Controversy surrounding dual citizenship has continued to shadow Uganda’s newly appointed Cabinet, even as activist Anthony Natif insists the debate is distracting from what he describes as a stronger question of competence and national service.
His remarks come as Parliament continues to scrutinise ministerial nominees, with some facing questions over dual citizenship status and eligibility under Uganda’s Citizenship and Immigration Control framework, which restricts dual nationals from holding certain senior public offices, including Cabinet positions.
Among those affected is Adonia Ayebare, who was among four minister-designates who did not take the oath during the recent Cabinet swearing-in ceremony at State House Entebbe.
Reports indicate that he holds both Ugandan and United States citizenship, and that administrative steps tied to renunciation of foreign nationality are still being clarified before his appointment proceeds.
Despite the legal uncertainty, Natif has strongly defended Ayebare’s suitability for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, framing him as a significant upgrade in diplomatic leadership.
“Controversy over dual citizenship aside, it’s nearly impossible to find a single Ugandan who thinks that Adonia Ayebare for Jeje Odongo is not a huge upgrade at the Foreign Affairs Ministry,” Natif said.
He also extended similar praise to Shartsi Kutesa Musherure, who has been linked to the Micro-Finance docket, arguing that both nominees reflect a rare blend of experience and administrative capability.
“Ditto Shartsi ‘Namatovu’ Musherure for Haruna Kasolo at Micro-Finance,” he added.
Natif dismissed concerns that dual citizenship could compromise loyalty, arguing that such claims are politically overstated and disconnected from reality.
“What’s also very difficult to understand is the talk that Mr Ayebare, whose family has more than 600 years of history in Uganda, and Shartsi—well, she’s Shartsi, whose work with the ‘muntu wa wansi’ in Mawogola speaks for itself—will somehow owe greater allegiance to the US over Uganda,” he said.
He questioned whether such suspicions had any grounding in public perception.
“Is there anyone who believes that?” he posed.
The activist further argued that global citizenship should be viewed as an asset rather than a liability, especially in a rapidly globalising economy where diplomatic and economic networks are critical.
“Perhaps it’s time we started looking at global citizenship as an asset that helps us anchor our motherland’s interests in other markets instead of using it as a stick to beat potentially impactful leaders,” Natif noted.
He added that Uganda is currently at what he described as a decisive moment requiring experienced leadership, warning that the country cannot afford to lose capable individuals over technical legal interpretations.
“Uganda is at a serious inflection point where great, experienced leadership talent is much needed and frankly rare,” he said.
According to Natif, the broader issue now facing policymakers is the balance between strict legal interpretation and practical governance needs.
“Of the President’s appointees in this new cabinet, these two are widely to be considered to be among his best picks; and this view is largely held across political divides,” he said.
He concluded by challenging lawmakers to reflect on the relationship between law and public interest as the vetting process continues.
“With the foregoing in mind, might this be the time to ask the question: is the law made for man or man for the law?” he asked.
The activist suggested that Parliament may soon be forced to confront the question directly as scrutiny of Cabinet nominees intensifies, with the 12th Parliament expected to play a decisive role in shaping the final composition of the executive.