Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Opinion: USAID needs an independent accountability office to improve development outcomes

Published

on

A man inspects USAID-donated ventilators on their way to Indonesia in the fight against COVID-19. Photo by: Nalendro Photoworks / USAID

As always, and during this pandemic in particular, many are looking to the U.S. Agency for International Development for the U.S. response to global needs. Acting USAID Administrator John Barsa recently appeared before Congress to discuss foreign assistance priorities for the next fiscal year. He answered questions related to cuts for USAID in the administration’s proposed budget and USAID’s efforts to support the development of an effective COVID-19 vaccine.

What was not discussed — but should be a top priority — is a key outstanding congressional directive to USAID to strengthen accountability for its development activities. The congressional directive creates an opportunity for USAID, and for those concerned with whether USAID’s programs are meeting their objectives, to take overdue action to ensure that the agency understands whether taxpayer money has met its mark.

In response to reports of human rights abuses tied to USAID’s support of certain conservation projects, including allegations of torture and rape by ecoguards, Congress, in its explanatory statement for the fiscal year 2020 appropriations legislation, directed USAID to work with its implementers to prevent these abuses from reoccurring.

Further, Congress called on USAID to ensure that “effective grievance and redress mechanisms for victims of human rights violations and other misconduct exist.”

Public information on USAID’s response is not currently available, but as USAID sets its course for the fiscal year ahead, it should prioritize addressing this congressional directive. From our experience supporting communities impacted by development projects, we recommend that USAID create an agency-level independent accountability office to do so.

First created by the World Bank, accountability offices are community feedback tools that address complaints from project-impacted people by either conducting a compliance review to see if environmental and social policies were properly followed in the course of a project or convening a bespoke dispute resolution process between the communities, clients, and other parties.

Accountability offices are housed within the very institutions they hold accountable and are given sufficient independence from management to be credible.

The experiences of communities in Haiti forced from their farmland in 2011 to make way for the Caracol Industrial Park, a large industrial facility financed by USAID, the Inter-American Development Bank, and others, demonstrates the importance of accountability offices — and USAID’s current accountability gap. In addition to taking 250 hectares of the most fertile agricultural land in the area, the park has had negative environmental impacts, including significant pollution from the USAID-financed power plant within the park.

After trying to address their issues with the industrial park through various channels, the communities filed a complaint to IDB’s accountability office, also known as MICI, in 2017 to address harm related to IDB’s involvement in the project.

MICI facilitated a dialogue process between the communities, the Haitian government, and IDB, which resulted in a historic agreement to replace farmland and restore livelihoods.

Unfortunately, the affected communities have not had the same opportunity to address grievances with USAID, as it lacks an accountability office, and many of the environmental challenges posed by the industrial park and its associated facilities remain unresolved.

To be truly effective, USAID should ensure that its accountability office applies to all of its projects and not just its conservation work.

Although USAID’s conservation projects sparked congressional action, it is indisputable that negative impacts can result from other projects as well. Data from the Accountability Console, a comprehensive database of accountability office complaints, reveals that grievances can arise in a range of sectors, from infrastructure projects to education programs, and across financial instruments.

It would also be a mistake for USAID to respond to the directive by pushing its obligation down to implementing partners.

Although implementing partners could address certain discrete issues at the project level, the agency needs to know about — and have a hand in addressing — environmental and social non-compliance.

In addition to addressing grievances, institution-wide accountability offices provide lessons from cases to ensure that future projects are more sustainable. Plus, that decision would put USAID out of step with the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation, which has an accountability office — as did its predecessor, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation — as well as other bilateral aid agencies with accountability offices, like in France and Japan.

An independent accountability office would also be a fundamental component of USAID’s Journey to Self-Reliance strategy, as it would amplify the voice of the very people impacted by USAID’s projects.

Unaddressed grievances can undermine a project’s sustainability and lead to conflict, affecting a country’s ability to transition effectively from international aid. An accountability office would only further USAID’s existing commitment to seeing local solutions through “effectively, inclusively, and with accountability.”

