There is no code of conduct specifically for military personnel. But all military personnel are trained on the importance of reporting corruption and the measures in place if any of them are involved in any form of bribery/corruption . [1][2] However, the code of ethics and values ​​and the disciplinary regulations require armed forces personnel not to engage in acts of corruption [3]

There is no code of conduct specifically for military personnel. But all military personnel are trained on the importance of reporting corruption and the measures in place if any of them are involved in any form of bribery/corruption . [1][2] However, the code of ethics and values ​​and the disciplinary regulations require armed forces personnel not to engage in acts of corruption [3]

There is no code of conduct specifically for military personnel. But all military personnel are trained on the importance of reporting corruption and the measures in place if any of them are involved in any form of bribery/corruption . [1][2] However, the code of ethics and values ​​and the disciplinary regulations require armed forces personnel not to engage in acts of corruption [3]

There is no code of conduct specifically for military personnel. But all military personnel are trained on the importance of reporting corruption and the measures in place if any of them are involved in any form of bribery/corruption . [1][2] However, the code of ethics and values ​​and the disciplinary regulations require armed forces personnel not to engage in acts of corruption [3]

There is no code of conduct for the military in Burundi, whether in relation to corruption or any other issue. [1] [2]

There is no code of conduct for the military in Burundi, whether in relation to corruption or any other issue so this indicator is marked Not Applicable. [1] [2]

There is no code of conduct for the military in Burundi, whether in relation to corruption or any other issue so this indicator is marked Not Applicable. [1] [2]

There is no code of conduct for the military in Burundi, whether in relation to corruption or any other issue so this indicator is marked Not Applicable. [1] [2]

Cameroon has a two complementaty document that could constitute a Code of Conduct for its military personnel known. the first one is the “Règlement de discipline général dans les forces de défense” (RDG) and derives from Decree no. 2007/199 of 07 July 2007 [1]. Before this text, there were the Regulations on Discipline of the Armed Forces, versions 1 and 2, which governed the army [1]. The explanatory memorandum to the 2007 decree mentions the following as fundamental principles: respect for fundamental freedoms and respect for the individual. Article 23 notes the importance of professional dignity, stating that military personnel must not adopt an attitude that could lead to criticism. Article 24 goes on to note that military personnel must maintain a correct attitude [2]. From this text, it would appear that the decree generally sets out the rules governing the principles or performance of military duties. In addition, it is apparent that the text highlights the rules of good conduct that military personnel should adopt, and the rules governing the career advancement of military personnel and their social life. The RDG does not explicitly detail provisions regarding corruption, such as bribery, gifts, and conflicts of interest. However, it emphasizes adherence to ethical standards and lawful behavior, which implicitly encompasses anti-corruption principles.

The second one is under the Ministry of Defense’s regulations and reinforced by Loi N° 2017/012 du 12 juillet 2017 portant Code de Justice Militaire. This code addresses various ethical considerations, such as prohibiting bribery, the acceptance of gifts, and conflicts of interest. However, the provisions are not detailed enough to offer clear guidelines for addressing these issues effectively [3]. While the code establishes ethical principles, it lacks specificity in outlining actionable steps for military personnel facing corruption or ethical dilemmas. It also does not provide detailed mechanisms for managing breaches, which undermines its overall effectiveness [2].

The Code of Conduct has been formally adopted and distributed through internal military channels [1]. However, several challenges were highlighted: not all military personnel have easy access to the document, and there is a lack of systematic training on its content and practical application [2]. Printed copies of the code are insufficiently available across military bases, and awareness sessions are sporadic, especially in conflict-affected regions [3]. These gaps hinder the uniform dissemination of ethical guidelines to all levels of personnel. Regarding its distribution within the military, while specific details are not publicly disclosed, it is standard practice for such foundational documents to be disseminated to all military personnel to ensure compliance.​

The Code of Conduct for military personnel in Cameroon is formally established and recognizsed by military authorities [1, 2]. While the Code aligns with international standards in theory, breaches are rarely addressed, indicating systemic impunity and enforcement gaps. Reports of bribery at military checkpoints and improper acceptance of gifts are documented but infrequently acted upon, and cases of disciplinary action are sporadic and lack transparency [3, 4].
Evidence show that the Code exists and is distributed within the military framework [1, 2, 3]. However, the absence of robust accountability mechanisms and the lack of provisions regulating post-separation activities, such as retired officers assuming roles that could create conflicts of interest, further undermine ethical standards [4].

