Defence Minister To Table UPDF Amendment Bill Before Parliament

The UPDF (Amendment) Bill, 2025 will be tabled in the Ugandan parliament today  by the Defence and Veteran Affairs, Oboth Oboth. 

The Bill has been listed on the order paper for the 3st meeting of the session of parliament's sitting on Tuesday 13th May. The Parliamet has not been sitting for couple of weeks since the speaker adjourned the House.

The 143-pages long bill according to human rights lawyers, Nicholas Opiyo if passed in the current form will largely overhaul of the UPDF Act.     

The Bill which was published in the government gazzeted on 2nd May 2025 is in response to the recent Supreme Court orders on trial of civilians in the General Court Martial. 

The Supreme Court ruling was made in response to an appeal by the AG, challenging the 2021 decision of the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Court had declared Sections 2, 119, and 179 of the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) Act unconstitutional.

The Uganda People’s Defence Forces (Amendment) Bill 2025 seeks to amend the UPDF ACT 330 to streamline the structures and composition of the defence forces, establish a medical board and to provide for the definition of a service offence, court martial, military court, reserve force, and provide for restructuring and re-establishment of court martial in the Defence Force.           

Some in legal practitioners have indicated to URN that same of these objectives are part of the sugar-coating in the bill to enable it sail through Parliament without opposition from the ruling NRM who are uncomfortable with the attempts to return the trail of civilians in the military courts.                

The NRM parliamentary caucus met President Museveni after the court’s ruling. They agreed to support the Bill when tabled before Parliament.           

Nicholas Opiyo, who has read through the Bill says uses the language of the Supreme Court in respect of trials of civilians - permits it only in ‘exceptional circumstances.’

    He says the Bill does not define by what is meant by exceptional circumstances, leaving it to be inferred from the grounds upon which a civilian or non-service person can be trial by the military courts.

“The question that arise is what is exceptional about the circumstances described above to bring one within the jurisdiction of military law. Save for military equipment, the rest seems pretty ordinary to warrant them to be termed exceptional circumstances,” reads part of the analysis said Opio wrote on his social media page.

  He says clause 30, the bill introduces a new section -117A - to encompass other persons subject to military law.

  “The second question is whether these comply with the ruling of the court. Essentially, it restated what was in the old law and imported what was in the regulations into the Act. It does not seem like compliance by any stretch of imagination, rather a clever attempt at disguising its disregard of the Supreme court directives and orders” he noted.