The World Health Organization on Tuesday defended Uganda’s decision to declare its Ebola Bundibugyo outbreak over before completing the conventional 42-day waiting period, saying the country’s response should be judged by its success in stopping transmission rather than by strict adherence to timelines.
Uganda discharged its last confirmed Ebola patient from the National Isolation and Treatment Centre in Mulago on July 16 and declared the outbreak over on July 28, less than two weeks later. The decision prompted questions from some observers about why authorities did not wait 42 days after the last confirmed case before making the declaration.
Responding to journalists in Kampala, WHO Regional Director for Africa Dr. Mohamed Yakub Janabi said Uganda’s priority had been to interrupt transmission and protect public health.
“The important issue was to stop transmission,” Janabi said, adding that Uganda’s response should be assessed based on its public health outcomes rather than procedural timelines.
Janabi, who is visiting Uganda with a delegation from the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) led by Director-General Dr. Jean Kaseya, said Uganda may have ended its outbreak, but the regional response remains far from over.
He noted that Uganda continues to support neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo, where health authorities had reported 3,605 confirmed Ebola Bundibugyo cases and 1,587 deaths as of Monday.
Although Uganda and the DRC declared their outbreaks on the same day in May, Uganda recorded only 20 confirmed cases. Fifteen of those were imported infections involving Congolese nationals who crossed into Uganda seeking medical care.
Health Minister Dr. Chris Baryomunsi said Uganda has now shifted its focus to supporting the response in eastern DRC. As of Monday, 58 Ugandan health specialists had been deployed to Kasenyi on the western shores of Lake Albert in Ituri Province and to Aru Territory, which borders Uganda’s Arua District.
Both WHO and Africa CDC described Uganda’s response as a model for other countries confronting Ebola outbreaks. They noted that Uganda recorded a case fatality rate of about 10%, compared with about 44% in the DRC, where nearly half of confirmed patients have died.
Despite the international praise, Uganda’s response was not without controversy. During the outbreak, some government officials questioned whether declaring an outbreak was necessary, arguing that it could unnecessarily harm the country’s economy.
Among them was Allan Kasujja, executive director of the Uganda Media Centre and the government’s communications lead during the outbreak. He argued that Uganda was unfairly grouped with the DRC in outbreak announcements despite dealing largely with imported cases and a small number of infections among health workers who treated the patients.
Asked about those concerns, Janabi said WHO had consistently communicated that Uganda’s cases were largely imported and rejected suggestions that the organization had misrepresented the country’s situation.
“There is no controversy,” he said, adding that WHO does not support unnecessary travel restrictions.
Africa CDC Director-General Dr. Jean Kaseya also criticized the United States for maintaining travel restrictions on Uganda after the country contained the outbreak.
Kaseya described the restrictions as unjustified and said they reflected a double standard, noting that France also reported an imported Ebola Bundibugyo case from the DRC but did not face similar travel measures.
