Town council agent convicted over sh100,000 PDM bribe

________________

A Nakasongola town council agent has been convicted and fined for corruptly soliciting and receiving shillings100,000 in exchange for providing information related to the Parish Development Model (PDM).

On February 10, 2026, Nulu Namakula pleaded guilty to charges of corruption, admitting that she solicited and received money in connection with the Parish Development Model (PDM) scheme.

Nakasero-based Anti-Corruption Court Grade One Magistrate Esther Asiimwe sentenced her to a fine of shillings 500,000 or, in default, to serve six months’ imprisonment. In addition, she was barred from holding any public office for a period of 10 years.

According to the prosecution’s brief facts, Namakula, on January 30, 2026, at Nakasongola Central Ward in Nakasongola District, while employed as a town council agent at Katuugo in charge of monitoring and implementing government programmes, solicited shillings 100,000 from Judiah Olupot. The money was allegedly demanded in order to help rectify an error in the PDM information system.

Senior state attorney Raymond Mugisa from the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) asked the court to impose a deterrent sentence, arguing that corruption remains a widespread vice that must be decisively curbed.

He submitted that public officers who abuse their positions for personal gain undermine government programmes and erode public trust in state institutions.

Mugisa emphasised that funds under PDM are specifically intended to uplift ordinary Ugandans from poverty by supporting income-generating activities at the grassroots level. He told court that any corrupt tendencies linked to the programme frustrate its objective of improving household incomes and transforming communities.

The prosecutor further argued that even relatively small sums, such as the shillings100,000 involved in the case, can discourage vulnerable beneficiaries from accessing services meant for them and create the perception that government support is only available at a price. He urged the court to send a strong message that exploitation of poverty alleviation initiatives will not be tolerated.

According to the State, a firm and deterrent sentence would serve both as punishment to the offender and as a warning to other public officials entrusted with implementing the PDM and similar government programmes.

Lawyers ask for lenient sentence

Defence lawyers John Isabirye and Daniel Wangwe asked the court to exercise its discretion and impose a fine, arguing that the convict did not waste the court’s time as she pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and is a first-time offender.

Isabirye further submitted that Namakula is a mother of two and the sole breadwinner of her family. He argued that a custodial sentence would not only punish her but would also cause undue suffering to her innocent children. He therefore prayed for a non-custodial sentence.