Economy

Presidency Denounces Alleged Presidential Letter: Cloud of Doubt Casts Shadow Over Official Communications

What you need to know more about

  • A letter bearing the official signature of President Museveni, purportedly instructing a probe into the contentious service award bestowed by the Parliamentary Commission upon former Leader of the Opposition and three backbench commissioners.
  • Neither confirms whether an investigation into the source of the controversial letter is underway nor addresses the broader implications on the credibility of other Presidency communications.

The Presidency has dismissed as “forged” a letter bearing the official signature of President Museveni, purportedly instructing a probe into the contentious service award bestowed by the Parliamentary Commission upon former Leader of the Opposition and three backbench commissioners.

Dated May 3, the letter, addressed to Attorney-General Mr. Kiryowa Kiwanuka, sought legal counsel on the legitimacy of the service award, which allegedly granted former LoP Mathias Mpuuga Shs500 million as gratuity in March 2022.

Quoting the purported Museveni letter, “When we were fighting Obote and Amin, we used to call it primitive accumulation of wealth. Why? Officials under those regimes were trying to get for themselves as much money as possible in the quickest time possible, in the easiest way possible. We used to ask them, ‘Where does this leave your country?'”

However, the Presidential Press Unit refuted the authenticity of the letter on Monday.

“The letter circulating on social media purportedly authored by the President on the subject of service awards to Parliamentary Commissioners is forged and should be ignored,” stated the Presidency.

State House’s denial of the widely circulated letter has raised eyebrows, especially since a portion of the Presidency’s staff had previously confirmed its veracity to several media outlets.

ALSO READ:  Amolatar Community Appeals to Government for Help Combatting Illegal Fishing

The terse statement, attributed simply to “Management,” neither confirms whether an investigation into the source of the controversial letter is underway nor addresses the broader implications on the credibility of other Presidency communications. Notably, these communications lack official symbols beyond digital signatures and letterhead, casting doubt on their authenticity.

Do you have a story or an opinion to share? Email us on: info@falconposts.com Or follow the Falconposts on or for the latest updates.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Most Popular

To Top