The Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) has raised serious concerns over what it describes as inconsistencies in the Executive's position on the proposed Protection of Sovereignty Bill, 2026, questioning both its drafting process and legislative handling.
Speaking during the party's weekly press briefing at its headquarters in Najjanankumbi on Monday, FDC Party President Patrick Oboi Amuriat said the party's engagement before Parliament's joint committees on Defence and Internal Affairs, and Legal and Parliamentary Affairs revealed overwhelming public opposition to the Bill.
"We were pleased by Ugandans who came in large numbers to oppose this bill. Almost everyone who appeared in the committee had no views different from ours," he said.
Amuriat said recent remarks by President Yoweri Museveni distancing himself from parts of the Bill raise fundamental governance and accountability questions, particularly regarding the origin and integrity of the draft legislation currently before Parliament.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
"Mr. Museveni has now publicly declared that the Bill before Parliament 'is not the Bill he initiated.' If it is true that the Bill that was tabled in Parliament is not what he sanctioned, then this signals a very big problem for which a number of questions can be asked," he said.
"Who distorted the Bill? Who authorised its tabling in its current form? Who in the Attorney General's office, in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, or in Cabinet is responsible for presenting to Parliament and the entire nation with a piece of legislation that its own initiator now disowns?"
Amuriat argued that the President's public distancing from the Bill points to institutional failure within government legal and drafting structures.
"Secondly, the President publicly distancing himself from this Bill is a vote of no confidence in his own Attorney General and all those involved in its drafting and presentation. Any serious and accountable leader would hold those responsible to account in order to avoid any future re-occurrence of such," he added.
He also criticized the communication channels used by the Executive, insisting that such disagreements should follow formal institutional procedures rather than public statements on social media platforms.
"We must also be clear on the process. The Bill was formally tabled before Parliament. Any denial or advice by the President should have taken the established procedures and not done on social media," he said.
Amuriat said the public rejection of the Bill during parliamentary consultations demonstrated the power of civic unity, citing participation from civil society, religious leaders, cultural institutions, economists, legal experts, the diaspora, opposition parties, and ordinary citizens.
"What has happened with this Bill is a demonstration of what Ugandans can achieve when they speak with one voice.
Over 90 percent of those who appeared before Parliament's joint committees rejected it," he said.
He added that the development shows coordinated public pressure can influence governance decisions.
"This government has now been forced to retreat and even denied themselves... When Ugandans speak in unison, even this government cannot hold its ground. This is a virtue that we must carry forward to all aspects of governance of our country," he said.
Amuriat urged Parliament to reject any version of the Bill that threatens constitutional freedoms, warning against what he described as legislative overreach.
"Parliament should listen to the voices of Ugandans and must therefore distance itself from any legislation that interferes with freedom of speech, freedom of association, political participation, or the fundamental rights of Ugandans granted to us by the Constitution," he said.
He further cautioned that Parliament risks being used to pass laws that undermine democratic space.
"Parliament was not established to manufacture tools of oppression that protect the NRM to continue oppressing Ugandans but to create an environment conducive to fair progress of the nation," he said.
Amuriat also expressed concern over reports that parliamentary committees had leaned towards supporting the Bill with amendments proposed by Attorney General Kiryowa Kiwanuka despite earlier opposition during consultations.
"We are now aware that the committees charged with criticizing the bill have overwhelmingly voted in favor of it and now the burden of passing it is left to the entire house. We call upon all Members of Parliament to reject any attempt to pass this Bill in its current form or in any amended form that continues to threaten the rights of Ugandans," he said.
His remarks come as Cabinet moves to finalize harmonization of the Protection of Sovereignty Bill 2026 ahead of its second and third readings in Parliament.
The Bill has sparked intense national debate, with President Museveni maintaining that criticism stems from "misinterpretations" and questioning whether commentators are referring to the version he originally initiated in Cabinet.
Museveni said his proposal was intended to safeguard Uganda's autonomy in political, social, cultural, economic, and diplomatic decision-making, while rejecting claims that it targets foreign direct investment, remittances, or religious funding.
To align the Bill with this intent, he held consultations with Government Chief Whip Denis Hamson Obua and parliamentary leadership, directing refinements to focus on sovereignty in policymaking while protecting private enterprise.
However, the draft legislation tabled by State Minister for Internal Affairs David Muhoozi continues to draw criticism over its broad regulatory scope, including provisions on digital oversight, foreign funding controls, and financial reporting requirements.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
One of the most contentious clauses introduces the offence of "economic sabotage," which critics warn could criminalize legitimate expression, research, and journalism.
The Governor of the Bank of Uganda, Michael Atingi-Ego, has also cautioned that the Bill could trigger capital flight, weaken the shilling, and reduce investor confidence.
Despite proposed amendments exempting certain institutions, critics maintain the framework remains overly broad, while government and ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) officials defend it as necessary to guard against foreign interference.
Parliamentary sources indicate that a majority of joint committee members have agreed to support the Bill with amendments, following deliberations at Munyonyo Commonwealth Resort.
However, the process has been marked by tension, including reports of procedural disputes and a brief scuffle during discussions.
One committee member described the proceedings as strained:
"We still had a lot we wanted to change, but even getting a chance to speak became a tug of war."
Government Chief Whip Obua has expressed optimism that a revised version of the Bill will soon be presented, stating it is intended to curb what officials describe as external influence on Uganda's governance and political affairs.
