The Luwero High court has summoned Nakaseke District LC V chairperson Ignatius Koomu to defend his decision to administer surprise competency tests to teachers in the district.
In March 2024, Koomu, in collaboration with district education officials, conducted mock examinations for 52 teachers to assess their ability to help pupils excel in the Primary Leaving Examinations (PLE). Results revealed that scores ranged from 27 to 92 out of 100.
However, this action sparked outrage among teachers and the Uganda National Teachers Union (Unatu). Through their lawyers, JByamukama and Company Advocates, four teachers - Mathias Mulumba (Timuna primary school), Adam Kuvuna (St. Kizito Kijjaguzo primary school), Phanel Mugisha Godfrey (Nabiika primary school), and John Ssemakula (Nabiika primary school) alongside Unatu, filed for judicial review at the Luwero High court.
The petitioners argue that the tests were illegal, degrading, and could potentially be used to justify disciplinary action or termination of their services. They sought a court declaration that Koomu's actions amounted to harassment and were beyond his legal mandate.
The teachers also requested a permanent injunction barring Koomu and Nakaseke district officials from administering further competency tests or engaging in any acts of intimidation or harassment. Additionally, they demanded compensation for embarrassment and degrading treatment caused by the examinations.
Filbert Baguma, secretary-general of Unatu, supported the petition, emphasizing that the surprise examinations violated the teachers' rights. He argued that Koomu lacked the authority to evaluate teachers' competence, a responsibility reserved for professional education bodies.
In response to the petition, Kenneth Tumwebaze, the assistant registrar of the Luwero High court, issued a summons requiring Koomu and the Nakaseke district government to file their defense. Koomu is expected to appear in court on February 26, 2025, at 9:00 a.m.
Koomu has acknowledged the summons and expressed readiness to defend his actions. He maintains that the tests were conducted within his mandate as the district chairperson and supervisor of government staff.
He insists that the purpose of the competency tests was to identify the reasons behind teachers' underperformance, which says has led to poor results among candidates.
Furthermore, he said, the tests were also intended to engage school management committees and headteachers in addressing these issues. He added that regardless of the case's outcome, he believes his efforts will drive accountability.
The case has drawn significant attention, highlighting tensions between local government officials and educators over accountability and the limits of authority in education management.
{loadposition inarticle}
Source
