Uganda Sovereignty Bill 2026 affects NGOs and citizens’ livelihoods nationwide

_______________

OPINION

By Rajab Bwengye Yusufu

In Uganda, several laws have been passed to regulate the operation and affairs of CSOs such as the NGO Act, 2016, which is the primary law that regulates NGOs, CBOs and its subsidiary regulations, i.e., the NGO Regulations and the Fees Regulations, 2017, the Anti-Money Laundering (Amendment) Act 2022, the Companies Act, 2012, the Trustee Incorporation Act, the famous public order management act of 2012 out lawed in 2017, the data protection and privacy act among many others.

The above are coupled with other regulatory requirements such as submission of annual returns, mandatory payment of government taxes such as PAYE, Local service tax, withholding tax, periodic processing of Operational permits with the NGO Bureau, payment of data protection certificates and annual renewals, signing MOUs in all operational districts of Uganda, etc. The list is just endless.

Amidst the above situation coupled with the financial crisis of the current times dictated partly by external factors such as wars in Ukraine and the middle East that have forced most donors cut funding /Aid for both NGOs and government, the Ugandan government after an overwhelming support to our dear president H.E Yoweri Kaguta Museveni by Ugandan citizens 80% of who live in poverty, dwindling employment opportunities and generally high costs of living, is advancing a draft Protection of Sovereignty Bill 2026 which proposes to add more restriction on the already existing passed domestic policies claiming the bill is to restrict foreign influence over domestic policy and governance.

From the look of the bill, if the above-mentioned policies were not in place, one would say it’s legitimate, and of course, it’s a legitimate cause for the national policy guidelines to guard the nationals. However, this bill from the framers seems to go beyond the legislation that has been made in other countries, with which we share social, economic and environmental protection interests. The proposed bill is not comparable anywhere else. Its implication, once approved, will most likely affect both the macro and micro economy, through compromised development finance, foreign investment, and associated abuse of fundamental rights.

The Bill, once passed into an act, will not only impact civil society organisations whose main funding is foreign-funded but also the private sector, which sometimes, in the execution of their work, implements some work on behalf of foreign investors. It means if the work is financed, supervised or controlled by a foreigner, including our own nationals living abroad might find difficulty in propelling development in Uganda through an agent unless it includes any person whose activities are "directly or indirectly supervised, directed, controlled, financed, or subsidised" by a foreigner. Will it therefore be a crime for a Ugandan citizen working with a foreign body or living abroad to support his people or invest back home?

Companies servicing the needs of Ugandans, partly funded by foreign loans or in partnership with international partners, may find difficulty in operation by being classified as agents of foreigners. Institutions receiving full funding or partial contributions towards their work, even if there is no direct control over the operations of the fund's recipient, will find it difficult not to be branded as agents of foreigners.

The bill also seeks to put a funding cap of sh400 million or its equivalent in foreign exchange annually. Additionally, any funding beyond the above stipulated figure in a year must be cleared by the minister responsible for internal affairs. Looking at the funding for NGO programmes, projects, and big infrastructure developments, this figure is not only a disaster to NGOs and other non-governmental institutions but also to the common man, a Ugandan surviving on the work of these institutions.

Sincerely speaking, Who doesn’t know NGOs complement government in employing unemployed citizens, work with the office of the prime minister to improve life and secure rights in the many refugee settlement camps in Uganda, invest heavily in protection, conservation and restoration of environmental ecosystems like forests and wetlands, Pay government taxes, contribute to NSSF for employed citizens, support community service delivery through education, economic empowerment, supporting social amenities for Ugandan citizens through construction of community wells, supporting value addition in farming communities, playing oversight roles to enforce climate justice and collaborating with government institutions and ministries such as NEMA, Ministry of Water and Environment, Ministry of Lands, the Prime minister’s office, the office of the president to generally make Ugandans live a better life. Given the above roles, even a cap of sh2 billion funding on the work of NGOs would be on the Lower side.

We strongly call on the bill initiators who might be looking for favors and cheap popularity after being shown exits in the last concluded elections, the many MPs citizens voted for as their voices and our dear President who has worked for the last 40 years toiling to make the life of Ugandans better to reject this 400 million cap requirement just like he refused to sign the GMO law that was merely looking at supporting hybrid varieties without taking into consideration indigenous knowledge to food growing, seed conservation and indigenous breeds protection.