The Code of Conduct is not formally incorporated into induction training for military personnel. While it is available within the military, guidance on the Code of Conduct is not part of formal training. This omission weakens the effectiveness of the Code in promoting a culture of ethical compliance from the outset of military service. The absence of structured training programs leaves the military vulnerable to unethical practices and corruption, as there is no consistent emphasis on these ethical standards during the training process. [1][2]

In Côte d’Ivoire, there is no code of conduct for the armed forces in the strict sense of the term, but there are sufficient general guidelines. The Military Service Code, drafted in 2016 and replacing the last version of 1996, defines the military hierarchy and command structure, duties, rights and freedoms, rewards, disciplinary sanctions, professional sanctions and statutory sanctions, as well as specific rules for health services in operation. Articles 13 and 14 mention conflicts of interest, but there is no mention of corruption or the risk of corruption. This code does not specifically address the issue of corruption, but it establishes a general framework for good conduct, including probity and integrity [1].

The military service code is available and easily accessible online, but no information is provided on the internal distribution of this document [1].

Violations of the code of conduct and, more broadly, of military regulations and laws by the forces are subject to investigation and even prosecution and punishment. However, there may be limitations, particularly with regard to high-ranking officers [1, 2].

During initial training at all levels and ranks, soldiers are taught the code and military regulations. These are repeated in ongoing training and unit messages [1, 2].

The Code of Service Discipline and the Armed Forces Regulations include various regulations, but they do not explicitly provide procedures or guidelines regarding bribery, gifts, and hospitality. The code of ethics is not publicly accessible. Chapter 15 of the Armed Forces Regulations offers a detailed account of post-separation activities. (1)

The Ghana Armed Forces have a Code of Ethics that regulates their activities(1). Personnel are educated and trained on it, it is however not distributed among personnel (2)(3). It is however, not available to the public (2).

Breaches of the code of conduct are regularly investigated. A notable example is the sanctioning of 86 personnel for violating the force’s code of ethics. These officers had their ranks reduced, while some were still on trial at the time the news was published. In July 2021, the Minister of Defence, Dominic Nitiwul, reported the case’s outcome to Parliament. He detailed how officers from the 10 Mechanised Battalion stormed Tindamba, a suburb of Wa Municipality, in search of a stolen phone belonging to a colleague. (1) This search led to the assault of some civilians, prompting an investigation and subsequent punishment of the officers. The quality and transparency of the investigation processes remain unclear, as much of the process is not made available to any oversight institution before the announcement of actions taken regarding breaches of conduct.
Additionally, the military high command sanctioned cases of personnel misconduct following the killing of a soldier in Ashaiman, a suburb of the Greater Accra region, in March 2023. This incident involved the deployment of troops who assaulted residents and detained 184 individuals, an action condemned by the CDD for the force’s misconduct. (2)

Personnel are taken through the code of service discipline as part of their training at all levels, including promotional courses that are undertaken by personnel. (1) (2) (3)
 

Kenya does not have a publicly available Code of Conduct specific to the Kenya Defence Forces (KDF). The Ministry of Defence (MoD) instead references the following general frameworks:

MOD Citizen Service Charter & Service Delivery Charter (2023): These outline commitments to integrity and anti-corruption but do not address conflict of interest, gifts/hospitality, or post-service conduct [1].

