“But when we ask for the dogs, they tell us they need fuel and other things. I don’t know when dogs started taking fuel,” she remarked.
Members of Parliament on the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on Tuesday tasked the leadership of the Uganda Police Force to explain persistent reports that communities are being charged money to access services from the police canine unit.
During a committee session chaired by PAC Deputy Chairperson Gorreth Namugga, legislators said residents across several districts are required to pay significant amounts before police sniffer dogs can be deployed to crime scenes.
Kumi Municipality MP, John Aogon questioned whether the police leadership effectively monitors how canine services are delivered to communities.
“We don’t know whether you inspect and monitor the services that you take to the communities. I’ve crossed the country, not just one place. The dog has to be paid for. Is it for its lunch? Is it for its supper? Or what?” Aogon asked.
Namugga supported the concerns, telling police officials that residents in Ssembabule District are regularly asked to pay for the canine services whenever they need police dogs to track suspects.
“It has never been free. We are giving you information — the dogs are paid for, very expensively. You need to update the community on what it takes for a common person to get that dog. We are telling you, the dogs are very expensive in our areas,” Namugga said.
Xavier Kyooma Akampurira, the Ibanda County North Constituency MP also criticised the high cost of the service in his constituency, revealing that some communities have formed groups to pool money in advance so they can afford to hire the canine unit whenever a crime occurs.
“In some places, because these dogs are expensive, people have formed groups to pool resources so that when something happens, they have the money to look for the services,” Kyooma said. “They are paid for, yet the revenue collected is not reflected in the police financial statements. It is off-budget.”
However, Kashongi County MP, Herbert Tayebwa dismissed explanations that the money charged is meant to cover transportation costs for the canine unit.
“I think the issue is not about transport, because if that was the case, they would charge different prices depending on the distance,” Tayebwa argued. “But the charges appear standard. Even if the police station is about 500 metres from the scene, they still charge around sh200,000.”
Responding to the allegations, AIGP James Ochaya, the Deputy Ispector General of Police said he was surprised to hear that citizens were paying for canine services, insisting that such services are meant to be free.
“Canine services? These are free services. I don’t know how it comes against our officers,” Ochaya said.
His response prompted further reactions from MPs, who said their constituents frequently call them seeking financial help to pay for police dogs during investigations.
Woman Jailed After Failing to Compensate Boyfriend Over Broken Marriage Promise
Lawmakers argued that the situation raises questions about the police leadership’s ability to supervise operations at stations across the country.
Susan Amero, the Woman Member of Parliament for Amuria District criticised the police for failing to use government media platforms to inform the public that canine services are supposed to be free.
“If people knew these dogs are free, they wouldn’t be paying. You have airtime on government radio stations but you never pass this information to the public,” Amero said.
She added that when residents fail to raise the money demanded by police officers, they often turn to their Members of Parliament for assistance.
“When someone fails to raise that money, the next thing is they say ‘my MP will send it for me,’” Amero said.
Amero suggested that if police intend to charge for the service, it should be formalised and receipts issued so that the money can be accounted for as government revenue.
“But when we ask for the dogs, they tell us they need fuel and other things. I don’t know when dogs started taking fuel,” she remarked.
The committee directed the police leadership to investigate the allegations and explain why communities are being asked to pay for a service that police management says should be provided free of charge.
