Mityana County South Member of Parliament Richard Lumu, has defended his controversial Administration of Parliament (Amendment) Bill, 2024, saying the proposal is aimed at strengthening democratic participation within the opposition in Parliament.
Speaking during NBS Barometer on Tuesday, Lumu pushed back against criticism from fellow opposition leaders, arguing that popularity does not determine whether a legislative proposal is correct.
“It is not true that the majority are always right. The minority can be right, and the majority can be wrong. That is why I believe my bill is right,” he said.
Lumu also criticized the current structure of opposition leadership in Parliament.
“The Leader of the Opposition we have now is more of a leader of the minority. We need a Leader of the Opposition who is elected by all opposition parties in Parliament,” he said.
Lumu further defended introducing a proposal that has faced strong resistance, pointing to historical precedent. He argued that Former Prime Minister the late Benedicto Kiwanuka had once introduced reforms that were unpopular at the time but later became historically significant.
“Benedicto Kiwanuka introduced proposals that many people disliked at the time, yet today he is still remembered and studied in history,” he said.
Lumu’s remarks come as Parliament prepares for a high-stakes showdown this coming Thursday, March 12, 2026 when the Administration of Parliament (Amendment) Bill, 2024 is expected to proceed to its third and final reading.
The private member’s bill has triggered intense debate and a wave of criticism from the very opposition groups it claims to reform.
While supporters argue that the legislation seeks to democratise internal leadership structures within the opposition, critics claim it is a carefully engineered intervention that could weaken the political influence of the National Unity Platform (NUP) in Parliament.
At the centre of the bill is a fundamental shift in how opposition leadership positions are determined.
Under the current system, the largest opposition party in Parliament appoints the Leader of the Opposition (LoP).
However, Lumu’s proposal would replace that arrangement with an elective model, in which all opposition Members of Parliament vote to elect the Leader of the Opposition.
Supporters argue that this system would promote inclusivity and ensure that smaller parties and independent MPs have a stronger voice in determining opposition leadership.
Opponents, however, fear the change could dilute the authority of the largest opposition party and fragment coordination within opposition ranks.
The bill has also drawn support from the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) caucus, a development that has further heightened suspicion among opposition leaders.
NRM Caucus Spokesperson Brandon Kintu defended the proposed amendments, arguing that the reforms would strengthen cohesion within the opposition rather than weaken it.
According to Kintu, Lumu’s initiative is intended to “strengthen and build harmony within the opposition in Parliament.”
Kintu also said the bill would simplify the role of the Leader of the Opposition, noting that the office currently carries extensive responsibilities.
Kintu further argued that the proposed changes could promote fairness in the allocation of parliamentary resources among opposition parties, ensuring that smaller political formations and independent legislators are not sidelined.
Despite these assurances, the bill has been strongly rejected by leaders from several opposition parties, including the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) and the Alliance for National Transformation (ANT).
Several opposition legislators have described the bill as being drafted in bad faith, warning that it could weaken the opposition’s ability to coordinate strategy and effectively hold the government accountable.
Some lawmakers have also raised concerns about “preferential treatment” in how the bill is being handled.
Among them is Alion Yorke Odria, the Member of Parliament for Aringa North, who questioned why Lumu’s proposal appears to be moving swiftly through Parliament while other similar proposals submitted earlier have stalled.
Responding to the criticism, Kintu urged stakeholders to carefully examine the contents of the bill rather than speculate about its intentions.
Kintu also acknowledged that if lawmakers determine the legislative process is being rushed, or if the amendments could produce unintended consequences, additional consultations and benchmarking with other parliamentary systems may be necessary.
As the March 12 deadline approaches, the debate surrounding the Administration of Parliament (Amendment) Bill, 2024 has evolved into a broader political question about how opposition leadership should be structured within Uganda’s parliamentary system.
While supporters believe the reforms could increase inclusivity and participation among opposition MPs, critics fear they could fracture opposition unity and weaken its ability to effectively challenge the government.
With Parliament preparing for a decisive vote, the outcome of the bill’s final reading is expected to carry significant implications for the future structure and cohesion of Uganda’s opposition politics.
