The debate over dual citizenship among some of President Museveni’s Cabinet nominees has taken a political turn, with strategist Egesa Ronald accusing the Appointments Committee of Parliament of weakening public trust in leadership vetting.
The issue involves four nominees whose oath-taking was delayed after concerns were raised about their citizenship status, a matter that remains restricted under Uganda’s leadership eligibility.
The affected nominees include Adonia Ayebare, nominated for Foreign Affairs Minister, and Shartsi Musherure, nominated for State Minister for Microfinance, both reported to hold Ugandan and United States citizenship. Calvin Echodu, nominated for State Minister for Foreign Affairs (International Affairs), is also under scrutiny over documentation linked to foreign travel records.
Dr Lawrence Muganga, nominated for State Minister for Internal Affairs, was rejected by the Appointments Committee over contested claims involving multiple citizenship.
Speaking during an appearance on NBS Television, Egesa said the matter goes beyond administrative procedure, pointing to questions of integrity among the nominees.
He said:
“The three gentlemen and a woman caught in the dual citizenship debate have an integrity deficit.”
Egesa further criticized Parliament’s vetting process, arguing that the Appointments Committee failed to properly apply the law on citizenship requirements for public office.
He said:
“The Appointments Committee of Parliament further lowered the standing of Parliament in the eyes of ordinary Ugandans by failing to comply with a straightforward issue of the law.”
The remarks come as government institutions continue to assess the status of the affected nominees following reports from immigration authorities and parliamentary committees.
The matter has already delayed their swearing-in, with further legal and administrative reviews expected before final clearance is granted.
The Appointments Committee had previously flagged concerns over Dr Muganga’s eligibility, citing unresolved issues related to citizenship claims, while other nominees were also subjected to verification after inconsistencies emerged in official records.
The controversy has placed Parliament’s vetting process under renewed scrutiny, with critics questioning whether constitutional requirements are being applied consistently in approving senior government officials.