ERA LIFTS LID ON UEDCL FAILURES! Regulator Says Power Distributor Has All Billions Required…BUT Sloppy on Execution
Uganda Electricity Distribution Company Limited (UEDCL) is sitting on what the electricity regulator describes as a “good cache of resources”, yet consumers continue to endure power blackouts, delayed fault repairs and frustrating customer service more than a year after the state-owned distributor took over from Umeme.
The damning assessment by the Electricity Regulatory Authority (ERA) has raised uncomfortable questions about whether UEDCL is failing to turn the resources available to it into reliable electricity supply.
At a major electricity stakeholders’ consultation in Kampala, Dr Geoffrey Okoboi, ERA’s Director of Economic Regulation, delivered a blunt message to the distributor: money and resources should no longer be the excuse.
“The company is now seated on a good cache of resources. The issue is what he talked about,” Okoboi said.
“The challenges are not now resources; the challenges are implementation.”
His remarks put UEDCL’s management under fresh pressure to explain why consumers are still suffering outages and waiting for faults to be fixed despite government financing, an approved tariff framework and commitments to invest in the distribution network.
Okoboi said ERA had anticipated the financial requirements of the transition long before Umeme handed over the concession on April 1, 2025.
“Even before the company was able to cross from Umeme to the current operator, the regulator had foreseen, and as early as 2024, we had provided the resources,” he said.
The resources were factored into a 2024 cost-of-service study that informed the tariff framework under which UEDCL assumed responsibility for distributing electricity.
The regulator’s position presents a direct challenge to UEDCL’s repeated explanations that procurement bottlenecks and shortages of essential equipment have hampered its operations.
SHS300M COMMITMENT, BUT WHERE ARE THE MATERIALS?
UEDCL’s own officials have admitted that the company has struggled to obtain the equipment needed to maintain and expand the electricity network.
Isaac Mufumbiro, the utility’s Head of Strategy, Compliance and Regulation, told the same conference that UEDCL had committed about US$300 million in capital and operational expenditure but had not received the expected materials.
“We have committed about $300 million in both CAPEX and OPEX, but I can tell you to this date that we’ve not had that filter through in terms of materials,” Mufumbiro said.
He blamed procurement challenges associated with the Buy Uganda, Build Uganda (BUBU) policy, which seeks to promote locally manufactured goods and services.
While acknowledging the policy’s intentions, Mufumbiro argued that it had complicated the procurement of transformers and other electricity equipment.
He revealed that some contracts for electricity meters had remained unfulfilled for eight months, forcing UEDCL to look to international manufacturers for supplies.
The revelations raise critical questions about procurement planning, supplier performance and contract enforcement.
Who awarded the contracts? When were they signed? Were suppliers paid? What delivery deadlines were agreed upon, and what action was taken when those deadlines were missed?
Without answers backed by procurement records, it remains difficult to establish whether UEDCL is being let down by suppliers, bogged down by procurement procedures or struggling with weaknesses in its own contract management.
The US$300 million figure also requires clarification, including how much has actually been spent, how much has been committed contractually and how much remains available for investment.
For consumers sitting in darkness, the distinction matters less than one basic question: why is essential equipment still unavailable when the distributor says it has committed substantial sums to running the business?
UEDCL ADMITS CUSTOMER SERVICE FAILURE
In a striking admission, Mufumbiro acknowledged that the transition had been accompanied by poor customer service.
“Before I can make my submission, I want to empathize with the public and the customers. On behalf of the entire value chain, we’ve not had good customer service in the last maybe 20 months,” he said.
“I need to take accountability and responsibility as well as ownership for those events.”
Mufumbiro, who previously held the same position at Umeme, attributed the problems partly to internal challenges involving personnel, processes and systems.
He also cited vandalism and supply-chain disruptions affecting equipment such as aerial bundled conductors and transformers.
The official maintained that management and board-level changes, together with internal reforms, were helping the company recover.
“Because I believe from my own assessment as a strategy person, we have made the turn despite the fact that it has taken us a lot of time. But there have been lessons learnt in that area,” he said.
He also revealed that meters from Chinese manufacturers were on their way to Kampala.
But promises of incoming equipment and assurances that the company has turned a corner will not be enough to convince customers who continue to experience blackouts.
UEDCL needs to demonstrate when the equipment arrives, how much is delivered, where it is deployed and whether repair times and outage frequency are actually improving.
