Certified Public Accountancy (CPA) Students Petition ICPAU, Demanding Better Treatment-ENOUGH IS ENOUGH

By KT Reporter

31 August 2026

The Chief Executive Officer / Secretary

The Council, Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Uganda (ICPAU)

Plot 42, Bukoto Street, Kololo

P.O. Box 12464, Kampala, Uganda

Copy: Public Accountancy Examinations Board (PAEB); Registrar, ICPAU

Dear Sir/Madam,

RE: PETITION FROM CPA STUDENTS OF UGANDA ON EXAMINATION, ADMINISTRATIVE AND WELFARE CONCERNS, AND REQUEST FOR A FORMAL STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE STRUCTURE

We, the undersigned Certified Public Accountancy (CPA) students of Uganda, currently pursuing studies at various levels of the CPA programme regulated by the Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Uganda (“ICPAU” or “the Institute”), respectfully submit this petition to draw the Council’s attention to a range of concerns that have arisen repeatedly and consistently across cohorts, tuition centres and examination sittings.

This petition is the product of an open, student-led consultation conducted over the past days among CPA students across the country. It is not intended as an attack on the Institute, its examiners, staff or Council. It is intended as a constructive, evidence-seeking submission from the Institute’s largest and most direct stakeholder group — its students — who bear the financial, academic and personal cost of the qualification process and who have, until now, had no formal, recognised channel through which to raise collective concerns.

We set out below the concerns raised, organised by theme, followed by our specific requests to Council.

1. Absence of a Formal Student Representative Structure

Unlike most academic and professional bodies in Uganda — including universities and other professional institutes — ICPAU currently has no identifiable, recognised structure through which CPA students can systematically consolidate and present collective concerns to Council or to the Public Accountancy Examinations Board (PAEB). Students currently rely on individual emails, informal contacts, and ad hoc surveys, none of which provide a sustained or accountable channel of engagement.

We recognise that under Section 14(2) of the Accountants Act, 2013, membership of Committees of Council is restricted to Council members and members of the Institute, which means students cannot sit as a Committee of Council in their own right. We are not asking to be one. We are asking Council to recognise, or assist in establishing, a CPA Students’ Representative Forum/Association that would operate as a liaison body — not a regulator, and not a Committee of Council — with the following objects:

• To collect, verify and consolidate concerns affecting CPA students across tuition centres and regions;
• To formally and periodically submit evidence-based proposals and feedback to ICPAU/PAEB through an agreed liaison mechanism;
• To provide an organised, elected or nominated channel of engagement between students and the Institute;
• To conduct regular student surveys prior to making representations to the Institute;
• To support academic and professional-development initiatives for students; and
• To help communicate ICPAU’s changes, requirements and decisions clearly to the student body.

We respectfully request a meeting with Council or its designated Committee to discuss the recognition and modalities of such a forum.

2. Examination Setting, Syllabus Coverage and Question Design

A large number of students across multiple sittings and levels have raised concerns that examination content in some papers (cited examples include Advanced Financial Reporting, Advanced Taxation, Advanced Financial Management, Strategy, and Management Decision and Control) has, in their experience, extended beyond the published syllabus, drawn on current-affairs or general-knowledge material not covered in tuition, or mirrored models used by other CPA-awarding bodies in the region without clear anchoring in the ICPAU syllabus. We ask the Institute to:

• Review and confirm the process by which examination papers are quality-assured against the published syllabus before being administered;
• Clarify, in cases where contextual or case-study material is used, how students are expected to have prepared for it; and
• Publish, after each sitting, a brief examiner’s report indicating overall performance trends and common areas of difficulty, as is done by comparable examining bodies.

Students also report that the volume of reading material and wording in some question papers (particularly Question 1 in several papers) is difficult to complete within the time allocated, and have asked that the Institute review the balance between question length, the number of sub-sections, and the standard time allowed per paper.

3. Errors in Published Model (Examiner’s) Solutions

Several students report identifiable errors in the model solutions published on the ICPAU student portal after each sitting (cited examples include past Advanced Financial Reporting and Strategic Financial Management/Advanced Financial Management solutions). Because these published solutions are understood to reflect the marking guide used by examiners, students are concerned that correct alternative answers may be marked as incorrect where the published solution itself contains an error, and that the disclaimer accompanying these publications should not be a substitute for a corrections process. We request that:

• ICPAU establish a clear, publicised process for students (or tutors) to flag suspected errors in published solutions, with a documented and timely institutional response;
• Where an error in a model solution is confirmed after a sitting, affected scripts be reviewed for equitable treatment of students who applied a materially correct alternative approach; and
• Corrected solutions, once verified, be reissued with a visible correction notice rather than silently amended.

