Bobi Wine's NUP challenges new UPDF law in court

_________________

The National Unity Platform (NUP) has petitioned the Constitutional Court, challenging the new Uganda Peoples Defence Forces (UPDF) Act, arguing that it is unconstitutional.

On August 13, 2025, NUP filed the petition against the Attorney General, who is the principal legal advisor to the Government, Speaker of Parliament Anita Among and the Minister of Defence and Veteran Affairs Jacob Oboth-Oboth.

NUP is a registered political party headed by Robert Kyagulanyi, also known as Bobi Wine.

On June 16, this year, President Yoweri Museveni assented to the UPDF Act, to resume charging civilians in military courts. The new law set new qualifications for military court heads.

The amendments also saw the army court reconstituted at unit, division and the general court martial levels.

According to the new endorsement, whoever is to chair the court martial at whichever level should be a competently trained lawyer suitable to be appointed a judge of the High Court.

Also, the General Court Martial will be at the level of the High Court, with a provision to appeal its decision to the civil court in case one is not satisfied with the ruling.

The amendment followed a landmark verdict delivered on January 31 this year by the Supreme Court, where the judges quashed the General Court Martial’s powers to try people for various crimes and limited it to handling army disciplinary matters.

The decision of the Supreme Court justices led by Alfonse Owiny-Dollo upheld an earlier Constitutional Court ruling that military courts cannot try civilians.

The order not to try civilians in the General Court Martial (GCM) followed a petition filed by the former Nakawa Member of Parliament Michael Kabaziguruka. Kabaziguruka challenged his trial on charges of treason and the GCM, arguing that he is a civilian.

Petition

The petitioners contend that the re-enactment of section 119 of the UPDF Act, 2005, into Section 117A of the UPDF (Amendment) Act, 2005, is inconsistent with and an infringement of Articles 92, 128 and 210 of the Constitution.

Article 92 of the Constitution prohibits Parliament from passing laws that override court decisions, while 210 stipulates that Parliament should regulate the UPDF. Article 128 stipulates the independence of the Judiciary.

According to the petitioner, the re-enactment of Section 179 to Section 195 (5) of the UPDF Amendment Act that allows GCM to have unlimited original jurisdiction to try any offence committed by a person subject to military law is inconsistent and an infringement to Articles 92, 128 and 210 of the Constitution.

The party also argues that the amended provisions in the UPDF Act is inconsistent with the Supreme and Constitutional Court judgements in the Attorney General, Kabaziguruka’s petition.

“The enactment of the UPDF Amendment Act, particularly Section 192 constitutes a deliberate disregard for and contempt of the Supreme Court constitutional appeal of 2021 in regard to non-trial of civilians by military courts, appointment of judicial officers and the exclusive mandate of the director of public prosecutions,” NUP’s Secretary General David Lewis Rubongoya, argued.

The party contends that mandating serving military officers as members of military courts, contravenes the Constitution.