What was once celebrated as a beacon of democratic rebirth is now being dissected as a framework that has suffered “capture, fear, and political compromise.”
Speaking during a national dialogue on constitutionalism, veteran jurist Justice James Ogoola described Uganda’s journey as one of “constitutional interruption and survival,” noting a troubling gap between the country’s independence in 1962 and the coming into force of the current Constitution in 1995.
“There is a discrepancy a disconnect between the birthday of our country and the birthday of her Constitution,” Ogoola said.
“In that 33-year gap lies the DNA of assassinations, revolutions, and institutional decay. We must ask: how did Uganda survive so long without a guiding constitutional soul?”
He called for a “constitutional audit,” an honest assessment of how the judiciary, legislature, executive, and the citizens themselves have upheld or betrayed the spirit of the Constitution over the past three decades.
Another speaker, a veteran constitutional scholar and former delegate to the Constituent Assembly, was more scathing about Parliament’s performance.
“The principle of checks and balances has collapsed. Parliament is supposed to be a watchdog, but instead it has become a lapdog,” he remarked. “Members of the ruling party treat every presidential proposal as sacred scripture.”
He argued that the decentralisation policy—once designed to empower local governments—has been distorted beyond recognition. “We started with 35 local governments, each meant to strengthen democracy and accountability. Now we have over 140 districts, many of them broke and dependent. This is not decentralisation; it is political multiplication for patronage.”
Justice Ogoola also reflected on the judiciary’s mixed record, recalling controversial rulings such as the 2006 presidential election petition, where the Supreme Court admitted there were massive electoral irregularities but still upheld the election results.
“That judgment left a fog drifting in the night,” he said. “Courage and clarity must guide judicial decisions, not ambiguity.”
Several civil society leaders lamented what they called the “capture of institutions and the capture of citizens by fear.” One activist said bluntly, “Ugandans are afraid—afraid for their jobs, their safety, even their voices. That’s how constitutionalism dies quietly.”
Speakers also decried widening inequality, corruption, and human rights violations as evidence of a Constitution betrayed. “The Constitution was built on the dream of dignity and equality,” one participant noted.
“Yet today, the gap between the rich and the poor has become a moral scandal. The powerful fly abroad for medical care while the poor die in silence.”
As the dialogue closed, the consensus was clear: Uganda’s 1995 Constitution remains a landmark achievement—but one increasingly undermined by political manipulation and public apathy.