THE UMEME EXCUSE UNDER PRESSURE
The procurement problems are particularly troubling because the potential difficulties were raised before the transition.
During the high-profile handover, dubbed the “Big Switch”, stakeholders warned that lengthy government procurement procedures could delay access to transformers, cables, meters and other essential supplies.
Former Umeme Managing Director Celestine Babunji urged the government to protect the value of the business being handed over.
He said the distribution network had expanded significantly during Umeme’s 20-year concession.
Babunji described the business as generating about US$700 million in revenue and said the network had grown from approximately 5,000 transformer zones to 17,000, with about 34,000 kilometres of lines and 2.2 million customers.
His figures were intended to demonstrate the scale of the operation and the importance of protecting the infrastructure and customer base built during the concession.
The question now is whether the new operator was adequately prepared to manage that expanded network and whether the procurement arrangements put in place before the handover were sufficient.
If the risks were identified in advance, why were they not resolved before they began affecting service delivery?
The government announced in March 2025 that it was securing US$50 million through domestic borrowing to support UEDCL capital investments. That commitment adds to the questions surrounding the availability of resources and the execution of the utility’s investment plans.
UEDCL must account for how the financing was deployed, what equipment was procured and which investments have translated into measurable improvements.
WHERE DID THE STAFFING PLAN GO WRONG?
The problems extend beyond procurement.
One of the unresolved questions is why UEDCL continues to cite personnel, processes and systems as challenges when many former Umeme employees moved to the state-owned distributor following the end of the concession.
Former Energy Minister Engineer Irene Muloni, who previously served as UEDCL managing director, argued that the company had prepared for the transition and that many employees who had worked under Umeme were familiar with the distribution business.
If experienced staff were available, what exactly went wrong?
Were critical technical and supervisory positions left vacant? Were employees reassigned to unfamiliar responsibilities? Did changes in reporting lines and decision-making disrupt operations? Were workers provided with the tools, equipment and authority needed to respond to faults?
These questions cannot be answered through general references to internal challenges.
Mufumbiro initially indicated that he would not delve into internal matters during the 11th Africa Energy Market Place dialogue. Yet those internal matters are central to understanding why a company with an established workforce and a functioning network has struggled to deliver satisfactory customer service.
Muloni also emphasised the need for appropriate skills, clear job descriptions, performance targets and managers who are held accountable for results.
She further raised an allegation that she had heard that jobs may have been sold during the transition. The allegation requires independent verification and should not be treated as established fact.
More importantly, the government and UEDCL need to explain what staffing and governance reviews were conducted, what weaknesses were identified and what corrective action followed.
GOVERNMENT SHAKE-UP, BUT WHERE ARE THE RESULTS?
In May 2026, the government sent UEDCL Managing Director Paul Mwesigwa on forced leave and terminated the contract of board chairperson Lydia Ochieng-Obbo.
Former Energy Minister Ruth Nankabirwa said the changes were intended to allow a comprehensive review of the company’s management and operations.
The leadership shake-up came amid growing concern over service delivery and operational weaknesses.
Yet the central question remains whether the review established who was responsible for the failures and whether it produced concrete improvements.
The public needs more than changes at the top. It needs evidence that those changes have improved the way the utility operates.
A review that identifies procurement delays, weak internal processes or staffing problems but does not assign responsibility or establish measurable targets would do little to resolve the frustrations experienced by consumers.
UEDCL’S OWN REPORT RAISES MORE QUESTIONS
The utility has also pointed to the condition of the electricity network, growing demand and ageing infrastructure as major challenges.
A UEDCL status report dated April 21, 2026, painted a picture of a distribution system under pressure from rising consumption, overloaded substations, ageing equipment and repeated breakdowns.
The report put electricity demand at 1,217.7 megawatts in March 2026, up from 986.4 megawatts in April 2025.
Active customers reportedly increased from about 2.45 million to 2.76 million over the same period.
The growth in demand and customer numbers has undoubtedly increased pressure on the network. But it also raises questions about whether UEDCL’s investment and maintenance plans have kept pace with that growth.
The report further put distribution losses in the first quarter of 2026 at 18.11 per cent, against an annual target of 13.65 per cent.
Although UEDCL described 18.07 per cent as the lowest loss level recorded since the transition, the figure remained above the annual target.
