Akol, based on her years at URA, ought to have known that the pursuit of this reward was conceived through a sense of impious entitlement, nurtured by greed, and driven by false self-aggrandisement. She should have known that her role in the saga could be potentially damaging on URA; an institution whose brand of integrity has been built over decades.
Many Ugandans have been celebrating URA’s transformation into a corruption free zone since 2005 under former Commissioner General Allen Kagina. Many recall the days when a tax collector would not process a tax payment unless they received a bribe. All that has until now appeared to be history – or it has been perceived to be history.
To achieve that, Kagina instituted and lived by an `integrity culture’ guided by an 8-point code. Point No.1 of the code was “building corruption resistance mechanisms within all URA operations”. The other parts of the code, including zero tolerance, transparence, the code of ethics, and guidelines on handling client relations should have guided the current leadership under Akol to possibly handle the presidential handshake differently. Did Akol and her team refer to them?
The tax body also has a 4-point policy guideline on the ethical behavior of staff. Part IV of that covers a “Rewards and Recognition Policy”. Was reference made to it when the President was cajoled to reward the Heritage Oil money lickers?
We feel Akol’s pain. She is paying too high a price for the `paltry’ Shs240 million she got. By her actions in the saga, she has deprived herself of the moral authority to head an institution whose lifeblood is ethics. She did no wrong but she failed to do right. For that she may not be prosecuted, because she did nothing illegal, but she must be punished for her impropriety. Anyone who has regretted something knows the frustration of failure of judgment. Some seek private punishment because, in such cases, public pardon is often absent. So it must be for Akol.
****
editor@independent.co.ug