Uganda’s President Approves New Law Allowing Civilians to Face Military Courts

President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda has approved a new amendment making it possible once again for civilians to face trials in military courts under specified conditions.

Earlier this year, the Supreme Court had struck down a similar provision, declaring it unconstitutional.

Before the court’s decision, civilians caught with military gear such as firearms or army clothing were sent to military tribunals. Critics said the law had been exploited to intimidate and silence opponents of the government.

The latest amendment was passed last month during a tense parliamentary session, marked by heavy security deployment. Opposition lawmakers chose to stay away, arguing that the bill disregarded the country’s top court’s verdict.

Judges in January ruled that military courts lacked the neutrality and competence necessary to perform legal duties, and this concern was publicly noted by rights organizations at the time.

In response, the newly signed law tries to address some of these shortcomings.

It specifies that tribunal judges must possess proper legal credentials and relevant training. It also insists on their independence and impartiality while carrying out their judicial responsibilities.

Still, civilians found in possession of military-related equipment could be handed over to such courts.

“The law will deal decisively with armed violent criminals, deter the formation of militant political groups that seek to subvert democratic processes, and ensure national security is bound on a firm foundational base. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!,” army spokesperson Col Chris Magezi wrote on X after the bill was passed by MPs.

Opposition figure Bobi Wine voiced his concern, claiming the law is aimed at suppressing him and his allies.

“All of us in the opposition are being targeted by the act,” he said.

The Uganda Law Society, representing the nation’s legal professionals, announced plans to “challenge the constitutionality” of this new law.

For a long time, human rights advocates have argued that military courts were used to crack down on dissent, alleging that government critics were often framed with planted evidence.

“If you are a political opponent then they will find a way of getting you under the military court and then you know your fate is sealed… once there, justice will never visit your door,” human rights lawyer Gawaya Tegulle commented in February.

He further explained that suspects could remain in indefinite pre-trial detention, awaiting decisions from top military officers — delays that could stretch into years — and those who were eventually convicted faced punishments harsher than those handed down by regular courts.

A notable case was the arrest in November of veteran opposition leader Kizza Besigye. He was detained in Kenya, transported back to Uganda, and charged in a military court with illegal possession of firearms and attempting to acquire weapons outside the country — charges he denied.

Later, after the Supreme Court ruling, these charges were withdrawn, and his case was shifted to a civilian court with fresh accusations.

Museveni, in reaction to the Supreme Court’s decision, called the ruling “the wrong decision” and remarked that “the country is not governed by the judges. It is governed by the people.”

He has also argued in the past that military courts are necessary because they swiftly address “rampant activities of criminals and terrorists that were using guns to kill people indiscriminately”.

He noted that civilian courts were overburdened and unable to “handle these gun-wielding criminals quickly”.