MAO TAKES ON MAYANJA OVER URSB CRISIS…Justice Minister Accuses AG Of Rushing Internal Dispute To M7, Roars: “If The President Is To Solve Every Problem, Then The Cabinet Should Be Dissolved And We Leave Everything To Him”
KAMPALA — Battle lines appears to have been drawn within the Justice and Constitutional Affairs docket after Justice Minister Norbert Mao appeared to take a swipe at Attorney General Dr Sam Mayanja over the handling of the explosive Uganda Registration Services Bureau (URSB) management dispute.
Appearing before Parliament’s Committee on Commissions, Statutory Authorities and State Enterprises (COSASE) on Wednesday, November 11, 2026, Mao questioned why internal administrative problems were rushed to President Yoweri Museveni before being properly handled through established government channels.
In a pointed statement that appeared to challenge the decision to involve the Head of State, Mao told MPs that ministers should not turn every institutional disagreement into a presidential matter.
“If the President is to solve every problem, then the Cabinet should be dissolved and we leave everything to him,” Mao declared.
The remarks came as Mao explained how a letter containing what he described as broad and unverified allegations against URSB leadership reached Museveni, triggering a presidential directive that sent Registrar General Mercy Kainobwisho and three other senior officials out of their offices pending investigations.
Although Mao did not directly name Mayanja as the person responsible for the escalation during his remarks, the minister’s account has placed the Attorney General’s July 8, 2026 letter at the centre of the controversy.
The letter, addressed to URSB Board Chairman Ambassador Francis Butagira, directed the Board to stop its investigations into Commissioner for Business Registration Gilbert Agaba and await presidential guidance.
It was copied to Museveni and Mao.
The development raises uncomfortable questions about how a dispute that began within URSB’s management structures moved through the Attorney General’s office and eventually landed on the President’s desk, with far-reaching consequences for the Bureau’s top leadership.
MAO: WHY RUSH EVERYTHING TO M7?
Mao told COSASE that the President acted after receiving an alarming communication containing allegations against URSB leadership.
However, the minister suggested that the allegations were general and had not been sufficiently verified before the matter reached the Head of State.
“The President received an alarming letter and on that basis he issued the order to investigate. But to the best of my knowledge, it is alarming because many of the allegations were general,” Mao told MPs.
He said he later met Museveni alongside URSB Board Chairman Butagira to provide context and address staff grievances.
Mao further told the committee that the internal disagreements had been addressed and that there was no longer cause for alarm at the Bureau.
But his explanation opened a fresh line of questioning about the role of senior government officials in escalating the dispute.
MP George Musisi challenged how a letter allegedly containing unverified claims could reach the President and result in several senior officials being sent out of office before a prima facie case had been established.
Mao responded by criticising the tendency among public officials to bypass administrative structures and rush complaints to the Presidency.
He said some complaints only reached his desk after the President had already written to him.
The minister argued that ministers are appointed to handle matters within their respective dockets instead of routinely referring every problem to Museveni.
“As Ministers, we should not rush to escalate matters to the President before we have dealt with them. That’s why we were appointed as Ministers. If the President is to solve every problem, then the Cabinet should be dissolved and we leave everything to him,” he said.
The remarks have put the spotlight on the working relationship between Mao and the Attorney General, particularly over the handling of complaints involving institutions under the Justice and Constitutional Affairs docket.
HOW AG MAYANJA WAS INVOLVED
But how did an internal URSB disagreement end up at the President’s desk through AG Mayanja?
Documents seen by Red Pepper trace the roots of the crisis to Gilbert Agaba, the Commissioner for Business Registration.
According to an internal management brief, the Bureau had received repeated complaints about Agaba’s leadership, performance, communication and working relationships within the Business Registration Department.
Management reportedly accused him of persistent absenteeism, inadequate supervision, failure to convene departmental meetings, poor coordination and failure to implement management decisions.
The brief further claimed that similar concerns had emerged during his earlier tenure as Commissioner for Intellectual Property.
Management reportedly viewed his transfer to Business Registration as an opportunity to improve leadership and teamwork in the department.
However, the relationship allegedly deteriorated further.
The Deputy Registrars General reportedly intervened on several occasions, counselling Agaba and proposing corrective measures to improve communication, supervision and departmental coordination.
When these interventions reportedly failed to resolve the dispute, Registrar General Kainobwisho personally intervened.
Agaba was directed to engage his team, agree on clear working arrangements and submit proposals aimed at improving departmental performance.
According to management, he did not comply with the directive.
The matter was subsequently escalated into a formal disciplinary process under the URSB Human Resource Manual.
AGABA FIRES BACK!
Before the internal administrative process could be concluded, Agaba reportedly took his grievances outside the Bureau.
He raised allegations against management before Board Chairman Butagira and subsequently referred substantially similar complaints to external authorities, including the Economic Crimes Division of the Uganda Police Force and the Attorney General’s office.
His allegations reportedly included claims of criminal conduct, corruption and misuse of institutional resources.
The URSB Board then constituted an investigation committee to examine both sides of the dispute.
On June 8, 2026, Agaba was invited to respond to concerns regarding leadership and governance challenges in his department.
