Uganda copying Russia and China with new bill designed to crush dissent, say critics | Global development

Ugandan opposition figures, human rights organizations and legal experts have condemned a sweeping bill that proposes prison sentences of up to 20 years for supporting “foreign interests” and imposes restrictions on a wide range of individuals and organizations that work with or receive funds from overseas partners.

The 2026 bill on sovereignty protection is being fast-tracked in parliament, and the debate is expected to conclude before the presidential inauguration on May 12.

Interior minister General David Muhoozi told a parliamentary committee on April 23 that the bill would be strengthened Protections against foreign influence This could destabilize national security, economic stability and social harmony. But critics said that, like similar foreign agent laws introduced by other authoritarian governments, the proposed law was designed to restrict civil society, the media and the opposition by cutting off funds that support activities such as legitimate political opposition and holding the government to account.

“This law is a copy and paste of Russian and Chinese laws passed to liquidate the opposition and civil society organisations,” said Ugandan opposition leader Joel Ssenyonyi..

“Passing this bill will not protect Uganda’s sovereignty, it will end multi-party financing, push thousands more Ugandans into absolute poverty, chase away foreign investment and turn our country into an international pariah. Clearly this bill aims to suppress dissent,” he said.

The controversial bill’s vague language and broad definitions put a wide range of activities, individuals and organizations, as well as private companies, at risk of criminalization in advocacy, journalism or public discourse. In an earlier draft, Ugandan citizens living outside the country were defined as foreigners. Following Attorney General Kiryowa Kiwanuka this has now been abolished. proposed a number of changes He introduced the bill on April 30 in response to public outcry.

The bill comes at a time of rising political tensions as opposition figures face accusations linked to foreign support. Suspension of human rights, media and electoral organizations Before the January general election.

President Yoweri Museveni has repeatedly warned against what he describes as foreign interference in Uganda’s affairs, linking outside actors with political unrest and efforts to influence the course of the country.

“Uganda is not a neo-colony where foreign entities can dictate its path,” Museveni said after the 2024 youth protests.

Former government minister and advocate Asuman Kiyingi said the bill would further restrict legitimate protests and crush dissent. “This is not regulation; it is siege. The state, which has long used the Public Order Management Act to restrict physical gatherings, is now seeking to seize the financial and intellectual lifeblood of civic participation. The goal is clear: to ensure that no independent mobilization center has the capacity to challenge the status quo.”

Human Rights Watch He said the bill threatened fundamental rights and called on Ugandan members of parliament to reject it.

Basic provisions in it invoice a cap on financial aid of over 400 million Ugandan shillings (£79,000) in any 12-month period; and allowing inspection of facilities and access to documents.

In an April 23 letter to parliament, the World Bank warned that some provisions could criminalize a wide range of “routine development activities.”

“The bill, which classifies international organizations as unqualified ‘foreigners’, subjects them to all financial restrictions and criminal sanctions,” the letter said. It was said.

Uganda receives hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign financing supporting health, education and civil society, making foreign financing a central pillar of the country’s development model.

Julius Mukunda of the Civil Society Budget Advocacy Group He warned that the broad restrictions imposed by the bill could significantly reduce inflows, creating ripple effects across the economy.

“Restrictions of this magnitude risk weakening the shilling and slowing economic activity, especially where foreign capital fills critical domestic gaps.” [through loans, private sector investment and infrastructure financing]said Mukunda.

In response to the harsh reaction against the bill, Museveni said: A statement about X On April 30, he said concerns about remittances and foreign investment were “too much noise” and that was not what he intended for the bill, but he defended its core mission. “Independence means the right to make our own decisions and learn from them when necessary. Sovereignty means please leave us alone. Do not fund groups to influence our decisions as a country.”

Other changes introduced by the attorney general exempted financial institutions, health and educational institutions, and faith-based organizations regulated by the Federal Reserve. . Education and health organizations had warned that the legislation could disrupt partnerships that support research and services targeting HIV, tuberculosis, malaria and maternal health, many of which rely on overseas donor funding. NGOs and other international partners may still be subject to scrutiny if they are deemed to be defending “a foreigner’s interests against Uganda’s national interests.”

Critics have vehemently rejected the government’s assurances and described the proposed change in the law as a constitutional coup. “The bill replaces ‘power belongs to the people’ with ‘power belongs to the government’. It does not adapt to the changing world; it adapts the constitution to the fears of those in power. This is not a law of sovereignty, it is a law against the sovereign people of Uganda. It is the very definition of a coup,” said Anthony Asiimwe, vice president of the Law Society of Uganda.

Additional reporting by Samuel Okiror