The Effectiveness of Public Finance Management Frameworks in Uganda

Uganda's public finance management framework establishes controls over revenue, budgeting, expenditure, procurement, reporting and external scrutiny. The existence of these controls does not by itself establish that public resources produce lawful and effective services. This article assesses the relationship between the legal framework, institutional accountability and documented implementation. It uses doctrinal analysis of Ugandan legislation and judgments, supported by a focused review of published public finance assessments. Eleven judicial decisions are examined, comprising eight Ugandan authorities and three comparative South African decisions. The analysis finds that the legal architecture provides substantial routes to authorisation, disclosure and scrutiny, but its effectiveness depends on the quality of implementation and the completion of corrective action. Constitutional litigation demonstrates that resource allocation is not wholly insulated from legal accountability; access to information cases clarify the importance and limits of disclosure; and audit litigation identifies the special legal position of reports prepared for Parliament. The article proposes an accountability pathway connecting budget authority, identifiable responsibility, transaction evidence, independent scrutiny and verified correction. It recommends reasoned responses to citizen submissions, publication of expenditure and contract implementation information, risk based follow up of audit findings, and proportionate enforcement with procedural safeguards. The findings are a legal and documentary synthesis, not results from newly conducted interviews or an estimate of nationwide reform effects.