The COVID-19 crisis has been a shock to the global system, with development institutions responding rapidly to address the health and economic impacts. USAID has a role to play in the response and should know whether its money meets its mark.

By creating an accountability office now, USAID can be well-positioned to ensure its projects — including those addressing the pandemic — avoid harm and achieve their intended impact.

Source: Devex

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Uganda’s Army is on the spot for forcibly grabbing land for families in Pangero Chiefdom in Nebbi district.

Published

on

By the Witness Radio team.

Despite the challenges, the community in Koch Parish, Nebbi Sub-County, in Nebbi District, near the Congolese border, has shown remarkable resilience. The Army seized approximately 100 acres of land, including private buildings, that members of the local Koch community had used for over 150 years to establish an Army barracks. Their resilience in the face of such a significant loss is genuinely inspiring.

The UPDF, as described on its website, is a nonpartisan force, national in character, patriotic, professional, disciplined, productive, and subordinate to the civilian authority as established under the constitution. Furthermore, it states that its primary interest is to protect Uganda and Africa at large, providing a safe and secure environment in which all Ugandan citizens can live and prosper.

However, according to a whistleblower, when the UPDF seized their land, no military chiefs offered prior communication, consultation, compensation, or resettlement. Instead, Uganda’s national Army only occupied people’s land forcefully, and not even the section commanders offered an official explanation.

“Citizens just woke up to a massive Army deployment in their fields,” wrote a whistleblower in an exchange with Witness Radio.

The occupied area in Koch Parish is not just a piece of land, but a home to the members of the Pangero chiefdom. This community belongs to the Alur kingdom, which spans north-western Congo and western Uganda, north of Lake Albert.

The reality and daily life of the Pangero community, which typically lives in a closely connected and communal manner, have been significantly impacted by the loss of both private and communal land. Not only is the cultural identity associated with land and community life at risk, but access to cultural sites, such as the graves of ancestors, is now denied.

Members of the local community who resisted the unlawful seizure of their land were reported to have been harassed and defamed. Despite these challenges, they continue to fight for their rights, making negotiations with the UPDF significantly more challenging.

Beyond the human suffering, the takeover also raises serious legal questions under Ugandan land law. Under Ugandan law, this action by the UPDF constitutes an illegal act. In principle, the government and, by extension, the Army are entitled to take over land if it is in the public interest, and are subject to fairly compensating the landowners.

However, this is subject to the condition that their intention is clearly communicated in advance and that negotiations take place with the previous residents, resulting in a mutual agreement on the necessary and appropriate compensation.

When faced with community resistance, the Army was compelled to conduct a survey and valuation of the land occupied by the UPDF in 2023 and 2024.  However, land defenders in the area claim that the process was marred by irregularities in some cases, against the will and in the absence of many landowners.

“The community was also pressured by the Koch Land Committee responsible for the review. Despite that it was supposed to represent the local population, it was not democratically elected by consensus, as is tradition in Alur communities, and was comprised of an imposed elite.” A local defender told Witness Radio

At an announcement meeting facilitated by officials from the UPDF Land Board, their national surveyor, and the Commander of Koch Army Barracks on September 19, 2025, community members were compelled to sign documents for meager compensation for land that had been seized five years prior.

“Residents whose land was surveyed before were given two choices: To sell their land to the Army by accepting the offered compensation, or to refuse the UPDF’s offer. In the latter case, however, it would be necessary to contact the Army headquarters in Mbuya, which is far away, to assert one’s claims or submit a petition.” Says another defender. Despite signing for this money, as of the writing of this article, the community claims it had never received it, almost two months later.

Mr Opio Okech, who attended the meeting himself, disapproves that this equates to a forced decision to sell, as the further necessary measures seem almost impossible for those affected without legal knowledge or external support.

