A storm of criticism is gathering over what many political and civil society actors are calling an unprocedural rush by Parliament to process two major bills: the Political Parties and Organisations (Amendment) Bill and the Uganda People's Defence Forces (UPDF) Amendment Bill, 2025.
In a move that caught many stakeholders off guard, both bills were tabled for first reading and sent to relevant committees within less than 24 hours, sparking fears that Parliament is sacrificing transparency and constitutional process for political expediency.
Sarah Birete, Executive Director of the Center for Constitutional Governance, was among the first to raise the alarm. Speaking to Nile Post, she said she was stunned to see an advert from the Clerk to Parliament calling for public submissions on a bill that had not yet been formally presented on the floor of Parliament.
“I saw the Clerk to Parliament advertising in papers, informing stakeholders that they had only one day to submit views on a bill that had not even been read on the floor of Parliament. That was wrong and unconstitutional,” Birete said.
She condemned the short window for public input, saying such practices undermine citizens’ right to meaningful participation in governance.
“You cannot give views on a bill that is not yet public. But also, one day isn’t enough to provide detailed and well-researched views for a bill that is going to shape the democratic process in the country,” she added.
Leader of Opposition Joel Ssenyonyi voiced similar frustration, questioning the motives behind the speed.
“If you are doing the right thing, why the rush? What is burning?” he asked, implying that the rush could mask ulterior political motives or obscure critical provisions in the proposed amendments.
City lawyer Isaac Atukunda also weighed in, reminding lawmakers of the constitutional requirement for public participation in legislative processes.
“The bill must have public input. The public must accept the bill,” Atukunda said, adding that even when urgency exists, it cannot justify circumventing established procedures.
While the government has not issued a formal explanation for the accelerated process, ruling NRM party Secretary General Richard Todwong offered a possible rationale, attributing the haste to the limited time before the next general election.
“They have a few months to the end of the term. They have to pass some bills before the elections, given that we are about three or four months to the election,” Todwong said.
However, critics argue that looming elections should not come at the expense of legal integrity and inclusive lawmaking. Atukunda acknowledged that urgency can justify fast-tracking laws, but warned against abusing that leeway.
“Any law can be fast-tracked depending on urgency. However, this doesn’t justify skipping the due process. If due process is not followed, the resultant laws are vulnerable to legal challenges and can be nullified,” he cautioned.
With Uganda's political climate becoming increasingly charged ahead of the 2026 general elections, the handling of these bills may set a critical precedent for how Parliament navigates contentious legislation in the months to come.
For civil society, the concern is clear: haste must not override constitutionalism.