Leadership and Integrity Act (2012), Public Officer Ethics Act (2003), and Constitution (Article 76) do offer detailed guidance for public officers [2, 3], including:

-Treatment of gifts and donations
-Conflict of interest disclosure
-Use of public office for private gain

However, these apply generally to state/public officers and are not tailored to military-specific contexts such as chain-of-command issues, post-service lobbying, or operational integrity.

While there is no publicly available Code of Conduct, the MoD has availed their service charter [1] and citizen service charter that is publicly available on their website [ 2]. The charters address issues regarding transparency and fraud and provide mechanism for raising awareness with MoD.
However, as noted in 46A, no military-specific code of conduct is publicly available. There is no evidence that a code of conduct is distributed internally to all military personnel (even if not public). Therefore, this indicator is marked Not Applicable.

As noted in 46A, no military-specific code of conduct is publicly available [1, 2]. There is no evidence to validate the enforcement of such Code. Therefore, this indicator is marked Not Applicable.

As noted in 46A, no military-specific code of conduct is publicly available [1, 2]. There is no evidence to validate the enforcement of such Code. Therefore, this indicator is marked Not Applicable.

The National Defense Act 2008 outlines the code of conduct for personnel of the Armed Forces of Liberia.[1] Some of the basic code that all military personnel are supposed to operate by include transparency and strict rules against bribery. Likewise, the National Defense Act, the Union Code of Military Justice mandates discipline, professionalism, and a high ethical standard. A supplement to this rule is that the National Code of Conduct applies only to official of government and not during periods of retirement or post-separation activities.[2] It’s unclear whether the code of conduct covers post-separation activities and conflict of interest.

The code of conduct reflected in the National Defense Act, as well as that of the UCMJ, is disseminated among the personnel.[1] This is done during training, deployment and other functions. All personnel are up to speed on this aspect of military reform. The priority of building a new armed force with standards on transparency and accountability are linked to the post vision of rebuilding a democratic armed forces, away from the previous politicised army that led to the destructive civil wars in Liberia.[2]
The National Defense Act (2008) includes “CHAPTER 8: CODE OF CONDUCT FOR AFL PERSONNEL” (Sections 8.1–8.3 on allegiance, standards of conduct, political neutrality). That’s openly accessible to anyone [3].

There is little evidence that the code of conduct is regularly investigated in practice. There is also little public knowledge available about the full extent to which the code of conduct is being upheld. However, within the ranks of the military and among observers, the AFL is generally perceived to be more professional than in the pre-war era, particularly in terms of its behaviour toward civilians and conduct during international peacekeeping missions.[1] Reports from Liberia’s peacekeeping contributions in other African countries—such as Mali—highlight the AFL’s discipline and engagement with communities. These activities suggest significant institutional improvements since the post-conflict rebuilding process began in 2005.
There is a reinforced perception of increasing professionalism. During a recruitment exercise, AFL authorities made public statements reaffirming their zero-tolerance policy against bribery in enlistment, and emphasised that recruitment would be based solely on merit and transparent procedures.[2]

During training exercise or deployment missions, the code of conduct is a critical part of the orientation process. Personnel are expected to behave according to the code of condut. Behaviours to the contrary are penalised.[1][2]

Order No. 20.404/2011 of June 28, 2011 establishing the Code of Conduct of the Malagasy Army is intended for all military personnel. Its article 36 stipulates that “the soldier must in no case solicit or accept gifts, favors, invitations, gratifications, remuneration or any other advantage which may influence the impartiality in the exercise or on the occasion of his functions” [1]. Article 39 of the same Code states that “the soldier must take appropriate measures to avoid placing himself in a situation where there is a conflict between his personal interest and the exercise of his official functions, and is required to account for this. to his hierarchical superior of any conflict of interest as soon as he becomes aware of it” [2]. It is this article 39 which is the only indication on how a military person should proceed when faced with the risks of corruption included in the code.

The Code of Conduct is widely available to the public. It is accessible on the website of the Integrity Safeguarding Committee, one of the anti-corruption institutions [1]. Generally speaking, its existence is known by both civilians and soldiers [2]. Military schools provide initial training on the Code and soldiers benefit from continuing training [2].

