Recent weeks have seen renewed public scrutiny of the National Environment Management Authority (Nema), following reports that it approved several high-profile projects, some of which have sparked controversy in Uganda’s urban and wetland areas.
On Monday, a certificate widely circulated on social media appeared to show that Nema had cleared businessman Hamis “Ham” Kiggundu for the redevelopment of the Nakivubo Channel.
The document, reportedly signed by Nema’s executive director, grants a “Certificate of Approval of Environmental and Social Impact Assessment” for the project.
The approval comes in the wake of dramatic flooding in downtown Kampala, raising concerns about whether the channel’s redevelopment could exacerbate drainage problems.
Nema has not issued a public statement denying or confirming the authenticity of the certificate.
The Nakivubo Channel project is only the latest in a string of controversial Nema approvals in recent years.
In the case of the Lubigi wetland, media reports highlighted the plight of Jaja Rose Namuddu, whose land was allegedly taken over for development projects.
Subsequent investigations revealed that other developers had been allowed to acquire large portions of the same wetland, raising questions about selective enforcement and fairness in approvals.
Similarly, Bugolobi wetland has been at the centre of multiple disputes. Developers reportedly proceeded with housing projects after Nema and Kampala Capital City Authority approvals, only to face suspensions or demolitions after complaints that the projects encroached on protected wetland areas.
Other notable controversies include projects in Hoima and Kikuube districts, where Nema issued Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) approvals for large-scale sugar plantations and mixed land-use developments.
In some cases, approvals were later partially revoked or suspended following environmental concerns raised by local communities.
Several media reports have also documented instances where Nema’s enforcement appeared selective. Factories in Bwaise, fuel stations in Nansana, and luxury apartments in Wakiso reportedly continued operations despite alleged environmental breaches, while other smaller actors faced swift action.
These patterns have contributed to public debates over Nema’s consistency in environmental regulation.
Across Kampala and surrounding areas, Nema has faced scrutiny over approvals in riparian and wetland zones. High-profile cases involving Kisugu, Namanve, and Nakiyanja wetlands have repeatedly sparked legal challenges and protests, particularly when approvals were granted while court disputes or public complaints were ongoing.
While Nema maintains that all approvals are guided by statutory procedures, the repeated controversies have fueled public discussion about transparency, selective enforcement, and urban planning in Uganda’s rapidly growing cities.
As the Nakivubo Channel redevelopment moves forward, and with the Lubigi and Bugolobi disputes still unresolved, many Ugandans are watching closely to see how Nema will respond and whether it will clarify the processes behind its approvals.