Mbarara, Makerere Universities Reject Sovereignty Bill.

By Abraham Lincolns

Kampala

As scrutiny of the proposed sovereignty law intensifies,  Makerere and Mbarara  universities  call  for a more balanced approach that safeguards sovereignty without undermining academic freedom, research collaboration, and institutional autonomy.

Mbarara University of Science and Technology (MUST)  formally joined Makerere University and raised concerns about the proposed Protection of Sovereignty Bill, 2026, questioning the potential impact of the legislation on academic work in Uganda. As parliamentary committees continue consultations on the Bill, the institution’s academic staffs  add to mounting pressure on lawmakers to reconsider or substantially revise the proposed legislation before it proceeds further.

In a letter dated April 24, 2026, addressed to the Clerk to Parliament, Adolf Mwesige, the university said while it supports government efforts to safeguard national sovereignty, the proposed law could unintentionally disrupt legitimate university functions.

“I write on behalf of Mbarara University of Science and Technology to respectfully submit the University’s observations on the Protection of Sovereignty Bill, 2026,” the Vice Chancellor’s office stated. MUST noted that as a public institution established under the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act, it carries a mandate that includes teaching, research, innovation, and community engagement. The

university stressed that these roles often involve partnerships, grants, scholarships, and collaborations with both local and international actors. “Upon review of the Bill, the University’s respectful concern is therefore limited to ensuring that the Bill… does not unintentionally affect lawful public university functions undertaken within approved Government and institutional frameworks,” the letter read in parts.

The university added that its submission is intended to support the objectives of the Bill while proposing refinements to ensure smooth implementation without undermining higher education. MUST’s position comes just days after Makerere University academic staff also strongly opposed the same Bill, warning that it could cripple academic freedom and research.

Through their umbrella body, Makerere University Academic Staff Association, lecturers last week, argued that the proposed law risks criminalizing core academic activities. “We contend that all these possible outcomes are not only unconstitutional. They would also make the work of academic staffs  and universities criminal and, consequently, impossible,” said MUASA chairperson Jude Ssempebwa in a memorandum to Parliament.

The Protection of Sovereignty Bill, 2026, currently before Parliament of Uganda, seeks to tighten regulation of foreign influence and financial flows into the country. Government officials have defended it as necessary to protect national interests and political independence.

However, critics across sectors argue that some provisions could have far-reaching consequences with legal bodies and civil society organisations warning that the Bill may introduce sweeping controls on external funding, including research grants and partnerships that universities rely on.

There are also concerns that stricter financial oversight measures could affect remittances and funding streams that support livelihoods and institutional programmes while some political actors going further to allege that the Bill could be used to target opposition figures such as Robert Kyagulanyi, a claim government has not formally addressed.

Parliament is expected to continue receiving views from stakeholders before the Bill proceeds to the next stage. “We urge Parliament to abandon the Bill in its entirety. In the alternative, we urge Parliament to explicitly exempt University staff and students from the scope of the Bill’s application. We build for the future,” Dr. Ssempebwa added.

One staff submission noted that “academic work includes critique of government policies, participation in lawful assemblies and demonstrations and other ways of civic engagement,” warning that the Bill risks turning constitutionally protected freedoms into criminal offences.

“Developing draft policies and contributing expert analysis is part of the academic role,” one senior lecturer said, adding that “this Bill would reduce universities to passive observers of national policy rather than contributors to it.”

The bill is also embedded with clauses that subject research funding to extensive state control and delay, including mandatory registration, ministerial approvals, and banking restrictions. One researcher said the proposed financial controls would “freeze research funds in bureaucratic processes, making time-bound academic work impossible,” particularly for projects tied to international deadlines and publications.

Beyond funding concerns, academicians raised alarm over provisions granting the Minister wide discretionary powers to designate individuals as foreigners, define offences, and regulate academic and research activity without parliamentary oversight.

“These are excessive powers that effectively amount to amending the law by ministerial directive,” the memorandum states, warning that such authority could be abused and undermine the rule of law.

Universities also argue that clauses restricting access to foreign funding and subjecting research institutions to inspection risks violating privacy and research ethics protections guaranteed under Ugandan law and international academic standards.

“Allowing unrestricted inspection of research records would violate confidentiality obligations towards research participants and undermine trust in academic institutions,” one staff member observed.

Within Uganda’s higher education sector, the concern is particularly acute given the already limited domestic funding for research and heavy reliance on international partnerships for postgraduate training, scientific innovation and policy development.