Article 45 of the Code stipulates that “any breach of the requirements of this code exposes its author to disciplinary sanction without prejudice, where applicable, to the penalties provided for by the texts in force” [1]. The fact remains that the soldiers sanctioned following the violation of the Code of Conduct are not always known. Indeed, article 45 of Law No. 96-029 establishing the General Status of the Military stipulates that “disciplinary sanctions are not made public. They cannot give rise to any legal recourse” [2]. Soldiers have been sanctioned following the violation of the code,[3]. But the surveys are not systematic.[3]

Military schools, for officers as well as non-commissioned officers and even ordinary soldiers, benefit from training on the Code [1] [2].

There is a code of conduct for the Armed Forces that sets out general obligations but there is no specific mention of bribes, gifts, hospitality expenses, conflicts of interest and post-separation activities.[1][2]

The Code of Conduct is publicly available and effectively distributed to all military personnel. The guidance contained in the Code of Conduct is incorporated into induction training.[1]

There is not enough evidence to score this indicator. One interview confirm that violations of the code of conduct are rarely brought to public attention, but it has not been possible to find additional sources discussing investigations of breaches of the code of conduct. [1]

The Code of Conduct training for the Defence and Security Forces (FDS) in Mali aims to ensure that military personnel comply with laws and ethical standards, particularly in conflict or detention situations. This training covers the rights of prisoners of war, the humane treatment of civilians, and the basic principles of international humanitarian law. The objective is to promote professional and responsible conduct on the part of the FDS, while strengthening their effectiveness and credibility.These trainings on the Code of Conduct for the FDS in Mali are an essential component of security sector reform.[1][2][3]

There is a code of conduct, a readily comprehensible guide, for all military personnel, which explains bribery, gifts and hospitality, conflicts of interest, and post-separation activities. This code of conduct provides specific guidance on how to proceed in the face of these events. This framework is set out across several key legal instruments: the Regulation of Military Discipline of the Armed Forces of Defence of Mozambique, which establishes standards of order and discipline [1]; the Regulation of Rights and Duties of General Officers, Senior and Junior Officers, and Reservists [2]; the Statute of the Military of the Armed Forces of Defence of Mozambique, which defines the legal regime for military careers in line with national defence laws [3]; and the Law of Military Crimes, which specifies offences committed by military personnel in the course of their duties [4].

The code of conduct exists. However, it is not distributed openly to military personnel, except during military training (Subjects on Military Legislation), although it is available to the public through legislation published in the Official Gazette [1], which is the official publication of the Republic of Mozambique.

The violations of the Code of Conduct are investigated and are prosecuted in accordance with the Military Discipline Regulations in force in the Mozambique Armed Defence Forces and the Military Crimes Law [1]. The proceedings are instructed by the Military Justice Section, in accordance with the Military Justice Code and the Military Discipline Regulation, and are subsequently forwarded to the Courts, if necessary [2]. However, the information about them is provided for, taking into account that the State Secrets Law guides the classification of information produced by the Defence and Security Forces [3]. In 2017 [4] and 2021 [5], there were cases of military personnel convicted of violating the Code of Conduct and the Statutes of the Mozambique Armed Defence Forces.

Guidance on the code of conduct is included in induction training for all military personnel, in the Military Practical Schools and Sergeants’ School [1], Military Academy Marshal Samora Machel [2] and Higher Institute of Advanced Defence Studies [3].

The Nigerien military has a Code of Conduct in place. However, its existence remain largely unknown to the public and within the ranks of the military. [1][2]

The Code of Conduct is not widely distributed among military personnel, and there is no public access to its contents. There is no evidence that military personnel receive systematic training or briefing on the ethical guidelines contained within the Code. [1][2] Additionally, no official channels make the document available for public scrutiny, limiting external oversight and accountability.

