President Yoweri Museveni has issued a stern warning against what he calls “hooliganism” and “bad language” in Uganda’s political arena. The remarks came after high-level meetings with the UPDF High Command and Defence Forces Council at State House Entebbe, where the long-serving leader stressed the need for what he termed “disciplined democracy.” His statements have sparked mixed reactions, with supporters praising his call for civility while critics see it as another attempt to stifle opposition voices.

Speaking in his usual firm tone, Museveni declared that the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) stands for order and respect in politics. “We advocate for disciplined democracy, not hooliganism or bad language,” he said. “We want Ugandans to decide what they want without intimidation.” He went further, condemning politicians who use fear tactics to influence citizens, calling such behavior “un-African.” His words carried a clear warning: “Politicians engaging in practices that intimidate citizens must stop! The security agencies have discussed this issue, and it will come to an end.”

The president also took aim at the language used by political leaders, urging them to communicate with respect. “You must speak well in public; do not resort to negative speech,” he said. While Museveni framed his message as a push for decency and national values, many opposition figures and activists see it differently. Some believe his comments are a thinly veiled threat to further restrict free speech and crack down on dissent.

A prominent opposition politician, who spoke anonymously for fear of retaliation, called the president’s remarks a classic authoritarian tactic. “Museveni is trying to control not just actions but even words,” the politician said. “He wants to dictate how political debates should sound, effectively silencing anyone who challenges him.” The mention of security agencies in Museveni’s statement has raised alarms, with human rights defenders warning that it could signal a new wave of repression.

A representative from a Kampala-based civil liberties group expressed deep concern. “When the president says ‘this will come to an end’ and involves security forces, it’s not just talk—it’s a chilling message,” they said. Over the years, opposition gatherings have frequently been broken up by police and military personnel, often under the justification of maintaining public order. Activists and critics have faced arrests, prosecutions, and even violence, with authorities accusing them of inciting unrest.

Analysts point out that terms like “hooliganism” and “bad language” are vague and open to interpretation, making them convenient tools for suppressing political opponents. What one person considers strong criticism, another might label as unacceptable speech. This ambiguity gives the government broad power to target those who speak out against it.

Museveni also used the meeting to address Uganda’s youth, urging them to embrace the NRM’s ideology and the concept of “uzalendo,” or patriotism. “The challenge for young people is to understand what the pioneers started and to carry that legacy forward,” he said. “They should work for the betterment of the country.” However, his appeal has been met with skepticism, particularly among younger Ugandans who feel disconnected from the ruling party’s decades-long dominance.

A political science lecturer at Makerere University argued that Museveni’s message to the youth is less about patriotism and more about control. “He is trying to indoctrinate young people with NRM ideology and suppress independent thought,” the lecturer said. “This is a long-term strategy to shape future generations into obedient citizens who equate loyalty to the country with loyalty to the ruling party.”

Supporters of the president, however, insist that his call for respectful politics is genuine. They argue that Uganda needs to move away from divisive and insult-driven debates, fostering instead a culture of constructive dialogue. Some believe that Museveni’s emphasis on discipline and order is necessary for stability in a country that has seen its share of political turmoil.

Yet opponents counter that the president’s own record undermines his claims of promoting tolerance. Over his nearly four decades in power, Museveni’s government has often been accused of suppressing opposition, limiting press freedom, and using security forces to quash dissent. Many argue that his latest statements are less about protecting democracy and more about tightening his grip on power.

As Uganda enters another politically tense period, Museveni’s words—and the involvement of the military in enforcing them—have cast a shadow over the future of free expression in the country. Will his push for “disciplined democracy” lead to a more respectful political climate, or will it further shrink the space for opposition voices? The answer may depend on how the government chooses to interpret—and enforce—its own warnings against “hooliganism” and “bad language.”

For now, the debate continues, with some Ugandans hopeful for a more civil political discourse and others fearing that the president’s latest stance is simply another step toward silencing his critics. One thing is certain: in a nation where politics has long been a battleground of words and actions, the fight over who gets to speak—and how—is far from over.