Parliament Approves Sovereignty Bill After Significant Amendments

Parliament has passed the Protection of Sovereignty Bill, 2026, with significant amendments aimed at refining its objectives and ensuring constitutional compliance. The revised bill, which had previously drawn considerable public attention due to contentious clauses, saw its scope narrowed and safeguards introduced during a plenary session led by Speaker Anita Among.

The Minister of State for Internal Affairs, Hon. David Muhoozi, highlighted the challenges to Uganda’s self-governance that the bill seeks to address. The Committee on Defence and Internal Affairs, presenting its report, noted that extensive consultations with over 200 stakeholders informed the amendments. The committee emphasized that the law is now intended to exclusively target agents of foreigners involved in influence-related activities, particularly concerning political processes and public decision-making, and will not apply to Ugandan citizens living abroad.

Key changes include refining the definition of “agent of a foreigner” to encompass only those knowingly acting on behalf of foreign interests to influence policy, elections, or national security. The bill now requires such agents to declare foreign funds rather than seek prior ministerial approval, a shift intended to prevent disruption to financial flows and economic activity. Furthermore, the amended legislation introduces broad exemptions for financial institutions, academic and research bodies, health facilities, and individuals engaged in legitimate commercial or domestic purposes, as well as explicitly protecting lawful financial flows like diaspora remittances and foreign direct investment.

Criminal provisions have also been revised, with penalties reduced and clear definitions of offenses introduced, requiring proof of intent. Offences related to economic sabotage carry a fine of Shs2 billion for legal entities and Shs1 billion for individuals, or up to 10 years imprisonment. Provisions requiring mandatory health examinations and inspection powers without court orders were removed.

Despite the amendments, several Members of Parliament voiced dissent, arguing that the bill infringes upon free speech and contradicts the Constitution. Concerns were raised regarding the extent of amendments, procedural fairness during the debate, and the alleged transformation of the bill into a new piece of legislation, though the Speaker maintained the core object of the bill remained unaltered.

Source: Parliament of Uganda