Promises that major infrastructure projects would uplift communities through jobs and local economic opportunities are increasingly coming under scrutiny in Mukono District, where residents accuse a Chinese road contractor of sidelining local workers under what they describe as suspicious and unfair circumstances.
China Railway No.5 Engineering Group Company Limited, the contractor upgrading the 7.8-kilometre Ntenjeru–Bule Road to bituminous standards, is facing criticism from sections of the community who claim that many local residents employed at the start of the project have since been dismissed without proper investigations or opportunities to defend themselves.
The project, being implemented under the Greater Kampala Metropolitan Area Urban Development Programme, is funded by the International Development Association (IDA) of the World Bank and Agence Française de Développement (AFD) at a contract cost of Shs35.7 billion. Construction is expected to be completed in January 2027.
For years, government policy has consistently encouraged contractors executing public infrastructure projects to prioritise employing Ugandans, especially residents from the host communities. The arrangement is intended to ensure that beyond improved roads and public infrastructure, local populations also directly benefit through employment and income generation.
However, some residents in Mukono say that ideal is slowly fading away.
Several locals who initially secured jobs on the road project allege they were dismissed on accusations linked to fuel theft, yet they claim no transparent disciplinary process was followed.
One resident, who requested anonymity for fear of reprisals, said local workers have become easy targets whenever any irregularity occurs on the project.
“For anything wrong to happen, they think it is orchestrated by people staying in the community,” he said.
“They complain about fuel siphoning yet they have a full-time monitoring team. If fuel is missing, those responsible for monitoring should equally be questioned instead of always coming after the weak people from the community.”
The resident further alleged that the dismissals are being used to create room for other recruits connected to already employed workers and supervisors.
According to records obtained by this website, the contractor initially recruited 241 Ugandan workers alongside 26 foreigners. However, only about 16 percent of the Ugandan workers were reportedly recruited directly from the project area, a figure residents argue is too low considering the government’s local content expectations.
Project sociologist Martha Rwaboona defended the company’s actions, insisting that fuel theft has become a persistent challenge, particularly among drivers recruited from the surrounding communities.
“We had considered employing many drivers from within the community, but now we are maintaining very few or none because of stealing fuel,” Rwaboona said.
She explained that the company previously attempted to handle such cases through salary deductions, but abandoned the practice after realising it was unlawful.
“We used to penalise them by deducting salaries, but that is illegal. So now, once someone is caught, they are fired immediately,” she noted.
Rwaboona added that fuel siphoning has become one of the major causes of staff turnover on the project, claiming that stolen fuel is allegedly sold within the same communities where the workers originate.
“When fuel is siphoned, it is sold within community members. We have asked members of the community to report such incidents, but they have declined,” she said.
She further revealed that six fuel theft-related cases have already been reported to police, although investigations have reportedly stalled due to lack of witnesses willing to testify.
“So far, we have six cases at police but they are not progressing because we have no witnesses. Whenever we arrest suspects after fuel goes missing, the community turns against us,” she added.
Rwaboona argued that employing workers from the immediate communities presents enforcement challenges because suspects often find protection among people familiar to them.
“If we employ people from within the local communities, they end up stealing fuel simply because they know the community very well,” she said.
The remarks have, however, sparked concern among local leaders and residents who fear that generalising criminal accusations against entire communities risks undermining trust between contractors and the people expected to benefit from such projects.
Mukono District LC5 Chairperson Francis Lukooya called for proper legal processes to be followed in handling the accusations.
“Cases before court should be followed up to conclusion. If the accused are found guilty, they get punished,” Lukooya said.
His comments reflect growing concerns about balancing accountability on large public projects with the rights of workers accused of wrongdoing.
The dispute now exposes a wider tension surrounding infrastructure projects in Uganda — the struggle between protecting contractors from operational losses and ensuring communities genuinely benefit from development initiatives funded with public and donor support.
Across the country, road projects have often been promoted not only as drivers of transport and trade, but also as short-term employment opportunities for local populations. Yet in many cases, complaints persist that locals are confined to casual labour while skilled and semi-skilled positions remain dominated by outsiders or foreign workers.
For residents along the Ntenjeru–Bule Road, the growing dismissals have created fears that the project may ultimately leave behind a completed road but little lasting economic impact for the host communities.
As the road takes shape toward its anticipated completion in 2027, the debate surrounding local labour, accountability, and fairness is likely to continue shadowing the multi-billion-shilling project.
The controversy surrounding the Ntenjeru–Bule Road project highlights a recurring challenge in Uganda’s infrastructure sector: the gap between policy promises on local content and the actual experience of host communities.
While contractors have legitimate concerns about theft and operational losses, the approach described by the company risks creating collective suspicion against entire communities rather than isolating individual offenders. Statements suggesting locals are more likely to steal simply because they know the community may deepen resentment and reinforce perceptions of discrimination.
At the same time, the figures showing only about 16 percent of workers were recruited from the project area raise questions about how effectively local employment policies are being implemented on government-funded projects.
The matter also exposes weaknesses in labour dispute resolution and criminal investigations. If six cases are already before police but remain unresolved due to lack of witnesses, it suggests either inadequate evidence gathering or mistrust between the contractor and the community.
For government and project funders such as the World Bank and AFD, the dispute may serve as a reminder that infrastructure success is not measured only by kilometres of tarmac completed, but also by the social relationship built with communities hosting such projects.
Without transparency, fair disciplinary systems, and stronger community engagement, infrastructure projects risk becoming sources of tension instead of development partnerships.
