A move to summon the Commander of the Defence Forces, Gen Muhoozi Kainerugaba, before a parliamentary committee reviewing the Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces (UPDF) Amendment Bill 2025 has failed after most lawmakers voted against it. The motion, introduced by Mukono Municipality MP Betty Nambooze, caused heated debate during a joint session of the Legal and Defence Committees. While Nambooze and a few others argued that Gen Muhoozi’s input was crucial, the majority of MPs disagreed, leading to the motion’s collapse.

The debate began when Nambooze insisted that Gen Muhoozi, as the head of the army, should appear before the committee to share his views on the proposed changes to the UPDF law. She emphasized that since he would be responsible for implementing the law, his direct input was necessary. Makindye West MP Derick Nyeko supported her argument, stating that involving the CDF would ensure the bill is practical and effective. However, their push faced strong resistance from other committee members.

Several MPs questioned whether summoning the CDF was the right approach, especially without first consulting President Museveni, who is the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. They argued that bypassing the President in such a matter could set a wrong precedent. Others raised procedural concerns, stating that if the CDF’s opinion was needed, only the Defence Committee—not the joint committee—should handle the invitation. The disagreement highlighted tensions over how much influence the military should have in shaping laws that govern it.

After lengthy discussions, the committee took a vote, and the majority rejected the motion. This decision effectively ended the attempt to formally invite Gen Muhoozi to speak before the lawmakers. The outcome reflects broader challenges in balancing military expertise with legislative oversight, particularly in matters involving national security.

The UPDF Amendment Bill 2025 is currently under review by the joint committee, and its progress is being closely watched. The bill proposes changes to the existing UPDF Act, though the specific details of the amendments have not been made fully public. Observers note that the discussions around the bill have raised important questions about the relationship between Uganda’s civilian leadership and the military. Some analysts argue that while military input is valuable in defence-related legislation, the final decisions should remain firmly under parliamentary control to maintain democratic accountability.

The failed motion also sheds light on the dynamics within Parliament, where differing opinions on military involvement in legislation continue to surface. While some lawmakers believe that direct engagement with top military officials leads to better-informed laws, others fear that excessive military influence could undermine civilian oversight. This tension is not new, but the debate over the UPDF bill has brought it back into sharp focus.

As the joint committee continues its work, the public will be watching to see how the proposed amendments evolve and whether further attempts will be made to involve military leaders in the discussions. For now, the rejection of the motion to summon Gen Muhoozi signals that most MPs are cautious about directly involving the army’s top leadership in the legislative process. The committee is expected to proceed with its review, gathering input from other stakeholders before presenting its final recommendations to Parliament.

The broader implications of this decision touch on the delicate balance between national security and democratic governance. In many countries, the military operates under strict civilian control, with laws governing its functions being shaped primarily by elected representatives. Uganda’s Parliament appears to be navigating this balance carefully, weighing the need for expert military advice against the principle of civilian oversight.

The UPDF Amendment Bill 2025 is likely to remain a topic of debate as it moves through the legislative stages. The discussions so far suggest that lawmakers are deeply divided on how best to approach defence reforms. While some advocate for more military involvement in shaping the laws that affect them, others insist that Parliament must retain full control over such matters. The rejection of the motion to summon Gen Muhoozi indicates that, for now, the latter view holds more sway among the majority of MPs.

As the process continues, observers will be keen to see whether new compromises emerge or if the disagreements deepen. The bill’s eventual form will have significant implications for Uganda’s defence policies and the relationship between the military and civilian authorities. For now, the committee’s work goes on, with the hope that the final version of the bill will strike the right balance between operational effectiveness and democratic accountability.

The outcome of this debate may also influence future discussions on military-related legislation, setting a precedent for how such matters are handled in Parliament. While Gen Muhoozi will not be appearing before the committee, the questions raised during this debate are likely to linger, shaping how lawmakers engage with defence issues in the years to come. The UPDF Amendment Bill 2025 is more than just a legal text—it is a test of how Uganda navigates the complex interplay between security and governance.