The ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) Caucus has thrown its weight behind a proposal that will see civilians accused of illegally possessing specific firearms tried before the Military Court Martial in the first instance.
This decision which follows a caucus meeting at State House Entebbe was announced by Government Chief Whip and NRM Parliamentary Caucus Chairperson Hamson Obua.
The development comes in response to the January 2025 Supreme Court ruling that barred the trial of civilians in military courts a landmark decision that was hailed by legal experts and human rights activists.
However, with the proposed amendments to the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) Act, the government appears to be seeking a workaround to keep certain civilians within the military justice system.
The statement released by Obua outlines three major principles that will guide the amendments that include;
Misconduct by serving military personnel will be tried by the Military Court Martial with the right of appeal through civilian courts.
Civilians who illegally acquire specified firearms will also face trial before the Military Court Martial but with an option to appeal through the civilian judiciary.
A provision will be made to ensure that appeals from Court Martial decisions can be taken to civilian courts.
While the government insists this amendment respects judicial oversight by allowing appeals in civilian courts, opposition argue that it undermines the Supreme Court’s ruling and risks violating fundamental rights.
The Supreme Court’s decision to block the trial of civilians in military courts was seen as a victory for judicial independence and human rights. Many legal minds argue that military courts are designed for discipline within the armed forces not for trying ordinary citizens.
“Military courts operate under different rules and standards,” says human rights lawyer Nicholas Opiyo. “Subjecting civilians to this system even with a right of appeal creates an uneven playing field where the accused may not receive the same protections as they would in a civilian court.”
With Uganda heading towards the 2026 general elections, opposition sees this move as another tool for state repression. Firearms possession charges have often been used to silence political protests, including opposition figures such as Dr. Kizza Besigye and National Unity Platform (NUP) leader Robert Kyagulanyi who have faced similar accusations in the past.
“This is nothing but an attempt to bypass the Supreme Court ruling and keep the military’s grip on Uganda’s judicial process,” says opposition MP Joel Ssenyonyi. “We have seen this before, and we know where it leads.”
Supporters of the amendment argue that it is a necessary measure to combat illegal arms possession and enhance national security. With rising concerns about armed criminality and insurgency threats, some MPs believe a tougher stance is required.
However, human rights activists see it differently. “The problem is not just about illegal firearms,” says Dr. Stella Nyanzi, a prominent government critic. “It’s about expanding the military’s role in civilian affairs and that is a dangerous precedent.”
The proposed amendments will be tabled before Parliament for debate. While the NRM Caucus has endorsed the changes, opposition MPs and civil society groups are expected to mount a fierce resistance.
