Buganda Kingdom has petitioned the Attorney General, Kiryowa Kiwanuka, seeking review of several clauses in the proposed Protection of Sovereignty Bill, 2026.
Buganda kingdom Attorney General Christopher Bwanika, says the Bill contains provisions that could negatively affect Buganda and Ugandans at large.
Speaking to journalists this afternoon at Bulange Mengo, Bwanika cited at least 5 problematic clauses.
Key concerns include; the vague definition of “foreigner or foreign agent”, Clause 7 of the bill criminalizes interfering with national security” without specifying how, Clause 13 mentions economic sabotage” but lacks clarity on what actions constitute sabotage.
The Mengo establishment also opposes Clause 21 of the Bill that compels recipients to disclose who sent them money, which infringes on privacy. Clause 25 grants the Minister Powers to block banks from releasing large sums to organizations, noting that this could cripple development related projects in the various sectors.
Owekitiibwa Bwanika however tells his central government counterpart Kiwanuka that Mengo’s
objection is not political, but rather a constitutional duty under Article 246 of the Constitution on Traditional Rulers.
Relatedly, Payment System Service Providers have also voiced their objection to the Protection of National Sovereignty Bill, 2026, warning it will cripple their operations and directly harm the wider economy.
Led by association Vice President, Ronald Azairwe, the group, comprising MTN Mobile Money, Airtel Commerce and others asked the Joint Committee of parliament that is receiving views on the Bill to exempt them from the same.
Azairwe, who also heads Pegasus Technologies, says the sector is already regulated under the National Payment Systems Act, 2020 and supervised by the Bank of Uganda.
‘’We would see almost the closure of operations as we know them. It would be completely disastrous, So number one, we seek exemption.
However, in the event, and hopefully the unlikely event, that we are not granted exemption, we therefore give recommendations that still seek to sanitize some of the clauses that impact us most negatively. So really we seek two things, In the best form, a complete exemption.
In the worst form, those clauses are amended to lessen, and probably may not altogether remove, but lessen the extent of the impact on our operations,’’ he concluded.