“The problem here from the government was to enter upon the land, stay for long without adequate awareness creation, then decide we are going nowhere. Come for compensation. This looks, smells, and walks like a forceful eviction, “he mentions.

The effects of forced land acquisition by the UPDF in Koch Parish pose a high risk of home and landlessness, rises in youth criminality, and recurring poverty, primarily affecting women and children. Furthermore, the dispersal of the traditional community of the Pangero chiefdom is most likely to result in a severe loss of cultural heritage.

The Ugandan government has a duty here to look after the needs of this traditional community beyond compensation. This could include providing alternative land on which the traditional communal way of life could continue.

Witness Radio had not received a response from Army spokesperson Mr. Felix Kulayigye regarding the land grab, despite several attempts. However, since the initial takeover in 2020, another land grab by the same agency is looming in the same Kochi community for the expansion of the Army barracks.

According to sources, the UPDF intends to acquire more than 1,000 acres in total, nearly half of Koch Parish, leaving residents in fear and uncertainty.

“People are now panicking because they have heard speculations that more land is being

targeted for expansion. They are concerned about the impunity of the national Army, since the land that was grabbed five years ago has not been paid for, and now there are reports that more than 1,000 acres of community land are being targeted.” Mr. Okello further revealed.

The fate of the Pangero chiefdom is not an isolated case. Across Uganda, communal lands belonging to traditional clans and kingdoms continue to face similar threats from investors and state actors. Although Ugandan law recognizes customary ownership, enforcement often remains weak, and those affected rarely have access to the information or resources needed to defend their rights.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Seed Sovereignty: Most existing and emerging laws and policies on seeds are endangering seed saving and conservation on the African continent.

Published

on

By the Witness Radio team

In Africa, farmers and civil society organizations are urgently warning about the adverse effects of existing policies on agrobiodiversity. These policies aim to erode centuries-old traditions of seed saving and exchange, effectively undermining seed sovereignty and intensifying dependency on commercial seed companies.

The struggle over seed sovereignty, particularly the rights of smallholder farmers, has become one of the most pressing issues for the continent’s agricultural future. As governments introduce new seed laws, such as the proposed East African Seed and Plant Varieties Act Bill of 2024, the preservation of cultural seeds and the rights of smallholder farmers are at stake.

The Communications and Advocacy Officer at Kenya’s Seed Savers Network, Tabitha Munyeri, notes that this has heightened monoculture, thereby significantly reducing the focus on indigenous plant varieties.

“There’s a lot of loss of agrobiodiversity with people focussing on a few foods, a few crops, leaving out so many other essential crops that have sustained humankind for generations and it is also important because it is coming at a time where we are having a lot of also conversations around different seed laws that are coming up for example within the EAC  we see that there is the seed and plant varieties bill of 2024 and we are looking at it as a huge setback and there is need for us to create awareness around even the policies that exist.”

She further argues that there is a need to raise awareness and sensitise farmers to the existing policies so that they can understand their effects on agrobiodiversity.

“Even for Kenya we have been having punitive seed laws for the longest time but now we are happy that courts of law are reviewing the law, but we still think that there is need to create a lot of advocacy around the seed laws and what they really mean to farmers because some of them do not understand, some of them are not even interested but once they get to know what it means and the impacts that the laws have on them then they are also able to become more vocal and more involved in the process.” She says.

Farmers in Africa have been the custodians of agricultural biodiversity, developing and maintaining numerous varieties of crops that are suited to local soils and climates. However, over the last few decades, the focus on farming has drastically declined to a handful of “high-yield” crops and imported hybrid varieties, leaving out the diverse indigenous seeds that have sustained communities through droughts, pests, and diseases.

Munyeri warns that this decline in agrobiodiversity is accelerating, driven not merely by market pressures, but by restrictive laws that criminalise and discourage traditional seed-saving practices.

