The case involving former customs officer David Kalemera has taken a dramatic turn after Uganda’s Industrial Court ruled that his removal from the Uganda Revenue Authority was an URA unlawful dismissal. The ruling, delivered this week, awarded him financial compensation even though internal audits linked him to a large-scale tax-evasion scheme. The decision has once again placed URA’s disciplinary systems under scrutiny.
How the URA unlawful dismissal ruling arose
The dispute originated from a consignment of fabric that was declared for re-export to the Democratic Republic of Congo. Investigations later revealed the goods were diverted to Sunbelt Textiles in Jinja, leading to revenue losses estimated at over Shs 518 million. URA’s Internal Audit unit traced the diversion to a network allegedly involving foreign traders, clearing agents, and insiders familiar with customs procedures.
Auditors also examined movements on Kalemera’s personal Bank of Africa account. They documented cash deposits totalling more than Shs 4.2 billion, including sizeable payments from traders linked to the diverted cargo. Investigators concluded that the pattern of deposits aligned with the rerouting and attempted clearance of the disputed consignment. Despite this, the court emphasised that URA failed to offer him a fair hearing before terminating his contract.
Why the court ruled it was an URA unlawful dismissal
The judgment stated that although URA had grounds to suspect misconduct, the process used to dismiss Kalemera violated fairness requirements. He received an Offence Notification Form and was summoned before the disciplinary committee on the same day, leaving no time for preparation. URA did not share witness evidence, the investigation report or statements, and committee minutes lacked detail on how the evidence was evaluated.
Because employment law requires both substantive and procedural fairness, the court determined that URA’s failure to follow its own Human Resource Manual rendered the action unlawful. As a result, the court awarded Kalemera Shs 51 million in various damages and allowances, although it rejected his claim for severance and punitive damages.
What the ruling means going forward
Kalemera’s name resurfaced in 2024 when President Museveni appointed him to a State House revenue intelligence unit, a move that sparked public debate given his contested record. A later transfer to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs raised further questions.
The Industrial Court’s decision highlights growing concerns over how disciplinary processes are handled within key public institutions. While the audit findings suggested possible involvement in a tax-diversion scheme, the ruling reinforces that due process remains essential—regardless of the allegations.