4. Marking Transparency and Borderline (Near-Pass) Grades

Several students report scores in the 43%-49% range and have raised concerns about the consistency and transparency of marking at the margin of the 50% pass mark. We do not allege any specific irregularity, as we are not in a position to verify examiners’ working papers. What we ask for is transparency that would allow students to be confident the process is sound:

• A clear published statement of ICPAU’s policy (if any) on marks recorded in the 45-49% band, so that students are not relying on rumour;
• Publication of aggregate pass-rate statistics per paper, per sitting, to allow the Institute and the public to monitor trends objectively; and
• Where pass rates for a given paper fall markedly below the norm, an internal review of the paper and marking guide, consistent with good examining practice.

5. The Remarking and Appeals Process

Students who apply for a script remark report the following specific concerns:

• The remarking fee is disproportionately high relative to the original examination fee (students estimate it at roughly three times the sitting fee), which may discourage genuinely aggrieved students, particularly those who have already spent significantly on repeated attempts, from seeking a review;
• Students are not shown their marked scripts as part of the remark process, making it difficult to understand where marks were lost or to assess whether a further appeal is warranted;
• The outcome of a remark is treated as final and not open to any further appeal, even where a student has a reasoned basis for disagreement; and
• The appeal window is reported to be approximately 14 days from the release of results, yet the marking guide/model solutions are not always available to students within the early part of that window, limiting their ability to make an informed decision on whether to apply.

We request that ICPAU review the remarking fee structure, consider a partial refund of the fee where a remark results in a change of outcome, publish the marking guide within the first few days after results are released, and consider introducing a limited right to a second-level review in clearly defined circumstances (for example, where a material marking error is demonstrated).

Separately, several students report that the online appeal/remark request function on the student portal has, on occasion, been unavailable during the applicable window, with follow-up emails to the Institute going unanswered. We ask that the portal’s reliability during appeal windows be reviewed and that a defined service-level response time be adopted for student enquiries and emails.

6. Repeat Attempts, Resit Policy and the Ten-Year Completion Window

A recurring and deeply felt concern is that a significant number of students find themselves repeating the same paper multiple times — students cite examples of five, six, eight, ten and more attempts at a single paper — at considerable cumulative cost in examination fees, tuition, time and, by students’ own account, mental strain. We ask Council to consider:

• Introducing a resit policy under which a student who fails a paper with a score close to the pass mark (for example, above a defined threshold) retains partial credit, or is required to demonstrate competence in a narrower set of areas on resit, rather than repeating the full paper from zero each time;
• Reviewing whether the current ten-year maximum completion period remains appropriate given the demands of the current syllabus and the realities of students who are also employed full-time; and
• Ensuring that applications for extension of the completion period receive a timely, substantive response. Students report submitting extension applications (for example, in June 2026) that remain unanswered months later, leaving them uncertain of their standing.

7. Examination-Day Administration and Invigilation

Students raise the following operational concerns regarding the conduct of examinations, principally at the Mengo examination centre:

• External noise (including music/band performances reported near the venue) during reading time and the examination itself, which is disruptive to concentration;
• Reliance on a single visible clock in some examination rooms, which disadvantages candidates seated where the clock cannot be seen, together with reports of time announcements that are themselves distracting;
• Candidates being required to remove personal watches, without an equally reliable alternative timekeeping method provided to every seat; and
• A general request for refresher training of invigilation staff on candidate welfare and fair, consistent time management.

We ask the Institute to review venue logistics, ensure a reliable individual or clearly visible timing method at every seat, and take reasonable steps to minimise external noise disruption during examinations.

8. Fees: Registration, Annual Subscription and PET

Students raise the following fee-related concerns:

• The late registration surcharge, reported at 50% of the examination fee, is considered disproportionately high, particularly for students facing genuine administrative or financial delays;
• The annual subscription fee for full members (reported at approximately UGX 600,000) is a significant burden for members who are unemployed or between jobs, with non-payment placing a member in poor standing; students request consideration of a reduced or deferred rate for members who can demonstrate unemployment or financial hardship;
• The Practical Experience Training (PET) requirement of three years, together with its associated fee (reported at approximately UGX 1,050,000), is considered lengthy relative to the overall demands already placed on students; and
• Mandatory paid webinars and continuing professional development events, which some members report as an additional and sometimes short-notice cost on top of annual subscriptions.

We ask the Institute to review these fee structures with a view to easing the cumulative financial burden on students and newly qualified members, and to publish clear, advance notice of any proposed fee changes.

9. Issuance and Delivery of Level Certificates

Students report that certificates for completed levels are issued only in hard copy and delivered exclusively by post to the address recorded on the student portal, with no option for collection in person or delivery by courier/email confirmation. Several students report certificates never arriving, and uncertainty as to whether the postal address on the portal can be corrected after the fact (as opposed to only the contact address). We request that ICPAU:

• Introduce a digital or verifiable electronic certificate/confirmation (in addition to the physical certificate) that students can use immediately for employment or further-study purposes;
• Allow certificates to be collected in person, by prior arrangement, as an alternative to postal delivery; and
• Clarify and simplify the process for correcting a postal address after a certificate has failed to arrive.