Distribution losses represent electricity purchased but not ultimately billed or collected for. They can result from technical problems, illegal connections, inaccurate metering and other commercial weaknesses.
High losses undermine revenue recovery and can constrain the funds available for network maintenance and expansion.
The figures demonstrate that UEDCL faces substantial operational pressures. They do not, however, establish how much of the problem was inherited from Umeme, how much resulted from growing demand and how much reflects decisions made after the takeover.
That distinction matters because the government and the distributor cannot indefinitely rely on the inherited state of the network without demonstrating what they have done to improve it.
FROM FASTER CONNECTIONS TO LONG DELAYS
In September 2025, Mwesigwa presented a positive account of UEDCL’s first six months in charge.
He reported that the company had added 648,404 customers to the national grid, with total customers rising from 1,782,085 to 2,430,489.
He also credited changes in procurement arrangements for accelerating new connections.
Mwesigwa commended the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Authority (PPDA) for accrediting UEDCL, saying the new arrangement had made connections “much faster”.
But subsequent concerns raised by the regulator included prolonged delays in new connections, slow acquisition of repair and maintenance materials, and delayed execution of network upgrades.
The contrasting accounts demand an explanation.
If procurement reforms had accelerated connections, why were customers still experiencing delays in obtaining meters and other services?
Did the reforms improve one category of procurement while leaving essential maintenance supplies trapped in lengthy processes? Did the initial gains prove temporary? Or were the early claims not reflected in the experience of consumers?
UEDCL should publish comparable figures showing connection applications received, connections completed, average waiting times, outstanding applications and meter deliveries since the takeover.
The same transparency should apply to fault reporting and restoration, including average repair times, repeated outages and the performance of regional offices.
Such information would help establish whether the utility is genuinely improving or simply changing the explanations for persistent service problems.
ERA HAD ALREADY FLAGGED THE PROBLEMS
Nankabirwa previously disclosed that an assessment by ERA had identified operational and managerial gaps affecting service delivery.
Among the concerns were declining electricity reliability, frequent outages, voltage fluctuations and slow restoration of supply.
The assessment also identified prolonged delays in processing new connections and acquiring essential repair, maintenance and operational materials.
Human-resource governance problems were also cited as factors weakening staff effectiveness and responsiveness to customers.
These findings closely mirror the issues raised by UEDCL’s own representatives at the stakeholder consultation.
The question is why the problems have persisted despite regulatory scrutiny, leadership changes and the reforms introduced after the takeover.
If procurement bottlenecks were anticipated before April 2025, what safeguards were put in place? If staffing and internal processes were found wanting, what specific weaknesses were corrected? And if government resources were factored into the tariff framework, why has the availability of essential equipment remained a challenge?
ERA must also explain how it is monitoring UEDCL’s performance and what action it is taking to ensure that licence obligations and service standards are met.
CONSUMERS CANNOT LIVE ON PROMISES
UEDCL inherited a large distribution network facing rising demand, ageing infrastructure and maintenance requirements. It also inherited experienced workers and received government support for the transition.
Those circumstances help explain the scale of the challenge, but they do not remove the responsibility to deliver reliable electricity.
ERA says the resources were provided for. UEDCL says it has committed hundreds of millions of dollars but is still waiting for materials. Its officials acknowledge poor customer service, while the government has changed senior leadership and ordered reviews of management and operations.
The competing explanations now need to be tested against procurement records, expenditure reports, delivery schedules, staffing assessments and independently verifiable service-performance data.
The public deserves to know how much money UEDCL has received, how much has been spent, what equipment has been delivered, which contracts remain outstanding and who is responsible for failures that have delayed repairs and disrupted electricity supply.
Above all, the distributor must show whether its promised turnaround is translating into fewer outages, faster fault repairs and shorter waiting times for new connections.
More than a year after Umeme handed over the concession, the test is no longer what UEDCL says it intends to do.
It is what the company can prove it has delivered.
For Ugandans paying their electricity bills, the bottom line is simple: if resources are available, why are the lights still going off?
GOT A HOT STORY? LET US KNOW!
Got breaking news, explosive secrets, or hard evidence?
Email us: redpeppertips@gmail.com
We accept tips, documents, videos, photos, and recordings—the more evidence you have, the better.
CONFIDENTIALITY IS OUR TOP PRIORITY. SOURCES ARE ALWAYS PROTECTED!
About Post Author
