KAMPALA – Budadiri East Member of Parliament, Hon. Eng. Julius Nakiyi, has questioned the financial figures surrounding the controversial Haba Group compensation transaction, explaining how an additional property valued at Shs26.8 billion contributed to the difference between the original Shs142 billion claim and the revised Shs168.8 billion figure.
Appearing before the Parliamentary Committee on Commissions, Statutory Authorities and State Enterprises (COSASE), where Bank of Uganda officials were being questioned, Nakiyi said the central bank could not independently account for the discrepancy because the transaction was handled between the Ministry of Finance and Haba Group.
The legislator explained that Bank of Uganda’s role was mainly to facilitate payments in accordance with instructions received from the Ministry of Finance, meaning the institution was not necessarily aware of the total amount Haba Group was claiming from government.
Nakiyi said he had taken time to study the documents submitted to the committee after receiving copies from the parliamentary clerk, allowing him to examine the matter more closely.
He pointed to correspondence from the Solicitor General addressed to the Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Finance, which he said contained details of an additional property that had not been included in the original Shs142 billion figure.
According to Nakiyi, the additional property, identified in the submission as Plot 36 at Nakawa Market, was valued at Shs26.8 billion, bringing the overall claim to approximately Shs168.8 billion.
He argued that this additional amount explained why the figures being discussed differed, noting that Bank of Uganda could not have accounted for information that had not been communicated to the institution.
The MP further maintained that the disagreement surrounding the figures could not be fully resolved without the involvement of the Minister of Finance, since the transaction and related claims were handled directly between the ministry and Haba Group.
His submission placed further emphasis on the need to establish the respective responsibilities of the Ministry of Finance and Bank of Uganda in the handling of the controversial compensation arrangement.
The COSASE inquiry is examining the financial exposure involving Haba Group, the role of Bank of Uganda in facilitating the transaction and the outstanding questions surrounding the public funds involved.
Nakiyi’s intervention highlighted the importance of examining the original correspondence and supporting documents to establish how the compensation figures were calculated and why different amounts emerged during the investigation.