In Kenya, where smallholder farmers supply more than 80 percent of the country’s food, seed systems have long depended on the informal exchange of seeds within communities. Small-hold farmers have relied on these systems to share, adapt, and innovate with seeds suited to their local conditions. However, existing laws have tended to favour the formal sector, requiring seed certification, variety registration, and compliance with intellectual property protections that most small-scale farmers cannot afford.

The 2024 Seed and Plant Varieties Act Bill, currently under discussion in several East African countries, has sparked significant controversy. It seeks to modernize agriculture and align national systems with international standards. However, smallholder farmers and critics contend that it allows corporate control over genetic resources, limiting farmers’ autonomy and threatening biodiversity. Under such a framework, only registered seed varieties can be legally traded or exchanged, effectively outlawing the informal seed networks that have sustained rural communities for centuries.

If smallholder farmers lose their rights to exchange and cultivate indigenous varieties, they may also lose control over their food systems. Dependence on improved seeds necessitates purchasing new stock each planting season, eroding self-reliance and increasing vulnerability to market fluctuations.

This awareness gap is what the Seed Savers Network hopes to address. Through training programs and advocacy initiatives, including its recently concluded regional boot camp, the organization equips participants from across Africa with knowledge about seed laws, biodiversity, and policy engagement.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Lands ministry rejects call to save over 300 Masaka residents facing eviction

Published

on

Over 300 families now face displacement, with the landlords’ legal team, Solis Advocates, having served eviction notices in 2021. (Credit: Dismus Buregyeya)

Lands state minister Joseph Mayanja and Minister Judith Nabakoba ruled out further administrative intervention, citing a 2019 court ruling that declared the residents had encroached on land owned by Masaka Jaggery Mills Ltd.

MASAKA – The lands ministry has dismissed a plea by over 300 residents of Kasanje village in Masaka district to halt their eviction from a 400-acre plot, despite a direct appeal to President Yoweri Museveni.

Lands state minister Joseph Mayanja and Minister Judith Nabakoba ruled out further administrative intervention, citing a 2019 court ruling that declared the residents had encroached on land owned by Masaka Jaggery Mills Ltd.The conflict stems from a 2019 ruling by Masaka chief magistrate Deo Ssejjemba, which sided with landlords Joseph Matovu and Methodius Kasujja in their eviction bid against the locals.

The court’s decision, upheld after residents withdrew an appeal in 2021, set the stage for the current standoff.

Despite this, the affected families, many of whom lost homes, crops, and plantations, petitioned the President in 2021, prompting former Vice-President Edward Ssekandi and the State House legal teams to intervene.

However, Mayanja emphasised that all avenues for mediation had been exhausted.

“The matter has been conclusively resolved through legal and administrative processes. No further interventions are justified,” he stated in a letter dated October 28, 2025, rejecting a last-minute plea for a site visit.

Unresolved

Nabakoba confirmed that 105 families received compensation between shillings 300,000 and 12 million from the landlords in 2021 after signing agreements.

However, a ministry report revealed 215 families remain uncompensated, pending verification of their claims.

“We closed the mediation process when the majority accepted the settlement,” Nabakoba said. However, locals like Vincent Mugerwa, leader of the Kasanje Bibanja Owners Association, denounced the payouts as “peanuts,” citing offers as low as shillings 800,000 per acre.

The dispute has drawn high-level attention, including from legislator Joanita Namutawe, who petitioned Parliament, and Prime Minister Robina Nabanja, who met with security officials in Masaka last week. Despite these efforts, the lands ministry insists the case is closed.

Residents, however, contest the land’s ownership history, alleging irregularities in transfers from the original owners, the Masaka Jaggery Mills, to current landlords. Title documents show the land was registered under Freehold Volume 59 Folio 11, transferred to Joseph Bukenya in 2021, before passing to Methodius Kasujja.

Facing eviction

Over 300 families now face displacement, with the landlords’ legal team, Solis Advocates, having served eviction notices in 2021.

The Prime Minister’s office received a fresh petition on October 31, detailing the residents’ grievances, including destroyed property and inadequate compensation.

Original Source: New Vision

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter