By Spy Uganda
A fresh directive from Prime Minister Robinah Nabbanja supporting the removal of roadside sugarcane weighbridges has reignited deep-seated tensions in Uganda’s sugar industry, with critics arguing the move effectively reverses reforms that had empowered outgrower farmers against exploitation.
In a letter dated March 17, 2026, addressed to the Minister of Trade, Industry and Cooperatives, Nabbanja directed that all roadside weighbridges be dismantled and relocated to licensed sugar factories. The Prime Minister justified the decision as a measure to curb theft and eliminate middlemen.
“I have received various complaints and concerns from stakeholders in the sugarcane industry concerning the way roadside weighbridges… are being used to steal sugarcane,” Nabbanja wrote, adding that government had “decided that all sugarcane weighbridges operating on the roadside should be removed and relocated to the respective licensed factories.”
She further instructed the Inspector General of Police to ensure “all roadside weighbridges are removed with immediate effect.”
However, this directive has triggered backlash from farmer groups and industry observers who view it as a regression to a system historically accused of enabling exploitation.
Why Roadside Weighbridges Were Introduced in The First Place
Roadside weighbridges did not emerge arbitrarily. They were a corrective intervention born out of long-standing grievances by sugarcane outgrowers, particularly in regions like Bunyoro.
For years, farmers were denied access to factory-based weighbridges, leaving them at the mercy of millers who unilaterally determined tonnage and payments. This opacity bred systemic underpayment, with farmers often unable to verify the actual weight of their harvested cane.
The introduction of independent, roadside weighbridges—managed largely by outgrower associations—was intended to restore transparency. These stations allowed farmers to witness and verify measurements before their produce reached factories, thereby mitigating manipulation.
By ordering their removal, critics argue, government is effectively restoring a monopolistic system where factories regain exclusive control over weighing—and, by extension, pricing.
Contradictions Within Government Directives
The latest directive also exposes contradictions within government itself. Nabbanja’s letter references an earlier position linked to the Minister of Internal Affairs, Gen. Kahinda Otafiire, which supported the dismantling of roadside weighbridges.
Yet notably absent is any mention of a more recent directive by the line Minister for Trade, Gen. Wilson Mbasu Mbadi, who had reportedly ordered the reinstatement of the same weighbridges following consultations with stakeholders.
Sources indicate that Mbadi’s directive came after a high-level meeting at the ministry headquarters in Kampala, where leaders—including district officials from affected regions—reportedly agreed on the necessity of maintaining independent weigh points to protect farmers.
The omission of Mbadi’s position in Nabbanja’s letter has raised questions about policy coherence and whether competing interests within government are shaping the sector’s direction.
Allegations Of Cartels And Political Capture
Beyond policy contradictions, multiple accounts point to entrenched financial interests influencing decisions in the sugar industry.
Investigations and field reports suggest that powerful cartels—allegedly linked to certain sugar manufacturing entities—have been actively lobbying against roadside weighbridges. These weighbridges disrupt their control over supply chains and profit margins.
Sources within Bunyoro claim that local politicians, opinion leaders, and security officials have been drawn into the fray through financial inducements. One incident cited involves a meeting at Kabalega Hotel, where alleged monetary distributions to local actors reportedly caused internal disputes over unequal sharing.
Further claims suggest that a sugar company operating in Masindi has been particularly influential, allegedly facilitating efforts to block the return of independent weighbridges. The same network is said to have pushed for district council deliberations aimed at undermining Minister Mbadi’s directive—despite several council members having participated in the original Kampala consultations.
While these allegations remain difficult to independently verify, they reinforce a growing perception that economic interests, rather than policy rationale, are dictating outcomes.
Farmers Left Counting Losses
Amid the high-level maneuvering, it is the farmers who continue to bear the brunt of the uncertainty.
In the Bunyoro sub-region, reports indicate that sugarcane has remained unharvested for nearly two months, drying up in fields as disputes over weighbridge policy stall the supply chain. Without clarity on where and how cane will be weighed—and at what price—transactions have slowed dramatically.
This paralysis underscores the broader implications of the directive: beyond governance debates and alleged corruption, the livelihoods of thousands of outgrowers hang in the balance.
A Sector At A Crossroads
The unfolding situation paints a picture of an industry caught between reform and regression, transparency and control, public interest and private gain.
While the Prime Minister’s office frames the directive as a crackdown on theft and inefficiency, critics argue it dismantles one of the few mechanisms that had begun to level the playing field for farmers.
With conflicting directives, allegations of political interference, and mounting farmer distress, Uganda’s sugar sector now stands at a junction- the ultimate question is whether policy will be guided by empirical realities and stakeholder welfare, or by the gravitational pull of money and power.
