In 2025, Uganda became the focal point of a renewed crisis concerning the military justice system’s jurisdiction over civilians. Despite the country’s Supreme Court ruling in January 2025 unequivocally declaring that trying civilians in military courts is unconstitutional, the government swiftly passed a law later that year effectively reinstating military trials for civilians under specific conditions. This contradictory legislative and judicial development has opened a fresh battleground over the rule of law, civil liberties, and political freedoms in Uganda.
The Supreme Court Ruling and Its Significance
On January 31, 2025, Uganda’s Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment that declared civilian trials in military courts unconstitutional and ordered all ongoing trials to be halted and transferred to civilian courts. This ruling was a significant victory for human rights advocates, reinforcing the constitutional guarantee of civilians’ right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial court.
As Human Rights Watch’s senior Africa researcher Oryem Nyeko affirmed,
“The Supreme Court’s decision is a major step to protect the right to a fair trial in Uganda.”
This decision challenged the long-standing use of military courts to try civilians, particularly opposition members and critics of the government, often under charges related to political dissent or alleged armed crimes.
The UPDF (Uganda People’s Defence Forces) Act of 2005, which authorized military courts’ jurisdiction, had been criticized for appointing military personnel without legal qualifications as judges and for failing to meet both domestic and international standards of impartiality and competence. Cases such as the trial and detention of opposition leader Kizza Besigye symbolized the misuse of military courts against political opponents.
The Government’s Legislative Response: Reinstating Military Trials for Civilians
Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling, Uganda’s government moved swiftly to counteract it by passing the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (Amendment) Bill in May 2025. President Yoweri Museveni signed this into law in June 2025, thereby restoring the power of military courts to try civilians accused of offenses linked to “political violence” or “military-related” offenses, including those who accompany military forces.
According to Colonel Chris Magezi, acting spokesperson for the Uganda People’s Defence Forces,
“The law will deal decisively with armed violent criminals, deter the formation of militant political groups that seek to subvert democratic processes, and ensure national security is bound on a firm foundational base.”
This government rationale frames the legislation as a necessary national security tool amid rising instability in regions like Karamoja, where armed raids and communal violence have been severe.
President Museveni himself publicly rejected the Supreme Court’s decision, stating on social media that the ruling was wrong and that trying civilians in the military court was necessary “to protect Ugandans from what he called ‘criminals armed with guns.’” The legislation also introduces some procedural reforms, requiring military judges to have legal qualifications and mandating Supreme Court confirmation for any death sentences, a move that proponents claim addresses prior critiques of military courts’ lack of judicial independence.
Criticisms from Legal Experts and Civil Society
Legal experts, the Uganda Law Society, opposition leaders, and human rights groups have condemned the new legislation as a blatant disregard for constitutional governance and judicial independence.
The Uganda Law Society stated:
“The reinstatement of military trials for civilians is a blatant disregard for the Supreme Court’s ruling and a threat to the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.”
They emphasized that the expanded jurisdiction risks sweeping too broadly under vague terms such as “military-related offenses,” leaving room for arbitrary prosecutions.
Eron Kiiza, a prominent human rights lawyer who recently represented opposition leader Kizza Besigye in a military court, vocally opposed the trials, saying:
“There are court rulings in Uganda that say that civilians shouldn’t be tried in military courts. And yet, you and many other civilians have been tried in military courts without access to fair trial guarantees.”
This underscores ongoing abuses despite formal legal protections.
These concerns reflect patterns where military courts have often been deployed as tools for political repression in Uganda, targeting opposition, activists, and dissenters. Human Rights Watch documented multiple cases of civilians detained arbitrarily or sentenced without fair trial due process, with allegations of torture and intimidation common in military detention.
International Responses and Calls for Compliance with Human Rights Standards
The international human rights community has also strongly criticized Uganda’s law reintroducing military trials for civilians. Volker Türk, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, called on President Museveni to reject the legislation, warning that trying civilians in military courts breaches international norms requiring fair, impartial, and independent judicial processes. He stated:
“The trial of civilians by military courts is in principle incompatible with international human rights law as it raises serious problems in relation to equitable, impartial and independent administration of justice.”
He urged Uganda to comply with the Supreme Court ruling and halt retrogressive legal reforms that erode rights protections.
The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights similarly maintains that civilians must never be subject to military court jurisdiction under any circumstances.
Impact on Uganda’s Democratic Space and Upcoming Elections
The reauthorization of military trials for civilians has alarming implications for Uganda’s democratic landscape. Opposition leaders and civil society activists argue this law will fuel political repression in the lead-up to Uganda’s 2026 general elections.
The military courts’ history of targeting opposition figures has been well documented, and critics fear this legislation formalizes a machinery to silence political dissent under the guise of national security. Kizza Besigye’s case—charged in a military court, effectively detained without due process, and sentenced in questionable proceedings—has become a symbol of this repression.
Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East and Southern Africa, Tigere Chagutah, reflected on the broader effects:
“If the state antics were intended to silence dissenting voices, they have done just the opposite. Far from dissuading others from speaking up, these trials have sparked a national conversation on human rights.”
Yet the climate of fear and legal uncertainty persists, threatening fundamental freedoms such as expression, assembly, and political participation.
Legal and Judicial Challenges Ahead
The Uganda Law Society and other rights bodies have pledged to continue challenging the new law’s constitutionality in courts. However, given the government’s control over Parliament and political institutions, judicial independence remains under pressure.
While the law introduces some procedural safeguards, such as requiring legally qualified military judges and Supreme Court review of death penalties, critics question the effectiveness of these reforms given the military’s dominant role and political influence over the judiciary.
Human rights advocates continue to call for full respect of the Supreme Court decision, a transparent review of cases prosecuted under military courts, and guarantees that civilian cases will be tried only in independent civilian courts.
Upholding Justice and Civil Rights in Uganda
Uganda’s 2025 legislative reversal on military trials for civilians marks a stark regression in both constitutional governance and human rights. The Supreme Court’s strong ruling to protect civilians from military jurisdiction has been undercut by a political and military leadership prioritizing control and national security over rule of law.
Statements from legal professionals like Eron Kiiza, UN rights chiefs, and domestic civil society collectively warn that allowing civilians to be tried in military courts undermines justice, fuels political repression, and violates international human rights standards. The coming months will test Uganda’s commitment to legal fairness and democratic principles as the country prepares for elections under a tense political environment.
