Mariam Wangadya did not begin with legal arguments or political accusations.
Instead, she spoke of exhaustion. “This is a very tough day,” the Chairperson of the Uganda Human Rights Commission (UHRC) told journalists last week, struggling to contain her emotions.
“A tough one. I’ll pray very hard that I don’t cry along the way. Because what I’m going to talk about is very, very painful.”
For more than three years, Wangadya said, she has endured what she describes as a coordinated campaign to discredit both her leadership and her reputation. Now, with allegations of corruption dominating sections of the media and exposing deep divisions within one of Uganda’s most important constitutional bodies, she decided to respond publicly.
Her remarks offer a rare glimpse into a bitter internal conflict at the institution charged with protecting Ugandans’ fundamental rights. They also raise questions about the stability and effectiveness of an organisation whose constitutional mandate includes investigating human rights abuses, monitoring places of detention and holding public institutions accountable.
At the centre of Wangadya’s address was a categorical denial that she is under criminal investigation.
“Today I called you here to inform you that those accusations are false and malicious,” she said. “It is also not true that I am under investigation by any investigative agency.”
She urged journalists to independently verify her claim by contacting the Inspector General of Government (IGG), the State House Anti-Corruption Unit, the Criminal Investigations Directorate and other investigative agencies.
“Just take a few minutes and call the IGG. Call the State House Anti-Corruption Unit. Go to CID and police to establish if any of these agencies or any other agency is investigating me for any crime,” she said.
Her comments came after weeks of public allegations that she says falsely portray her as the subject of corruption investigations. According to Wangadya, those claims have been deliberately spread by three fellow commissioners, whom she accuses of orchestrating a sustained smear campaign since she assumed office in September 2021.
“As you are all aware, I have been under a vicious, vile, and relentless smear campaign in the media, orchestrated by three members of the Uganda Human Rights Commission,” she said.
“This campaign is not new. It has lasted since I assumed the office as Chairperson… the difference is that at this time it is more intense.”
The Uganda Human Rights Commission occupies a unique position within Uganda’s constitutional framework. Established under Chapter Four of the Constitution, it is mandated to investigate human rights violations, inspect detention facilities, educate the public about human rights and advise government on compliance with constitutional standards.
Because of that role, public confidence in the Commission’s independence is central to its credibility. Internal disputes within such an institution therefore carry consequences beyond the individuals involved.
They risk undermining public trust in an organisation expected to act as an impartial defender of citizens’ rights. Rather than focusing on the Commission’s constitutional responsibilities, Wangadya said, internal divisions have increasingly consumed the institution.
“I have been mentally tortured, humiliated, bullied, and defamed. This happens daily, hourly, 24-7, and even as I talk now. My family and I have not known peace, especially the past six months to date.”
Wangadya also challenged the logic behind allegations that she had stolen public funds. She said the Commission has consistently struggled with inadequate funding, making accusations of large-scale theft implausible.
“By the way, this institution, as I have repeatedly said to the media and even at Parliament, is the most resource-starved among all the constitutional bodies,” she said.
“There is no money to steal, even if I were a thief, which I am not. There is no money to steal at the Uganda Human Rights Commission.”
She also pointed to her previous eight-year tenure as Deputy Inspector General of Government, where she said she had opportunities to enrich herself through bribery but refused to do so.
“I want to remind the country that I was deputy IGG for eight years,” she said. “If I were the kind of person media houses have depicted me to be, that I am a thief, I would be a very wealthy woman today.”
She claimed that while serving in the Inspectorate of Government, she was offered substantial sums of money to halt investigations, discontinue prosecutions and target political opponents but rejected those offers.
“If I was that person the media talk about every day, I wouldn’t even have to steal non-existent money at the Uganda Human Rights Commission,” she said.
Another recurring theme in Wangadya’s remarks was her criticism of media coverage. She accused sections of the media of publishing allegations without independently verifying them, saying journalists had failed to meet basic professional standards.
“You ought to have done the necessary cross- checking before you embark on spreading falsehoods against me,” she said.
“I sometimes wonder, is this laziness? Is it lack of professionalism? Or sheer hatred for certain people?”
For the public, the dispute illustrates the importance of distinguishing allegations from verified findings. Being investigated and being accused are not the same thing. Investigations are formal processes carried out by legally mandated agencies that gather evidence before reaching conclusions.
Wangadya maintains that no such process currently exists against her, while urging reporters to verify that claim directly with the relevant authorities. She also revealed that, before taking office, she had received warnings that her leadership would face internal resistance.
