23 billion paid to 35 staff, UGX 3.18 billion went to severance pay, UGX 26.16 million was recorded as transport refund, UGX 871.8 million covered payment in lieu of notice, and UGX 145.3 million went to leave payments. The figures themselves raise eyebrows, especially around categorisation and consistency, further fueling concerns about financial clarity.
Land management, often a flashpoint in Uganda, emerges as another major fault line. Out of 53 pieces of land owned by DDA, 27 pieces measuring 3.83 hectares were untitled, leaving them vulnerable. Of these, 11 pieces have already been encroached upon, while seven are tied up in court disputes. Efforts to secure titles for eight more pieces are still ongoing, reflecting a system struggling to protect its own assets.
Even among the 26 titled properties, problems persist. Two pieces are encumbered, and three are under dispute in court. At the time of closure, the Authority was entangled in 19 court cases, all of which have now been handed over to the Attorney General under MAAIF, effectively passing the legal burden to the parent ministry.
Funding gaps further complicated operations. Out of UGX 10.95 billion appropriated for the 2024/2025 financial year, only UGX 6.46 billion was actually released, leaving UGX 4.49 billion unreleased. Some of this funding was meant for activities that remained relevant, while others had already become obsolete due to the agency’s transition, highlighting a disconnect between planning and reality.
Of the funds that were received, UGX 6.21 billion was spent, leaving UGX 0.25 billion unspent. This balance was tied to six major activities that were not implemented and had to be rolled over, adding to the growing backlog of incomplete work.
A closer look at project implementation reveals a troubling pattern. Out of 16 sampled activities worth UGX 4.41 billion, only seven activities valued at UGX 3.39 billion were fully completed, while nine activities worth UGX 1.04 billion were only partially implemented. It is a picture of half-finished work and unfulfilled plans.
Perhaps the most visible signs of failure lie in the Milk Collection Centres, which were meant to anchor Uganda’s dairy value chain. Instead, many have become symbols of neglect. Centres in Kitgum, Jinja, Busiu, Tororo, Busia, Pallisa, Kyegegwa, Kyenjojo, Mwenge and Kamwenge were found non-functional, abandoned or unoccupied, with some left to decay by both contractors and DDA staff.
Infrastructure that should have supported farmers is now crumbling. Buildings in Mbale, Busiu, Tororo, Kyenjojo and Kamwenge are dilapidated and in urgent need of repair, with asbestos roofing materials still in place in some locations. Ongoing works at sites like Mbale Factory, Bukedea, Kitgum and the Dairy Village in Jinja tell a mixed story, with some projects progressing while others, like the Jinja Dairy Village, have been completely abandoned.
At the borders, where quality control is critical, the situation is equally alarming. Malaba and Busia border posts are severely understaffed, with just one officer handling testing of milk and dairy products at each location. Worse still, neither post has a fully equipped laboratory, raising concerns about the safety and quality of dairy products entering or leaving the country.
Construction irregularities add another layer to the chaos. At Bukedea Milk Collection Centre, discrepancies were observed where ten timber doors were installed instead of the six specified in the Bills of Quantities, and varnish was used instead of the required gloss oil paint. These may appear minor, but they point to weak supervision and disregard for agreed standards.
And then comes perhaps the most shocking revelation of all. The Milk Collection Centre in Iganga was demolished, and a private mall was constructed on the same land after the lease expired and was re-issued to an individual. The matter is now before court, but the image of a public dairy facility replaced by a private commercial building captures the scale of institutional failure in one dramatic stroke.
As the dust settles on the collapse of DDA, the Auditor General’s findings leave behind a haunting question. How did an agency tasked with driving Uganda’s dairy sector end up leaving behind such a trail of confusion, unfinished work and contested assets?
For many observers, the answer points squarely at leadership and oversight during its final years. Because while the institution may have been dissolved, the legacy of its failures remains very much alive—now sitting on the desk of MAAIF to clean up.
And for farmers, workers and taxpayers, the cost of that rot is still being counted.
GOT A HOT STORY? EMAIL: redpeppertips@gmail.
SOURCE PROTECTION/CONFIDENTIALITY IS OUR NO.1 PRIORITY.
About Post Author
