Uganda Police has revealed it has dismissed and recommended for dismissal 153 of its officers from its force.
Fred Enanga, the spokesperson for the force without revealing their identities , said the officers were found to have breached standards.
” We wish to inform the public and all stakeholders that the Police Authority and the Police Council Appointments/Promotions Committee (Subordinate officer), that are respectively responsible for overseeing the Police Disciplinary Complaints system, have dismissed, and also recommended for dismissal, officers found to have breached standards. The Disciplinary Complaints against Senior Officers and all officers charged in the criminal courts of law, are dealt with by the Police Authority, chaired by all the Hon. Minister for Internal Affairs, while disciplinary complaints against subordinate officers, are dealt with by the Police Council, chaired by the IGP,” Mr Enanga said in a statement issued on Monday.
The spokesperson confirmed there was thorough investigations by responsible bodies
“The public should note that disciplinary action in the police, ranges from a caution, severe reprimand, written warnings, discharge, demotion or reduction in rank, stopping or withholding or deferment of increase in salary, fine, recovery of the cost or part of it, imprisonment in police custody, confinement to residence or barracks, communal labour and or dismissal.
All of which are determined by the disciplinary courts led by competent panels from the respective unit or territorial disciplinary unit to the court of Appeal, at police headquarters.
The respective panels therefore, investigated the serious allegations of Professional misconduct across the country and decided, the appropriate sanction for the 153 officers was dismissal and discharge respectively.”
In the first category, Enanga said a total of 73 officers, were dismissed between 2015 and 2019, following internal disciplinary actions. 41 were absent from duty without official leave, C/S 44(1) code 20b; 06, were charged with discreditable or irregular conduct C/S 44(1) code 12b; 05 were dismissed for neglect of duty, C/S 44(1) code 19(c); 12 on grounds of Scandalous manner c/s 44(1), code 14(1) and (2); 01 for causing loss to Government Property c/s44(1) code 7 and 28; 03 for drunkardness c/s 44(1) code 13, 02 for withdrawal from duty o1 for damage to clothing or Articles supplied for duty c/s 44(1) code 26a and 02 for disobedience of lawful orders.
Another category he said was of personnel pending formal dismissal by the Police Council Appointments/Promotions Committee. “Under this category, 18 surbodinate officers are awaiting their formal letters of dismissal for scandalous behaviour, corrupt practices, Away without official leave, Neglect of Duty, discreditable or irregular conduct and theft,” Enanga added.
The third category comprises of officers that he said had already been charged by the Police Council Appointments/Promotions Committee.
Under this category, he said 54 officers, were discharged from the force for being absent without official leave, neglect of duty, scandalous manner, drunkardness, discreditable or irregular conduct and causing loss to Government.
Mr Enanga also cited an additional number of eight officers pending formal discharge by the Police Council Appointments/Promotions Committee (Surbordinate) , for being Away without official leave, scandalous manner and drunkerdness.
“As a force we expect the highest personal and professional standards of all officers. Therefore, any allegations of behaviour that do not meet the set standards, are rigorously investigated in accordance with the Police Act and Standing orders. All the officers indicated above, had the cases of gross misconduct proven against them, and for that matter cannot continue enforcing the law or using their previous positions of power,” Enanga said.
He added, “We strongly believe such stern measures will further help in reducing the many cases of civil litigation against the police and the Attorney General. It will further help the public to have confidence in police officers who have a duty to be honest, act with integrity and not compromise or abuse their position.”