UPDF Amendment Bill Passes Despite Opposition Pushback
Uganda’s Parliament has passed the controversial UPDF Amendment Bill, 2025, following intense debate over the expansion of the military’s powers to try civilians in military courts.
The 143-page bill, introduced by Defence Minister Jacob Oboth Oboth, includes 84 new clauses and marks a significant update to the Uganda People’s Defence Forces Act. Among the most contested provisions is the military court’s jurisdiction over civilians, reigniting constitutional concerns.
Military Courts to Try Civilians
Hon. Wilson Kajwengye, Chair of the Defence and Internal Affairs Committee, defended the legislation, stating civilian trials in military courts should be rare and ensure a fair trial.
However, Hon. Moses Okot Junior led opposition efforts to block the bill, citing the 2021 Supreme Court ruling in AG vs Hon. Kabaziguruka, which deemed such trials unconstitutional except under narrow conditions. He criticized the bill for undermining judicial independence and bypassing public input.
“This law effectively elevates the General Court Martial to the same level as the High Court—a move that contradicts the Constitution,” Okot argued.
Opposition Attempts Defeated
Efforts by opposition MP Muhammad Nsereko to remove Clause 30—which allows for the prosecution of civilians connected to the military—were defeated in a vote. Nsereko also opposed Clause 38, which strengthens the authority of the Court Martial, but the motion failed as well.
Government’s Emotional Defense
Minister Peter Ogwang passionately supported the bill, recalling personal trauma from his childhood in Karamoja, saying,
“My mother was raped by Karimojong warriors. I know the pain of lawlessness. This bill ensures national security and military discipline.”
MP Fadhil Chemaswet echoed his support, emphasizing the court martial’s role in enforcing discipline among soldiers.
Meanwhile, MP Jonathan Odur proposed changing the name “Special Forces Command” to “Special Forces” for uniformity across military branches, but the motion was also defeated.
Legal Challenge Looms
After walking out in protest, several opposition lawmakers announced plans to challenge the bill in court, accusing the government of ignoring a Supreme Court directive and failing to engage the public in meaningful consultation.
With the bill now passed, critics fear it could lead to an erosion of civilian legal protections and deepen tension between the ruling party and the opposition ahead of the next election cycle.
