Parliament Questions Legality of Digital Number Plate Deal Over $134m Cost Discrepancy

A parliamentary inquiry into Uganda’s Intelligent Transport Monitoring System (ITMS) project has raised questions about procurement procedures, contract valuation and the technical capabilities of the system supplied by Russian firm Joint Stock Global Security Company.

Appearing before Parliament’s Committee on Physical Infrastructure, officials faced questions about compliance with the Public Private Partnership (PPP) Act, the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets (PPDA) Act and the approval of the multibillion-shilling contract.

Committee Chairperson Mwine Mpaka questioned how the government arrived at a financial model of $257 million when the contractor’s feasibility estimate was reportedly $123 million, creating a $134 million discrepancy.

“Who determined the user requirements that informed the PMT that a system that does this kind of capacity requires twenty-five million USD? Now I want a straight answer,” Mpaka asked.

He also questioned who determined the contract’s value and whether the government had conducted the due diligence required under Section 25(4) of the PPP Act to assess the contractor’s competence and capacity.

“The question is: was due diligence carried out at Joint Stock Company in line with the PPP Act?” he asked.

Mpaka further sought clarification on whether Cabinet approval had been obtained for the contract and a subsequent amendment, Addendum Number One, and whether the agreement and amendment had been presented to Parliament within the periods prescribed by law.

He also questioned who had defined the system’s requirements and introduced the description of the number plates as digital, saying the contractor had reportedly denied promising digital number plates.

“The third question: the company yesterday informed us that they have never told the country that they are bringing digital number plates. So we are wondering who started the lie that they are digital number plates,” Mpaka said.

Another legislator questioned whether a presidential directive could override statutory procurement requirements, citing Sections 22 and 23 of the PPP Act, which address feasibility studies and procurement procedures for public-private partnerships.

The MP challenged officials to explain the $134 million difference between the contractor’s feasibility estimate and the government’s financial model, asking whether the required study had been conducted before procurement proceeded.

The legislator also questioned whether the classification of the project on security grounds had been used to bypass procurement requirements. These concerns were raised during the inquiry and do not, by themselves, establish that the law was breached.

The committee also examined the financial burden on motorists and the destination of the revenue collected under the arrangement.

MP Byanyima questioned why the money was being paid to a private entity rather than directly into government revenue accounts.

“Do you find the figure seven sixty, and especially going into a private pocket? Not the Government of Uganda, because the money is not paid to URA... So this money, I'm wondering why we would be interested in getting that much money to a private person rather than going into the coffers of Government,” Byanyima said.

Internal Affairs Minister Gen. Kahinda Otafiire told the committee that he had initially opposed the project because of concerns about compatibility between the imported technology and Uganda’s existing surveillance infrastructure.

Otafiire said the cameras already deployed in Uganda used Chinese technology, raising questions about whether equipment supplied from Russia would integrate with the existing systems.

“Then I resisted because I said what is coming from Russia does not necessarily match with what we have on the ground, because the technology we have is Chinese. The cameras we have are Chinese technology and they may not be compatible,” he said.

The minister said he consulted Makerere University, the Police and other technical experts, as well as counterparts in Kenya, who raised concerns about the project’s feasibility.

He also questioned whether the installed system delivered the capabilities implied by its description as an intelligent transport monitoring system.

“Now when it was finally installed, what the Police discovered was that the so-called Intelligent Transport System was what we call fleet management,” Otafiire said.

He added that Police had described the system as relying on vehicle trackers, which he said could be removed by motorists.

The inquiry follows wider concerns about the project’s implementation, including the Kyambogo facility intended to support local number plate production. During the committee’s inspection, Works Minister Gen. Edward Katumba Wamala acknowledged that the facility did not qualify as a manufacturing factory, while officials described it as a warehouse and temporary assembly hub.

The committee’s inquiry is examining whether the project followed the applicable procurement procedures, how its cost was determined and whether the technology and infrastructure delivered meet the government’s stated objectives.