The matter subsequently reached an extraordinary Board meeting held on July 15.
The Board made findings against Agaba and communicated them through a warning letter.
Among the findings was that the Business Registration Department had reportedly gone through the entire 2025/2026 financial year without holding a departmental meeting or retreat to plan and evaluate performance.
The Board also accused him of failing to implement and report back on management decisions, treating the conduct as insubordination under Section 7.2.4(b)(viii) of the URSB Human Resource Manual.
The most explosive finding concerned language he allegedly used against Kainobwisho.
According to the Board’s findings, Agaba had referred to the Registrar General as a criminal and accused her of running a criminal enterprise within URSB.
The Board reportedly ordered him to submit a written apology within five days and placed him on a proposed 12-month Performance Improvement Plan under the supervision of the Deputy Registrar General for Finance and Administration.
But Agaba reportedly rejected the findings, the apology demand and the proposed improvement plan.
ATTORNEY GENERAL ENTERS THE BATTLE
The dispute then moved to another level.
On July 8, 2026, Attorney General Dr Sam Mayanja wrote to URSB Board Chairman Butagira in a letter titled “Investigations into Agaba Gilbert, Commissioner Business Registration.”
Mayanja acknowledged receiving information from Agaba concerning alleged criminal activities at URSB.
He told the Board that he had escalated the allegations to President Museveni for guidance.
Then came an extraordinary instruction.
Mayanja directed the Board to halt its investigations into Agaba pending further guidance from the President.
“This is to direct that you and the URSB Board ceases all investigations/inquiries into Mr. Agaba and await the guidance of His Excellency the President,” the letter stated.
The communication was copied to Museveni and Minister Mao.
This effectively put the internal disciplinary process on hold as the matter moved to the highest political office in the country.
But insiders are now asking a pointed question:
Why did the matter go through the Attorney General instead of being handled directly by the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, Nobert Mao, who is the political head of the ministry responsible for URSB?
The question has become even more important because the Attorney General’s office operates within the Justice and Constitutional Affairs docket headed by Mao.
According to watchers, this is the same issue Mao tried to raise with COSASE MPs when he said the matter shouldn’t have escalated to State House quickly.
Mao blamed the escalation on failures in administrative procedures, arguing that some officials had bypassed established institutional channels and taken internal grievances directly to State House.
He added that ministers should not rush to escalate matters to the President before exhausting their own administrative responsibilities.
“As Ministers, we should not rush to escalate matters to the President before we have dealt with them. That’s why we were appointed as Ministers. If the President is to solve every problem, then the Cabinet should be dissolved and we leave everything to him,” he said.
JULY 24: THE PRESIDENTIAL HAMMER
Three weeks after the Attorney General’s letter, Museveni wrote to Mao.
The July 24 communication, bearing State House reference NPO/17, carried the dramatic title: “Embezzlement of Government Funds, Abuse of Office and Maladministration, Money Laundering and Institutional Mismanagement at the Uganda Registration Services Bureau (URSB).”
The President directed that Kainobwisho and the other named officials step aside until an audit was completed.
He assigned the IGG to lead the investigations with assistance from presidential auditors.
The directive dramatically transformed what had started as a disciplinary dispute involving one commissioner into a much wider investigation of URSB’s leadership and operations.
The affected officials were subsequently placed on mandatory leave.
The consequences were immediate, with the institution’s top leadership effectively removed from their day-to-day responsibilities.
WE WERE NOT HEARD
According to the affected officials, URSB management does not oppose investigations.
Instead, management says it is ready to cooperate with all lawful investigations.
Its major complaint is about the circumstances in which the presidential directive was reached.
Management argues that the President may not have received the full picture because, according to them, the Attorney General reported the allegations to State House without first giving management an opportunity to present its side.
The officials affected by the suspension therefore want the presidential directive reviewed.
They have also asked for support to expedite a meeting between the URSB Board Chairman, the affected officials and President Museveni so that the Board can present its side of the story.
WIDER PICTURE
The central issue, however, is not whether allegations of corruption and abuse of office should be investigated. They should.
It is whether the process leading to the removal of senior officials from their duties followed proper administrative safeguards and allowed all sides to be heard.
Mao’s COSASE appearance has now brought the role of the Attorney General into sharper focus: why was the internal URSB dispute escalated to the President, and what information informed the July 8 communication?
For now, the IGG investigations remain critical to establishing whether the allegations against URSB officials have merit.
But Mao’s warning to fellow ministers has left a bigger question hanging over government: if every institutional dispute ends up at State House, what becomes of the responsibility of ministers, boards and accounting officers to resolve problems within their own mandates?
GOT A HOT STORY? BLOW THE WHISTLE!
Have breaking news, explosive revelations, juicy leads or evidence of wrongdoing?
WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU!
Send your tips, documents, videos, photos and audio recordings to:
redpeppertips@gmail.com
Whether it’s corruption, scandals, abuse of office, injustice or stories others are afraid to tell, help us bring the truth to light.
SOURCES ARE PROTECTED.
CONFIDENTIALITY IS OUR NO.1 PRIORITY!
About Post Author
