FAMILY BREAKDOWN AS IG INVESTIGATES FORMER ARUA DISTRICT CHAIRMAN, OTHERS OVER ALLEGED SALE OF GOVERNMENT MOTORCYCLE

Family members of the suspects surround the IGG vehicle at Arua Central Police Station. Photo//Dramadri Federick.

By Dramadri Federick

Arua City

Family members of two online commission agents broke down in tears at Arua Central Police Station on Friday morning as they watched their relatives being taken away by the Inspectorate of Government (IG) over investigations into the alleged sale of a government motorcycle registered in the name of Arua District Local Government.

The emotional scenes unfolded at around 11am on October 30, 2026 as the suspects were presented at the police station before being transferred in an Inspectorate of Government vehicle for further action at the anti-corruption headquarters.

The investigation implicates former Arua District LC5 Chairperson Alfred Okuonzi and his son, Stephen Pariyo, over the circumstances under which the motorcycle allegedly left the custody of the district and ended up being advertised for private sale.

The two commission agents, identified as Allen Sisto and Anguzu Felix, are alleged to have participated in marketing the motorcycle online and connecting it to a prospective buyer.

The motorcycle reportedly came into the possession of Pariyo, a health worker and upcoming artist, who allegedly engaged the commission agents to help him find a buyer.

Bernard Anguyo, an uncle to Allen Sisto, says the family was distressed because they believed the two commission agents were merely brokers who had been brought into a transaction initiated by other individuals.

Anguyo questions why his nephew was taken away despite what he considers to be the identification of the people who initially handled the motorcycle.

“Why the family reacted like that was because the motorcycle was sent by Alfred Okuonzi, the former LC5 Chairman of Arua District, and his son was the one selling the bike. The two guys who were arrested are brokers. We wanted these guys to be released because the core criminals were already got. Why did they go with my son?” Anguyo questioned.

How the motorcycle allegedly reached the commission agents

The allegedly stolen Arua district Motorcycle been loaded on the IG pickup vehicle at the IG Arua regional offices. Photo//Dramadri Federick

John Bosco Acidri, commonly known as Sabi, a friend to the two commission agents, narrates how the motorcycle allegedly reached them and the circumstances surrounding their involvement in the transaction.

According to Acidri, Stephen Pariyo contacted the commission agents seeking assistance to sell the motorcycle, reportedly explaining that his father wanted to dispose of it.

The agents first sought clarification on whether the motorcycle had ownership documents, to which Pariyo reportedly responded affirmatively.

Following the assurance, Allen Sisto advertised the motorcycle online, while his friend Felix circulated the advertisement through his networks to identify potential buyers.

Acidri says Pariyo had informed the agents that his father Alfred Okuonzi wanted to sell the motorcycle at 5.5 million shillings and that they would receive a commission after completing the transaction.

However, the commission agents reportedly advertised the motorcycle at seven million shillings, but a prospective buyer negotiated the price down to 6.5 million shillings.

The agents subsequently connected the prospective buyer directly to Pariyo, who reportedly received an initial payment of six million shillings, with the remaining 500,000 shillings expected to be paid later.

Acidri explains that two days after the initial payment, the prospective buyer contacted the commission agents to collect the outstanding balance.

The parties reportedly agreed to meet at Rose Villa Hotel in Arua City, where the suspects were arrested and taken to Arua Central Police Station.

Acidri narrates how the transaction unfolded.

His account indicates that the commission agents allegedly facilitated the advertisement, negotiations and connection between the buyer and Pariyo, while the money from the initial transaction was reportedly paid directly to Pariyo.

However, the investigation is expected to establish whether the agents knew that the motorcycle was a government asset and whether they had any knowledge of irregularities surrounding its ownership.

Brother says Felix discovered motorcycle ownership after initial payment

The suspects Pariyo Stephen, Allen Sisto and Anguzu Felix been paraded by plane clothed security personnel at Arua central police station. Photo//Dramadri Federick

Meanwhile, Eriku Stanley, the brother of Felix, says his sibling became involved in the transaction after forwarding the advertisement to his networks and subsequently connecting the motorcycle to potential buyers.

Stanley describes the incident as unfortunate, maintaining that his brother had never previously been involved in dealing in stolen property.

He claims that Felix initially believed the motorcycle was privately owned because Pariyo had reportedly assured the commission agents that it had the necessary documentation.

According to Stanley, his brother only established the motorcycle’s actual ownership after the prospective buyer had made the first payment.

He further claims that upon checking the registration details, Felix discovered that the motorcycle belonged to Arua District Local Government and that the registration number displayed on the motorcycle did not correspond with its actual identification details.

“He has never dealt in a stolen item in his record of online sale of items, he would do verifications first but I surely don’t know what happened this time”. Eriku explains

The alleged discrepancy in the motorcycle’s identification details is another issue that investigators may need to establish through physical examination and verification of its registration particulars.

