Civil society organisations in Uganda’s health sector have expressed support for protecting the country’s sovereignty but raised strong concerns about the proposed Protection of Sovereignty Bill, 2026, urging Parliament to halt its current form and consider alternative approaches.
Appearing before a joint sitting of the Defence and Internal Affairs Committee and the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee of the Parliament of Uganda, the organisations said they had also submitted a detailed memorandum outlining their position.
“We support the object. We express concerns to the method. We propose a better way,” the groups said in a joint statement.
Support for sovereignty, but questions on necessity
The organisations clarified that they are not opposed to the intention behind the Bill, noting that safeguarding Uganda’s independence and territorial integrity is a legitimate goal.
However, they argued that the law is unnecessary because Uganda already has sufficient legal frameworks to deal with threats to sovereignty.
“Uganda already has in force a comprehensive body of law that… gives the Government ample statutory tools to identify, investigate and act upon any genuine threat,” the statement reads.
They cited existing laws such as the NGO Act, Anti-Money Laundering Act, Anti-Terrorism Act, and the Penal Code, saying these already cover issues the Bill seeks to address.
Concerns over broad definitions
The groups warned that key terms in the Bill—such as “foreigner,” “agent of a foreigner,” and “disruptive activities”—are too broad and could affect a wide range of institutions.
According to the statement, organisations like hospitals, universities, religious institutions, and even small community groups that receive some foreign support could be labelled as “agents of a foreigner.”
They also pointed out that the definition of “disruptive activities” is vague and could be misused, referencing past court rulings that struck down similar wording.
Harsh penalties and rights concerns
The civil society groups further criticised the heavy penalties proposed in the Bill, including fines of up to Shs4 billion for organisations and up to Shs2 billion or 20 years in prison for individuals.
“These are not modest regulatory burdens,” they said, arguing that some provisions—such as warrantless inspections and public disclosure of funding sources—could violate privacy and constitutional rights.
They added that limits on foreign funding could severely affect operations of institutions like hospitals and research bodies that rely on international support.
Economic and social impact
The organisations warned that the Bill could harm Uganda’s economy and key sectors, particularly health.
They noted that civil society contributes trillions of shillings annually and supports national programmes, including HIV/AIDS interventions.
The statement also highlighted the importance of diaspora remittances, warning that stricter controls could discourage inflows and increase the cost of doing business.
“A statute authorising further disruption of inflows on political rather than prudential grounds compounds, rather than cures, that exposure,” they said.
Civil society ‘a partner, not an adversary’
The groups emphasised that civil society organisations are registered Ugandan entities working alongside government to deliver services.
“Civil society organisations are not adversaries of the state. We are… critical partners of the Government of Uganda,” the statement said.
Alternative proposals
Instead of passing the Bill, the organisations proposed:
- A national programme to sensitise citizens on sovereignty, involving government and civil society
- Measures to strengthen local funding for civil society, including tax incentives and diaspora engagement
- Gradual reforms to reduce dependence on foreign funding without disrupting services
“Sovereignty is best protected by mobilising the Ugandan people, not by criminalising the organisations through which they mobilise,” they said.
Call to Parliament and public
The groups called on Parliament to pause the Bill and address any gaps through amendments to existing laws.
They also urged the government to work with civil society on sustainable solutions, and encouraged Ugandans to engage with the debate.
“The Bill affects not only specialised organisations but… the institutions through which ordinary Ugandans organise their lives,” they noted.
The organisations concluded that a strong civil society is essential to national strength.
“A strong civil society is not a threat to sovereignty. It is one of its surest guarantees.”
