Health 29 March 2026 Daily Monitor (Uganda)
Jinja Court Awards Shs190m to Man Wrongly Treated for HIV Over Seven Years
A High Court in Jinja has ordered Shs190 million in compensation to John Wataka, who endured unnecessary HIV treatment for seven years after a false positive test at TASO. Experts affirm Uganda's HIV testing protocols are over 99% accurate but stress the need for confirmatory steps and vigilant follow-up. Source: https://www.monitor.co.ug/uganda/magazines/healthy-living/how-reliable-are-your-hiv-results--5405406
John Wataka’s ordeal began in July 2016 when a test at The AIDS Support Organisation (TASO) indicated he was HIV positive. He started antiretroviral therapy immediately and continued it until 2023, only to later test negative, prompting the Jinja High Court to award him Shs190 million in damages for the error.
This rare false positive case has sparked questions about HIV test reliability. Dr. William Tamale from the Joint Clinical Research Centre explains that genuine HIV infections produce lifelong antibodies, making true positives irreversible. Errors like false positives can stem from lab mix-ups, cross-reacting infections, or procedural lapses.
Uganda adheres to a WHO-approved serial testing algorithm to minimize mistakes. A screening test is followed by a confirmatory one; discrepancies trigger a third test. When executed properly by trained staff, accuracy exceeds 99%, according to experts like Dr. Emanuel Muwanga from Njeru HIV Health Centre.
The court’s ruling suggests TASO may not have fully followed this protocol. TASO’s executive director, Dr. Benard Micheal Etukoit, declined comment due to an ongoing appeal. Dr. Stephen Watiti highlights failures in routine monitoring, which should catch anomalies through follow-up tests and clinical reviews.
A similar incident involved Balikuddembe Mukasa, whose false positive was quickly corrected after second opinions and a PCR test. Unlike Wataka’s seven-year saga, Mukasa’s error was resolved in months, underscoring the role of prompt verification.
Awareness of the ‘window period’—when recent infections may not show on standard tests—is crucial. Negative results post-exposure warrant retesting after three months, and positives always need confirmation.
Experts urge patients doubting results to consult centers like JCRC, Mildmay, or the Infectious Diseases Institute for retesting. While errors are exceptional, they emphasize strict protocol adherence to maintain trust in Uganda’s robust HIV program.