A high-stakes parliamentary vote is expected today as Uganda’s lawmakers decide the fate of the controversial Sovereignty Bill, 2026, a proposed law that has triggered sharp divisions across government institutions, the private sector, cultural leadership, and civil society.
According to the Daily Monitor report published on Tuesday, May 5, Members of Parliament are set to vote on the Bill amid growing concerns that it could reshape Uganda’s governance, economic stability, and international relations.
The legislation, which government argues is aimed at protecting national sovereignty, has instead been described by critics as potentially harmful and overly restrictive.
Economic warning from central bank
Bank of Uganda Governor has raised alarm over the possible economic consequences, warning that weakening international confidence could destabilise the country’s financial position.
“A country without reserves is not sovereign,” the Governor stated, noting that Uganda’s balance of payments had remained dependent on steady inflows.
He explained that last financial year, the country recorded a surplus of about $1.5 billion, while current foreign reserves stand at nearly $6 billion, supported by continued external inflows.
His concern, he said, is that the proposed restrictions under the Bill could discourage investment and disrupt financial stability.
“The potential of this Bill to destabilise Uganda’s balance of payments is our primary concern as a central bank,” he added.
Cultural institutions warn of economic fallout
The Baganda Kingdom has also weighed in, cautioning that the Bill could have long-term economic consequences that outweigh its intended protections.
“The damage likely to be caused by the ripple effect of this legislation may outstrip the benefits of concerns sought to be protected,” the Kingdom noted. It warned that the law could undermine investor confidence, increase the cost of doing business, and lower Uganda’s global investment rating.
The Kingdom further argued that rather than strengthening sovereignty, the Bill could expose the country to economic risks that may affect ordinary citizens.
Legal fraternity raises constitutional concerns
The Uganda Law Society has taken a more direct stance, rejecting the Bill in its current form and branding it unconstitutional.
“We are renaming this Bill what it really is: the Anti-Sovereignty Bill,” the Law Society stated. It argued that the legislation undermines the constitutional principle of self-determination by concentrating excessive power in the Executive.
According to the legal body, the Bill risks eroding democratic governance structures and weakening institutional independence, warning that it could alter the balance of power established under Uganda’s Constitution.
World Bank flags operational risks
International financial institutions have also expressed concern. The World Bank warned that the classification of international organisations as “foreigners” without clear distinction could impose heavy compliance burdens.
“By classifying international organisations as foreigners without qualification, the Bill subjects them to registration requirements, financial reporting obligations, and criminal penalties,” the institution noted.
It cautioned that such measures could disrupt development partnerships and slow down ongoing support programmes in Uganda.
Civil society calls for withdrawal
Civil society organisations have been among the most vocal opponents, describing the Bill as unnecessary and harmful to vulnerable populations.
“The Bill as drafted is unconstitutional, disproportionate, and unnecessary,” the groups said in a joint statement. They argued that it duplicates existing legal frameworks while introducing contradictions that could restrict civic space.
They further warned that the Bill poses an “existential threat” to civil society operations and called for its full withdrawal, urging Parliament to reconsider its approach to regulating sovereignty-related matters.
MPs under pressure ahead of vote
As Parliament prepares for the decisive vote, attention now turns to how MPs will respond to mounting pressure from both government-aligned voices and critical stakeholders.
The outcome is expected to have far-reaching implications not only for Uganda’s political landscape but also for its economic trajectory and relations with development partners.