Enforcement of the Code of Conduct within Niger’s military is weak, with breaches rarely investigated. While the Military Penal Code establishes disciplinary and legal consequences for misconduct, there is little evidence that violations related to bribery, corruption, or ethical breaches are systematically addressed. Cases involving high-ranking officials have historically been handled with leniency or complete impunity, particularly when political or military elites are implicated. The lack of transparency and external oversight over military disciplinary processes further exacerbates the issue, as there is no independent monitoring body ensuring that breaches are properly investigated and sanctioned [1] Following the military coup of July 26, 2023, accountability mechanisms have further deteriorated . The concentration of power within the military has led to increased opacity, making it even less likely that breaches of conduct—especially those involving corruption or abuse of power—are investigated.

There is no established, mandatory training program specifically dedicated to ethics and anti-corruption measures, ad hoc guidance may be provided by commanding officers as part of operational briefings or disciplinary discussions [1][2]. However, this informal approach does not ensure that all personnel receive standardized instruction on bribery, conflicts of interest, gifts and hospitality, and post-separation activities. Given this lack of formalized training, the dissemination of information regarding expected conduct remains inconsistent across different ranks and units.

The General Code of Conduct in the Fifth Schedule of the 1999 Constitution applies to all Public Officers, including the military. It prohibits accepting bribery and benefits of any kind, accepting any gifts or benefits from commercial firms, business enterprises or persons who have contracts with the government, except gifts from family as custom demands. Conflicts of interests are not mentioned [1]. The military also has its own specific Code of Conduct under Section 103 of the Armed Forces Act, which prohibits bribery and gifts but fails to apply to post-separation activities [2]. The Code of Conduct Bureau also plays a role with the declaration of assets by public officials which includes military personnel. Senior military personnel are expected to declare all their assets in compliance with the Code of Conduct Bureau’s standard for public officers, which helps to control abuse of office and conflict of interest in the discharge of their duties [3]. Assets declaration is a continuous exercise which is done every four years, especially for serving public officers.

The Code of Conduct is made available to all military personnel given the emphasis on maintaining professionalism and discipline. Reference to the code of conduct is often made by senior military officials to promote discipline in the military or the Judge Advocate of a Court Martial during trial of erring personnel [1, 2].

There is evidence revealing that cases of breaches of code of conduct among military personnel are regularly investigated and punishment enforced in accordance with the provisions of the Armed Forces Act, Nigerian Army Regulation, and the National Defence Policy of Nigeria, among others. Some relevant bodies such as the Military Police and the Nigerian Armed Forces High Command are key to this investigation. The media also provides evidence of such cases. For instance, the Nigerian military have always been accused of complicity in oil theft in the Niger Delta region by aiding and providing protection for vessels that enter the country’s waterways in order to steal oil [1]. As a result, culpable commanders had been redeployed [2]. While the Chief of Defence Staff, General Christopher Musa reiterated the zero-tolerance approach of the military to oil theft, it remains unclear how many officers have been court-martialled and jailed for this economic crime [3]. Incidents involving the breach of the Nigerian Army code of ethics in the past have equally been investigated and appropriate punishment recommended for the alleged infractions [4].

Training is a huge part of military profession and the Nigerian military go through rigorous training, which integrates both military, academic and policy contents in the training package. Trainings and capacity building, especially on leadership, at the Nigerian Defence Academy, Nigerian Armed Forces Command and Staff College, and National Defence College exposes participants to dangers of bribery, corruption, and conflicts of interest, among others [1,2.3]. By way of guidance and deliberate conscientisation, all public officers including military personnel are made to be aware of the existence of a Code of Conduct for Public Officers (CCPO) [4].

