Parliament is expected to pass the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) Amendment Bill, 2025, during tomorrow’s plenary sitting, following the conclusion of a joint committee report by lawmakers on defence and internal affairs.
The two committees, chaired by Bukooli North MP Stephen Bakka Mugabi and his deputy, Nyabushozi County MP Wilson Kajwengye — both of the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) — finalized their deliberations last Friday during a retreat at Maya Resort Hotel in Wakiso District.
The resulting report, due to be presented tomorrow, will guide Parliament’s debate and likely passage of the Bill.
The UPDF Amendment Bill was tabled in response to a 2021 Supreme Court ruling in Michael Kabaziguruka v. Attorney General, which declared the trial of civilians in military courts unconstitutional.
The new legislation aims to reform the military justice system and streamline the army’s command structure, addressing gaps identified by the court.
According to Mugabi, 76 clauses in the Bill focus on improving soldier welfare, while only four clauses have sparked significant debate — particularly Section 117A, which allows for the trial of civilians in military courts under “exceptional circumstances.”
These include cases where civilians act in concert with soldiers to commit serious crimes such as murder, treason, or possession of classified military equipment.
The Bill also outlines a comprehensive list of military-exclusive items, ranging from uniforms like berets and kaunda suits to weaponry and explosives, including TNT and ammonium nitrate.
While government officials argue that these provisions are necessary to curb the proliferation of illegal arms and protect national security, opposition MPs have voiced concerns.
They warn the proposed law could be used to target political opponents ahead of the 2026 elections. Mukono Municipality MP Betty Nambooze and Makindye East MP Derrick Nyeko of the National Unity Platform (NUP) argue that civilian attire and political party uniforms should instead be regulated under the Political Parties and Organisations Act.
Attorney General Kiryowa Kiwanuka has defended the Bill, stating that it is not meant to target licensed civilian gun holders but those engaged in illegal activity.
“The law does not replace civilian courts. It simply provides an additional avenue to deal with those who use firearms unlawfully,” he said.
Another point of contention is the proposed process for appointing judges to the General Court Martial.
While the Bill requires that the head of the military court be qualified to serve as a High Court judge and hold at least the rank of brigadier, legal experts and some MPs argue that the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) should have full authority over judicial appointments, similar to civilian courts.
Despite the ongoing debate, tomorrow’s session is expected to see Parliament pass the landmark legislation, marking a significant shift in Uganda’s military legal framework.
