According to court findings, Wataka only discovered the life-altering mistake in 2022 after seeking independent medical tests, which confirmed he did not have HIV.
The High Court of Uganda has ordered the The Aids Support Organisation (TASO) to pay a total of 240 million Ugandan shillings in damages to John Wataka after he was wrongly diagnosed as HIV-positive and placed on antiretroviral therapy (ARVs) for seven years.
In a ruling that underscored the grave responsibility borne by medical institutions, the court found TASO negligent for keeping Wataka on HIV treatment from 2016 until 2023 despite him being HIV-negative.
The judgment awarded 190 million shillings (approximately $53,000) in general damages for the profound psychological, social, and economic harm he endured. An additional 50 million shillings was granted for negligent diagnosis and dispensing medication he did not need.
Lubaga Cathedral Becomes Unlikely Battleground: Faith and Dissent Collide Over Besigye Prayers
According to court findings, Wataka only discovered the life-altering mistake in 2022 after seeking independent medical tests, which confirmed he did not have HIV. Despite presenting these results, it reportedly took time before the erroneous diagnosis was fully acknowledged.
The impact of the misdiagnosis was devastating. During the seven years he believed he was living with HIV, Wataka’s marriage collapsed under the strain. He lost employment opportunities, faced stigma within his community, and suffered deep emotional trauma. The court noted that the unnecessary lifelong-treatment narrative imposed on him robbed him not only of peace of mind but also of social standing and economic stability.
In its ruling, the court emphasized that healthcare providers owe patients a duty of care grounded in accuracy, diligence, and continuous reassessment—particularly in cases involving life-altering diagnoses such as HIV. The prolonged administration of ARVs to a person who did not require them, the judge observed, amounted to a serious breach of professional standards.
The case has sparked renewed public discussion about diagnostic safeguards, accountability in medical practice, and the need for patients to seek confirmatory testing in critical health matters.
For Wataka, the judgment represents both vindication and a measure of justice after years defined by a mistake that reshaped his life.