Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNabukeera, M. Sebyala
dc.contributor.authorBwengye, Micheal
dc.contributor.authorBoerhannoeddin, Ali
dc.contributor.authorNoriza, Raja
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-22T06:59:53Z
dc.date.available2020-11-22T06:59:53Z
dc.date.issued2015-09
dc.identifier.citationMadinah, N.(2016).Recentralization of Kampala City Administration in Uganda: Implications for Top and Bottom Accountability.SAGE Open. July-September 2015: 1 –13 .en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://ir.iuiu.ac.ug/xmlui/handle/20.500.12309/737
dc.descriptionThe government disseminated a new constitution in 1995 with the provision on decentralization of Article 176 2 (b) that acted shortly before the rebirth of the local government act in 1997. Devolution as a form of decentralization transferred both political and administrative powers from the center to lower local councils specially to handle the responsibility of service delivery.en_US
dc.description.abstractThe government disseminated a new constitution in 1995 with the provision on decentralization of Article 176 2 (b) that acted shortly before the rebirth of the local government act in 1997. Devolution as a form of decentralization transferred both political and administrative powers from the center to lower local councils specially to handle the responsibility of service delivery. Following the approval of the Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA) Act 2010, the city’s administration reverted to the central government. Detractors of decentralization allege that the conveyance in the policy and legislation for change of Kampala city administration was timely because decentralization failed to deliver desired services to residents. This article contends that recentralization of Kampala city administration was a necessary evil, it decreased the autonomy of sub-national governments in civil service administration, eroded accountability to the electorates, and transferred the allegiance of the accounting officer from local governments with and for which they work to the central government that designates and positions. To inflame accountability in local governments, the article champions for the reexamining of the KCCA Act 2010 to allow power sharing between the mayor and executive director to enhance bottom-up accountability, checks and balances, and for participation of central government in appointing of executive director to allow financial and security support. It additionally requests for a reconsideration of the 9th Parliament to lobby for the amendments owing to challenges in its implementation and impact on accountabilityen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSageen_US
dc.subjectRecentralizationen_US
dc.subjectService deliveryen_US
dc.subjectKCCAen_US
dc.subjectAccountabilityen_US
dc.subjectLocal governmenten_US
dc.titleRecentralization of Kampala City Administration in Ugandaen_US
dc.title.alternativeImplications for Top and Bottom Accountabilityen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record