Related to this, some students report that credits or certificates obtained through the CPA programme have not been recognised for exemption purposes when they subsequently pursue university degrees. We ask ICPAU to explore or strengthen articulation/exemption agreements with universities and other recognised bodies so that partial completion of the CPA programme carries tangible value even where a student does not complete the full qualification.

10. Professional Recognition and Remuneration of CPA Holders

Many students and newly qualified members report being offered starting salaries that they consider incommensurate with the time, cost and effort invested in the qualification, in some cases citing offers in the range of UGX 1,000,000 to 1,500,000 gross per month for CPA-qualified or part-qualified roles. While we recognise that ICPAU does not set private-sector salaries, students ask that the Institute consider:

• Engaging employers and recruitment platforms to promote clearer understanding of the value and scope of the CPA qualification; and
• Publishing periodic salary-benchmarking guidance for CPA holders at different levels, similar to guidance published by comparable professional bodies, to support members in salary negotiations.

11. Comparative Standing with Other Qualifications

A number of students draw comparisons with the ACCA qualification, citing (in their experience) more predictable, syllabus-aligned questions, clearer international recognition, and a more transparent link between published study material and examination content. We raise this not to suggest that ICPAU should replicate another body’s approach wholesale, but because students perceive a gap in predictability and transparency that they believe contributes to the concerns raised above. We would welcome the Institute’s perspective on how it benchmarks its examination standards and student experience against comparable regional and international bodies.

12. Student Wellbeing

Finally, a significant number of students describe considerable stress, anxiety and, in some cases, physical symptoms (reported examples include disrupted sleep, elevated blood pressure and general ill health) associated with repeated examination attempts and the financial pressure of the course. We do not raise this to assign blame, but to ask that the Institute give explicit consideration to student wellbeing when reviewing examination policy — for example, by ensuring adequate breaks between sittings for students repeating papers, and by considering signposting to student support resources around examination periods.

Summary of Requests to Council

In light of the foregoing, we respectfully request that Council:

1. Recognise and support the establishment of a CPA Students’ Representative Forum/Association as a liaison body between students and the Institute, and meet with a nominated interim student delegation to discuss its structure and mandate;
2. Review the quality-assurance process for examination setting to ensure strict alignment with the published syllabus, and publish brief examiner’s reports after each sitting;
3. Establish a clear, publicised process for correcting errors in published model solutions, with equitable treatment of affected scripts;
4. Publish aggregate pass-rate statistics per paper and sitting, and review papers or marking guides where pass rates are markedly low;
5. Review the remarking fee and process, including access to marked scripts, timely publication of marking guides within the appeal window, and a defined route for a second-level review in clearly justified cases;
6. Ensure the online appeal/remark function is reliably available during appeal windows, and adopt a defined response time for student emails and enquiries;
7. Consider a partial-credit or marks-carried-forward mechanism for near-pass resits, and review the appropriateness of the ten-year completion window, with timely responses to extension applications;
8. Review examination-day logistics, including noise control and reliable timekeeping at every seat, and refresh invigilator training;
9. Review the late-registration surcharge, the annual subscription fee for unemployed or financially constrained members, and the cost and duration of the PET requirement;
10. Introduce a digital or verifiable electronic certificate option alongside physical delivery, and simplify address-correction procedures for certificate delivery;
11. Explore stronger exemption/articulation arrangements with universities and other bodies for students who partially complete the CPA programme;
12. Engage employers on fair remuneration and recognition of CPA holders, and consider publishing periodic salary-benchmarking guidance; and
13. Conduct regular, genuinely consultative student surveys and town-hall style engagements, including in-person forums, ahead of major policy decisions affecting students.

Conclusion

We make this petition in good faith and in the spirit of partnership with the Institute, whose reputation and statutory mandate to produce competent, ethical accountants we fully support. Our concern is that the current experience of a substantial number of students — in examination design, marking transparency, administrative processes and cost — is, in their view, not always consistent with that shared goal. We believe that a structured, ongoing dialogue between ICPAU and its student body, of the kind proposed above, is the most constructive way to address these concerns.

We would be grateful for an opportunity to meet with Council, the PAEB, or their designated representatives to discuss this petition and the matters raised in it, and we look forward to the Institute’s response.

Yours faithfully,

On behalf of the undersigned CPA Students of Uganda

ICPAU Students Voice — Student-led, Independent, Evidence-based, One Voice

[Signatures and student registration numbers attached as Annex I]-Give us feedback on this story through our email: kamwokyatimes@gmail.com