Ssemakadde has raised legal and constitutional concerns over a reported presidential directive seeking verification of the citizenship status of recently appointed Cabinet nominees, arguing that the matter must strictly follow constitutional procedure and due process.
Ssemakadde said the issue touches on key provisions of Uganda’s constitutional and statutory framework governing eligibility for public office.
“At first glance, this memo raises several immediate legal and constitutional questions under Uganda’s Citizenship and Immigration Control Act and the 1995 Constitution (as amended),” he stated.
He noted that while the President has authority to ensure that appointees meet legal requirements, the verification process must be anchored in the Constitution.
“The President has a legitimate interest in ensuring that cabinet members meet constitutional requirements. Article 99(4) of the Constitution and Section 10 of the Leadership Code Act require public officers especially ministers to be Ugandan citizens. Dual citizenship is prohibited for certain high offices unless expressly allowed by law (which it generally isn’t for ministers),” Ssemakadde said.
On procedure, he stressed that any inquiry must observe fairness and allow those affected to respond before conclusions are reached.
“The directive to the Director of Citizenship and Immigration Control is fine as an administrative inquiry, but the named individuals should be given a right to respond before any adverse finding is made or acted upon,” he added.
Ssemakadde also pointed to what he described as a possible institutional gap in vetting processes, noting that the same appointing authority is now seeking to verify eligibility after appointments were made.
“The President personally appointed these persons. If any lacks sole Ugandan citizenship, it may raise questions about vetting processes before appointment which could suggest procedural lapses in the State House Appointments Secretariat,” he said.
He further questioned the short timeline reportedly given for verification.
“The 4-day deadline (from 28 May to 1 June 2026) is extremely tight. It risks incomplete verification, especially for bases of acquisition (naturalisation, registration, birth abroad, marriage, etc.), which may require diplomatic liaison,” he noted.
Ssemakadde recommended that the immigration authority be given more time to complete a proper review.
“The Director should request a short extension say, 7 working days to allow due diligence, including Oath of Allegiance records, passport issuance logs, and correspondence with foreign embassies where needed,” he said.
He concluded that if any appointees are found to hold dual citizenship contrary to legal requirements, constitutional mechanisms must be followed.
“Ultimately, if dual citizenship is found, the President should be prepared to invoke Article 113(1) on removal or reassignment, or seek a court interpretation where the facts are contested. The principle of legality must prevail over political convenience,” Ssemakadde stated.