Uganda’s Intelligent Transport Monitoring System (ITMS) project has come under scrutiny after a parliamentary inquiry revealed that the government did not conduct an independent feasibility study before signing the contract, while the contractor’s initial investment estimate was $134 million lower than the figure later adopted in the project’s financial model.
The inquiry before Parliament’s Committee on Physical Infrastructure heard that the initial feasibility report, which estimated the cost of developing and deploying the national tracking system at $127 million, was prepared and submitted by the private contractor, Joint Stock Company.
However, the government subsequently adopted a financial model that provided for an investment of $257 million, leaving a $134 million difference between the two figures.
The discrepancy has raised questions about how the project’s financial model was developed and whether the statutory procedures governing public-private partnerships (PPPs) were followed before the agreement was signed.
Under Section 22 of the Public Private Partnerships Act, an accounting officer is required to undertake a feasibility study to establish whether a proposed project is viable as a PPP before procuring a private party.
Appearing before the committee, Works and Transport Minister Gen. Edward Katumba Wamala admitted that his ministry had not independently assessed the suitability of the proposed technology before entering the agreement.
“As a Ministry of Works and Transport, we did not have a feasibility study of the digital [number plate] or whether this was the [right technology],” he told lawmakers.
When committee chairperson Mwine Mpaka presented the $127 million feasibility document to Katushabe Winston, chairperson of the ITMS Project Management Team (PMT), Katushabe said he had never seen the report.
He explained that the PMT was constituted after the main contract had already been signed, meaning its members were not involved in the initial contracting process.
“I have not seen it... When you asked me I said I have not seen it... some of these issues which, Chair, you are asking, and Members, came in immediately after the contract was signed. That's how I, as Chair of the PMT, how we were appointed, came in — the contract was already signed,” Katushabe said.
The inquiry also examined how the project’s financial model was set at $257 million despite the contractor’s initial feasibility estimate of $127 million.
Gen. Katumba said the financial model was handled by specialised subcommittees working under the Ministry of Finance, rather than by him personally.
“So in the issue of the financing model... we had the Project Management Team, but in the Project Management Team there were subcommittees which were dealing with the specific areas of their specialty. So the financing model, it is not I who would examine whether that model is correct. There is a technical team under Finance which would be able to look at it and be able to say whether this is pro-Ugandan or not,” he told the committee.
The minister’s explanation placed the development and assessment of the financial model within the remit of the technical teams responsible for financing, as lawmakers sought to establish how the project’s investment figure was determined.
The $134 million difference between the contractor’s initial estimate and the government-adopted financial model has become a central issue in the inquiry, with legislators questioning the absence of an independent feasibility assessment and the process through which the higher figure was approved.
The committee’s findings could help establish how the project was evaluated before the contract was signed, which institutions were responsible for scrutinising its financial assumptions, and whether the requirements of the PPP Act were met.