The Opposition has rejected the Protection of Sovereignty Bill, 2026, describing it as unnecessary, legally redundant, and potentially harmful to Uganda’s democratic and economic environment.
The Leader of the Opposition, Joel Ssenyonyi, while appearing before a joint committee scrutinising the Bill on Friday, 24 April 2026, argued that the proposed law duplicates provisions already covered under existing statutes such as the Penal Code Act, Anti-Money Laundering Act, Public Finance Management Act, and the NGO Act.
“We have a plethora of laws that address these critical concerns. The Penal Code Act already captures many of those provisions, so the Bill is redundant,” Ssenyonyi said.
He explained that offences such as treason, illicit financial flows, and unlawful foreign funding are already criminalised within Uganda’s legal framework.
“If a foreign embassy funds a violent coup, the Penal Code Act criminalises treason. If someone launders illicit foreign money, the Anti-Money Laundering Act already requires declaration of the source of funds,” he added.
Ssenyonyi further warned that the Bill introduces harsh provisions that could negatively affect Uganda’s economy and civic space. He cited a clause that caps foreign funding at Shs400 million, with penalties of up to 20 years in prison for those who receive higher amounts without ministerial approval.
He also raised concerns over Clause 2(2), which criminalises influencing the public against government policy, arguing that it undermines the constitutional role of the Opposition.
Similarly, the Uganda People’s Congress (UPC), through its General Secretary Francis Ebil, called for the withdrawal of the Bill, describing it as unconstitutional.
“By reclassifying Ugandans as foreigners based on residence, the Bill bypasses the 1995 Constitution, which guarantees citizenship to those who qualified at its commencement,” Ebil said.
He also criticised the proposed penalties—including jail terms of up to 20 years and fines of up to Shs4 billion—arguing that they violate protections against cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment.
Ebil further warned that vague definitions of terms such as ‘economic sabotage’, ‘foreigner’, and ‘foreign agent’ could be abused to suppress press freedom and freedom of expression.
“A journalist could be prosecuted for publishing an accurate report if it leads to a decline in company shares or investor confidence,” he cautioned.
However, some legislators urged further scrutiny rather than outright rejection. Bugabula County North MP John Teira said the Bill is intended to address subversive activities against Uganda’s interests, not to broadly restrict freedoms.
Meanwhile, Kibale County MP Richard Oriebo argued that consolidating sovereignty-related provisions into a single law could be more effective than amending multiple existing statutes.