The bill is also vague in its language, and Ugandans will not find much sense in it. What does disrupting, frustrating, and hindering government policy actually mean? Requiring cabinet approval for civil society organisations to complement government efforts in mass education, community empowerment, skilling, agriculture, health, water provision, among others? 

If you are a pro-people leader, be it at local, district, national, regional or international level, and you know that your salary and livelihood are being met by taxpayers' money, common sense should just tell you that subjecting Ugandans to the above not only violates the Ugandan constitution and will only add pain and misery as they strive to live.

Is not The Set heavy penalties in form of imprisonment, financial fines, financial controls under clauses 6,7 and 8 and have been getting funding and complementing government programmes in education, agriculture, health, water provision among others but this Bill seeks to put financial controls under Clauses 6, 7, and 8 which requires Cabinet approval before any entity, individual or agent of a foreigner carries out activities in the above mentioned sectors for which Government is responsible.

Any attempt by the public to oppose the government policy is criminalised by the bill. The Bill also prohibits any person from hindering, frustrating, or disrupting Government policy, punishable by up to 20 years in prison. Any attempt to influence government policy by a civic organization it criminalises the development of policy without Cabinet approval and the promotion of any policy not adopted by Cabinet. This extinguishes fundamental freedoms such as freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, among others. The large fines and long prison terms are also out of all proportion to the alleged offences.

The lobby and advocacy organisation’s big job is civic engagement, since this space is heading for narrowing/compromising, which will most likely affect the operating environment for corporate social responsibility programmes, stakeholder engagement, policy influence, input to environmental and social impact assessments and other development documents, hence environmental injustice with associated climate change impacts and social governance gap. Uganda is not a pioneer in legislating against foreign influence. However, the bill is extraordinary by any comparable standard.

Uganda is not the first country to legislate against foreign influence, but its Bill is extraordinary by any standard. The maximum criminal penalty of twenty years' imprisonment is four times the maximum under FARA or Australia's Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme. It's indirect economic sabotage and an offence for treating diaspora citizens as "foreigners" because of their hard-earned cash, as it gets transferred back to the country of origin.

The bill has not been presented to legislators as they have not been sworn in, waiting for May. The biggest worry, given the large number of members of parliament, it’s likely that they might pass it the way it is. This is further confirmed by the president’s speech, which was given at the Kyankwanzi retreat who told members of parliament-elect and other stakeholders that it’s not a good practice for members of parliament to always amend proposals by the president.

The new members of parliament, given the caution, may fear making any amendments to the bill and pass it as it is. Regarding whether the law could be challenged in court, it’s also feared that the courts may not be in position or take long to deliver justice to the majority affected, despite, a legally required expedited hearing and so if this Bill is passed into law, it would not take less than two years to be determined and any damage incurred by that time will be irreversible.

There is a need to clearly review this bill to cater for the interests of the majority of the poor. A clear assessment of the compromise should be done to ascertain whether or not this bill should be enacted into law; otherwise, if it is passed in its current state, it will result in government capture of citizens' sovereignty and abuse of their rights.

I will conclude by asking the following: Do we want to see Ugandans lose employment services offered by NGOs? Do we want important development partners (local and foreign) to leave Uganda or further suffocate support to government programs? Do we want Uganda Revenue Authority to lose money through taxes? Do we want our children to finish university and cannot get social service institutions like NGOs to absorb them? Do we want food, human, land, water, and environmental rights to be abused and NGOs or even regulatory government institutions like NEMA keep quiet?

Do you want to see conflicts, co-existence, and social services support in refugee settlements deteriorate? Do we want banks to go out of business due to reduced financial inflows? Do we want forests, wetlands, range lands, etc., to get erased off the Ugandan map and environmental organisations just keep Quiet? Would that serve Uganda better?? 

So, let cool and sober minds think through all the above and surely gauge if passing this bill, vague as it is, will help us deliver the Uganda 2030 vision.

Uganda became a sovereign state in 1962 upon gaining independence. It will remain so today, tomorrow and even a century ahead to come. Subjecting Ugandans, businesses, NGOs to the provisions of the proposed bill does not add value to Uganda's sovereignty today and therefore makes it an unnecessary call, and I pray our visionary, experienced and time-tested president rejects the bill. It will not help deliver Ugandans to Prosperity.

The writer works with the National Association of Professional Environmentalists (NAPE) commonly referred to by many as “FRIENDS OF THE EARTH UGANDA”