There was also a recognition that there was certain economic value to the national ID, allowing a person to open a bank account, buy and sell land, and access formal job opportunities. The irony was that these benefits are the direct result of the government requiring Ndaga Muntu to access these services in the first place. At the same time, many interviewees understood that they had little choice about whether or not to register. “Even if there were risks, and I do not give the information, I would fail to get a national ID and this would make it hard for me to get food donations, access hospitals, vote, and get credit,” one woman told us. “So I really had no option.” Very few people knew, or even could guess, what the government was doing with their information or why it was being collected during the Ndaga Muntu registration process. Some interviewees asked our researchers to explain it to them. When people have questions or complaints about Ndaga Muntu, or its many applications, there are limited routes to raise these questions or complaints. Under Section 83 of ROPA, NIRA was meant to set up an ‘identification and registration committee’ to “adjudicate over matters arising and or related to registration” under ROPA. NIRA is also required by Section 83 of ROPA to publish the committee general rules and guidelines, which could be appealed before the High Court. However, at the time of writing this report we have not been able to ascertain whether this committee has ever been set up, whether it has published general rules or guidelines, or whether it has dealt with any complaints or questions. In practice, most people we spoke with felt most comfortable bringing complaints to their LC1 chairperson. But the LC1 does not typically have the authority to challenge decisions about the national ID system, as people like Lilian have discovered. Lilian was turned away from the health centre because she did not have a Ndaga Muntu. When she returned with her LC1 chairperson they were both turned away because they had arrived too late, and the nurse refused to let her in. Someone else told us: We fear (to complain) because these people speak English. Even our LC1, the one we depend on, can’t speak English. But even if you come with the LC1 chairperson, they tell you to come with the National ID. Especially when it came to the SCG, many were discouraged from complaining because it was presumed that they should be grateful for the programme. We were told, “even those chiefs, when you ask them why the money is small, they tell us to just eat what we are given, that we did not work for it.” LC1 chairpersons have also found themselves marginalized in the administration of the SCG. Their former role in helping to identify and target beneficiaries has been stripped away in favour of the automated system, along with the incentive payments that encouraged them to support the work. It is therefore understandable they feel less able and less motivated to provide remedies.134 How a National Security Approach to Uganda’s National Digital ID Has Led to Wholesale Exclusion of Women and Older Persons 59