IG interrogations link former chairman to motorcycle

During interrogations at Arua Central Police Station, investigators (whose detailed were withheld) from the Inspectorate of Government reportedly established that former district chairman Alfred Okuonzi acknowledged that the motorcycle belonged to Arua District Local Government.

Okuonzi reportedly explained that he had lobbied for the motorcycle from non-governmental organisations before it came into his possession.

He further acknowledged giving the motorcycle to his son, Stephen Pariyo, to sell.

The reported admission raises questions about the circumstances under which a motorcycle registered in the name of a local government ended up in the possession of a former district political leader and was subsequently offered for private sale.

Although Okuonzi reportedly explained that he had lobbied for the motorcycle from development partners, the available registration document identifies Arua District Local Government as its registered owner.

The investigation is therefore expected to establish whether the motorcycle was formally donated to the district, assigned to the former chairman for official duties or transferred under any other legally recognised arrangement.

It will also establish whether Okuonzi had authority to hand the motorcycle to his son for sale.

Okuonzi’s departure from district leadership raises asset accountability questions

Alfred Okuonzi the Prime suspect and the former Arua district Chairman been showed the IG car door. Photo//Dramadri Federick.

Alfred Okuonzi served as Arua District LC5 Chairperson from 2021, completing his formal term in district leadership before his departure from office.

His political transition and eventual exit from leadership were reportedly shaped by political setbacks and leadership friction, alongside a high-profile criminal investigation.

His departure from office is now relevant to the ongoing Inspectorate of Government investigation, particularly regarding the circumstances under which the motorcycle registered in the name of Arua District Local Government allegedly remained in his possession.

Preliminary allegations indicate that Okuonzi allegedly failed to surrender the motorcycle after leaving office and subsequently handed it to his son, Stephen Pariyo, who is accused of engaging commission agents to advertise it for sale.

The investigation is expected to establish whether the motorcycle was officially assigned to Okuonzi during his tenure, whether it was included in the district’s asset register and whether any formal authorisation existed for its transfer or disposal.

Registration document identifies Arua district as owner

A vehicle registration document issued by the Ministry of Works and Transport provides documentary evidence of the motorcycle’s registered ownership.

The motorcycle at the centre of the investigation bears registration number UFA 401N and is identified as a Yamaha DT125 manufactured in 2019.

According to the document, the motorcycle was registered on January 13, 2020, in the name of Arua District Local Government.

The document further identifies the motorcycle as a Yamaha DT125, registration number UFA 401N, manufactured in 2019 and registered on January 13, 2020, in the name of Arua District Local Government. It bears engine number 3TT234416 and chassis number DE02X111667, with Arua recorded as the district. The registration document was last issued on April 2, 2026.

The registration document is particularly significant because it identifies the district local government, rather than Okuonzi or his son, as the registered owner of the motorcycle.

This raises an important distinction between physical possession and legal ownership of public property.

Even if a public official was involved in lobbying for or securing a motorcycle from a development partner, such involvement does not automatically establish personal ownership.

The circumstances under which the motorcycle was acquired, registered, assigned and subsequently transferred therefore remain central to the investigation.

IG takes suspects to anti-corruption headquarters

Despite the reported accounts surrounding the transaction, details of the specific charges against the suspects had not been publicly disclosed by the Inspectorate of Government at the time they were transferred from Arua.

The suspects were subsequently driven to the anti-corruption headquarters for further action.

The investigation is expected to establish how the motorcycle allegedly remained outside the custody of district authorities, how it reached the commission agents and the respective roles of the individuals implicated in the transaction.

Another important aspect is whether the commission agents knew or ought to have known that the motorcycle was registered in the name of a government institution.

The investigation is also expected to establish whether there was an unlawful disposal or attempted disposal of the government asset.

Questions over accountability and public assets

The incident has renewed attention on accountability in the management of public assets, particularly vehicles and equipment acquired by local governments through government programmes, development partners and non-governmental organisations.

Public assets are expected to remain under the custody and control of the respective government institutions unless they are lawfully transferred or disposed of through established procedures.

The case also raises questions about asset management records, handover procedures and the responsibility of outgoing public officials to account for government property entrusted to them during their tenure.

For Arua District Local Government, the investigation could provide an opportunity to clarify whether the motorcycle was formally assigned to the former chairman, whether it was included in the district’s asset register and whether any formal handover or recovery efforts were undertaken.

Ultimately, the Inspectorate of Government’s findings are expected to establish how the motorcycle ended up in the hands of the commission agents, whether there was an attempted unlawful disposal of public property and the individual responsibilities of everyone involved.

All individuals implicated in the investigation are presumed innocent unless proven guilty by a competent court of law.

Written by newsroom-radiopacis