According to Wangadya, two Members of Parliament escorted her from the Appointments Committee after her vetting and cautioned that one commissioner would work to undermine her.
“One of them told me, ‘My dear, you are in very big trouble. One of the members you are to work with will do everything to hurt you and fail you in your work. You will be scandalized, bullied, disrespected, and humiliated on a daily basis. You will be destroyed,’” she recalled.
“Sadly, this has come to pass.” She said those early warnings proved to be the beginning of what she now describes as years of hostility inside the Commission, setting the stage for an increasingly public confrontation that has placed the institution itself under intense scrutiny.
She accused three fellow commissioners of system- atically undermining her authority and damaging the institution’s work, alleging that their campaign had shifted from internal disagreements to a sustained effort to influence public opinion through the media.
“These people are idle; they are shallow, crazy and seem not to know their roles as members of the Uganda Human Rights Commission,” she said.
“They are hateful, malicious, vile and are determined to destroy not just me but the entire institution. They have never accepted me as their leader and have openly vowed to get me out of office.”
She claimed the commissioners spent more time pursuing personal battles than carrying out the Commission’s constitutional responsibilities.
“That is all they do: plan meetings, storm media houses, storm senior people’s offices that Wangadya has done this, they have done this, they have done that,” she said. Wangadya also levelled serious allegations about the conduct of some commissioners during internal meetings, claiming she had faced repeated intimidation.
“These crazy insufferable individuals shout at me during meetings. They point fingers at me and swear at me all the time. They vow to my chest that they will evict me from office. They have threatened physical violence to me,” she said.
“Their relentless, brutal smear campaign they continue to unleash on me proves their intent and determination to harm me.”
She went on to make further allegations concerning the personal conduct of unnamed commissioners, including claims of alcohol and drug use during meetings, and referred to an audio recording she said contained threats made during an election campaign.
Those allegations have not been independently verified in the document. Perhaps Wangadya’s sharpest criticism was directed not only at her colleagues but also at the process through which commissioners are appointed. Article 51(4) of Uganda’s Constitution requires members of the Human Rights Commission to be people “of high moral character and proven integrity.”
Wangadya argued that this constitutional standard has not always been rigorously applied.
“How I wish the appointing authority, in this case my beloved President Yoweri Museveni, had taken these constitutional provisions seriously,” she said.
She described the Commission as having become “a dumping ground for political failures,” alleging that some appointments were being used to accommodate unsuccessful politicians rather than strengthen the institution’s professional capacity.
Wangadya also revisited one of the most publicised controversies during her tenure: the repatriation and burial of the late Commissioner Fr Simon Lokodo, who died in Geneva while on official duty.
She rejected allegations that she had misappropriated funds allocated for the exercise, explaining that because the Commission lacked sufficient resources, she sought assistance from government.
According to Wangadya, Shs500 million was transferred into the Commission’s official account after intervention by the Vice President through the then Minister for Ethics and Integrity, Rose Lilly Akello.
She said the money was managed by the Commission’s Accounting Officer under ministerial oversight and that expenditure required approval from the minister. Yet, she said, allegations that she had stolen the money surfaced before Fr Lokodo’s body had even arrived in Uganda.
“Before Father Lokodo’s body could even be delivered at Entebbe Airport, I saw a story online that I had stolen the Shs500 million,” she said.
She added that while travelling back from Karenga after the burial, another online post accused her of causing Fr Lokodo’s death.
“Before we could even reach Gulu I saw a story online that I was a witch and had killed Father Lokodo,” she said tearfully.
Wangadya alleged that those stories formed part of the same campaign she says has continued to the present day. Her remarks later turned to another issue that has attracted significant public attention in recent months: allegations that security agencies have operated an undisclosed “basement” where suspects are detained and tortured.
As head of the Human Rights Commission, Wangadya said she had personally attempted to establish whether such a facility exists after reports circulated on social media concerning opposition activist Eddie Mutwe.
“About the existence of a basement where suspects are detained and or tortured as I have been hearing, I have never seen that basement,” she said.
“When we saw a post on X that Eddie Mutwe was in a basement, I took the trouble personally to look for that basement. I never found it.”
She explained that she intended to review the Commission’s case file to determine whether Eddie Mutwe had identified where he was allegedly held and said commissioners also planned to interview MP Miriam Atebe to establish what information she might have.
“If it’s there, we want that basement closed,” Wangadya said.