While there is general guidance on military conduct and ethics (e.g., internal military regulations), Senegal does not have a comprehensive, formalised Code of Conduct explicitly covering corruption risks tailored for military personnel. [1] [2] Senegal has a code of military justice which enables professional magistrates, assisted by military or paramilitary assessors, to dispense military justice in complete independence, while respecting human rights and preserving the disciplinary powers granted by the laws and regulations to the military authorities in their area of jurisdiction. [3]

There is no evidence that there is a comprehensive Code of Conduct in the Senegalese Armed Forces so this indicator is marked Not Applicable. The NGO Partners West Africa Senegal has carried out a project during which it has produced, with the support of the police and gendarmerie, a practical guide to fighting corruption. Several copies of this guide have been distributed to gendarmerie brigades, police stations and military camps in Senegal, covering all aspects of corruption in the security sector and the guide is not not given to civilians. Howerver, it does not provide specific guidance on how to proceed in the face of these events [1] [2]

There is no evidence that there is a comprehensive Code of Conduct in the Senegalese Armed Forces so this indicator is marked Not Applicable. [1] [2]

There is no evidence that there is a comprehensive Code of Conduct in the Senegalese Armed Forces so this indicator is marked Not Applicable. [1] [2]

The South African military has a Code of Conduct which states: “I will not abuse my authority, position or public funds for personal gain, political motive or any other reason” and “I will report criminal activity, corruption and misconduct to the appropriate authority”. [1] The code is easily understandable, but does not provide definitions for corruption nor guidance on how to proceed in the fact of these events.

The code of conduct for uniformed members is available online and accessible to the public. [1] The code of conduct is distributed to members of the armed forces. [2]

The Military Ombuds and Military Police have a role in investigating transgressions of the code of conduct. [1] There are examples of investigations into breaches of the code of conduct, but failures in the investigation of the killing of a civilian by soldiers during the COVID pandemic lockdown illustrate weak enforcement of the code of conduct related to criminal behaviour. [2] A Ministerial enquiry into sexual offences within the Department of Defence found that cases of sexual misconduct were often left unpunished. [3]

Guidance on the code of conduct is provided as part of training [1] and the military regularly conducts events and trainings on issues of ethics. [2]

South Sudan has two legal documents that cover the code of conduct for military personnel. These are the SPLM Code of Conduct [1] and the “Sudan People’s Liberation Movement’s Rules and Regulations, 2009.” [2] Both of these documents are classified and not available to the public. However, their existence is mentioned in other documents for example in Section 29 (iii) of the SPLA Constitution, 2008 which gives the Secretary for Political Affairs and Mobilization powers to ensure commitment and adherence of cadres and members of the Movement, at all levels, to the vision, mission and programs, and abide by this Constitution, rules and regulations and the SPLM Code of Conduct. [3]. Other documents besides the SPLA Act, the SPLA adopted the SPLA Rules and Regulations 2009 document that defines the code of conduct for the SPLA and the SPLA Job Descriptions of Senior Positions 2011. These documents are available to guide behaviour and conduct of military personnel when discharging their duties. Furthermore, the existing Code of Conduct of the SPLM has limitation since its application under the unity government may not be applicable to the other parties to the R-ARCSS.

The SPLM Code of Conduct and the “Sudan People’s Liberation Movement’s Rules and Regulations, 2009.” [2] are both confidential documents. They are neither available online [1] and officials were unable to retrieve a copy of the documents [2]

The SPLM Code of Conduct and the “Sudan People’s Liberation Movement’s Rules and Regulations, 2009.” [1] are both confidential documents. They are not available online [1]. Despite the presence of the SPLA Rules and Regulations 2009 document that guides the behaviour and conduct of military personnel, the document is not enforced as manifested in the rise of corruption in the national army [2].

A search on the defence ministry [1], media sources [2] and interview [3] did not reveal any guidance provided to military personnel on the code of conduct.
Despite the presence of the SPLA Rules and Regulations 2009 document that guides the behaviour and conduct of military personnel, the document is not comprehensive to guide training with respect to corruption, bribery, gifts, and conflict of interests as they are adequately covered in the document.

