Human rights activist and lawyer Sarah Bireete has raised fresh constitutional questions over the appointment of Uganda’s ambassador to the United Nations, Adonia Ayebare, following reports linking him to dual citizenship while in active diplomatic service.
In a statement reacting to the ongoing debate on ministerial appointments and citizenship verification, Bireete questioned whether Ayebare’s reported acquisition of United States citizenship complied with diplomatic obligations that require undivided loyalty to the state represented abroad.
“Active diplomats are not supposed to acquire dual citizenship in countries where they are accredited. Did my friend Amb Adonia Ayebare acquire dual citizenship while in active diplomatic service?” she posed.
S
he further questioned how a senior diplomat could simultaneously manage competing legal and political obligations tied to two nationalities while representing Uganda at the highest international level.
“How did he represent Uganda’s sovereignty with an inherent conflict of allegiance? How did he maintain the required neutrality for diplomatic work?” she added.
Ayebare, who was recently nominated as Minister of Foreign Affairs, was among several appointees flagged in parliamentary vetting over citizenship concerns.
Immigration records presented to Parliament indicate that he holds both Ugandan and United States citizenship, reportedly acquired in April 2025 while still in diplomatic service.
The citizenship issue has already affected the swearing-in of four ministerial nominees who were not administered the oath at State House Entebbe, pending legal verification of their eligibility.
The group includes officials linked to foreign affairs and internal security portfolios.
Bireete’s remarks add to a growing legal and political debate over whether holders of dual citizenship can occupy senior executive offices under Uganda’s constitutional framework, which restricts such positions to sole citizens.
She framed the matter as both a legal and ethical concern, arguing that diplomatic service demands strict adherence to neutrality and unquestioned allegiance to national interests.
The controversy continues to fuel scrutiny in Parliament, where committees are reviewing whether the affected nominees complied fully with renunciation requirements before assuming office.