Section 118 (1) of the Uganda People’s Defence Force (UPDF) Act mandates a code of conduct, detailed in the Seventh Schedule, to govern the behaviour and discipline of all defence force members. This code, in conjunction with Section 117 Subsection (f) of the UPDF Act 2005, which explicitly warns against all forms of corruption, establishes a strong legal and ethical foundation for preventing and addressing corrupt practices within the UPDF. [1]
However, as the Code of Conduct is not publicly available, its exact provisions remain unclear. While Section 117(f) of the UPDF Act, 2005, explicitly warns against all forms of corruption, there is limited publicly available documentation specifying how the Code of Conduct reinforces these legal provisions or provides guidance on issues such as bribery, gifts, and conflicts of interest.
In the event that corruption occurs, the UPDF legal framework outlines a clear process for investigation and prosecution [2]. However, without access to the Code of Conduct, it remains uncertain whether there are additional procedural safeguards or specific ethical directives governing the handling of corruption-related offenses within the UPDF.

The UPDF code of conduct is transparent, written in clear language, and regularly updated to reflect changes in laws and operational requirements. However, a crucial aspect of accessibility remains problematic because the updated versions are not readily available to the public. This lack of public access raises questions about the true extent of transparency and accountability within the UPDF. While serving officers and recruits receive copies of the code, the absence of publicly available, up-to-date versions hinders external oversight and limits the ability of citizens and civil society organisations to assess. [1][2][3]

The UPDF personnel receive regular training on the code of conduct. Commanders are held responsible for ensuring their personnel adhere to the UPDF code of conduct [1] However, there are cases UPDF officers break the army code and are charged in the army court. For instance, the case of Pte Kyambandde, arrested and charged with impersonation after allegedly promoting himself to Major, is part of an ongoing pattern of prosecutions for violations such as fraud, desertion, impersonation, and abuse of office. These proceedings are publicly reported in national media and are logged in the UPDF’s internal disciplinary registers [2]. In 2023, two commanders (a Major and a Colonel) were convicted by court martial for cowardice related to the mishandling of an Al-Shabaab attack at the Buulo Mareer base in Somalia—a clear case of operational failure being scrutinised through military justice [3]
Investigations into breaches occur regularly, rather than sporadically, as reflected in these examples and records over recent years.
However, while the enforcement of the Code of Conduct is routine for lower- and mid-ranking personnel, concerns remain regarding the consistency of enforcement against senior officers. Cases involving high-ranking officials are less frequently pursued to prosecution, contributing to perceptions of selective application of the rules [4].

The Seventh Schedule of the UPDF Act states that the Code of Conduct is a central component in the training of military personnel at all levels. All UPDF recruits receive a copy of the UPDF Act, with emphasis on the Code of Conduct [1].

During the pass-out ceremony of over 9,690 Local Defence Personnel (LDPs) at Kaweweta Recruits Training School, the Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) emphasized the importance of discipline, urging recruits to uphold the core values of the UPDF, with the Code of Conduct being a key reference point [2]. The UPDF’s disciplinary framework is built on this Code of Conduct, ensuring that personnel maintain a positive relationship with civilians (wanainchi) by avoiding misconduct that could harm the UPDF’s reputation.

However, UPDF training primarily focuses on military skills, strategic leadership, and peace support operations, rather than in-depth instruction on the Code of Conduct. While the Code of Conduct is emphasised, practical training is more focused on combat readiness and operational effectiveness [3].

There is no existing code of conduct for military personnel on bribery and gifts [1]. While section (100-104) of the Defence Act guides the military on crimes and offences in the military, it does not pay attention on bribery and gifts in the military [1,2]. However, sometimes commanders takes initiatives to address soldiers on parades and briefings in the barracks to ensure that soldiers remain disciplined and refrain from criminal activities [1].

There is no code of conduct [1] [2]. Therefore, this indicator is marked Not Applicable.

There is no code of conduct [1] [2]. Therefore, this indicator is marked Not Applicable.

There is no code of conduct [1] [2]. Therefore, this indicator is marked Not Applicable.