MPs demand vetting of defence forces commanders

In a renewed effort to strengthen democratic oversight and accountability within Uganda’s security apparatus, the opposition in parliament has proposed a critical amendment to the law governing the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF).

The amendment seeks to introduce mandatory parliamentary vetting for the appointment of the Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) and their deputy. This proposal is detailed in the alternative ministerial policy statement for the ministry of Defence and Veterans Affairs for the 2025/2026 financial year.

The opposition argues that given the enormous influence wielded by the CDF and deputy CDF, particularly over national security and defence expenditure, their appointments should be subjected to the same level of scrutiny as other top public officials.

According to Derrick Nyeko, the member of Parliament for Makindye East and shadow minister for Defence and Veteran Affairs, parliamentary vetting would ensure a robust system of checks and balances.

“The CDF should be vetted because parliament must ensure that any individual seeking to serve in such a position possesses the necessary education, work experience, competence, temperament and integrity,” Nyeko said.

Nyeko pointed out that under Articles 213 and 216 of the Constitution, the appointments of the inspector general of police, deputy IGP, and the commissioner and Deputy Commissioner General of the Uganda Prisons Service require both a presidential nomination and parliamentary approval.

However, the Commander of Defence Forces— under Article 210 and Section 8(2)(o) of the UPDF Act, 2005—is appointed solely by the president, without any legislative oversight. He argued that this exception is problematic, especially since the UPDF receives more than 95% of the entire defence budget’s sub-programme allocation.

“Allowing such a critical position to be filled without vetting undermines the spirit of constitutional accountability,” he said.

“In the next financial year, we will push to amend Section 8 of the UPDF Act to require parliamentary approval for nominees to the positions of chief of defence forces and deputy CDF,” Nyeko added.

SSENYONYI DEMANDS TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Leader of the Opposition in Parliament (LoP) Joel Ssenyonyi, reinforced the opposition’s call for reform, describing the CDF and Deputy CDF roles as too powerful to be exempt from vetting.

“These are the people who command our armed forces. Before President Museveni began preparing to hand over to his son, he even expanded the powers of the CDF,” Ssenyonyi said.

“If ministers, commissioners, and judges are vetted, why not the CDF and their deputy?”

He warned of the consequences of unchecked authority, saying that current appointments allow the Commander-in-Chief to select anyone—including family members— without scrutiny.

“We now have a CDF who could drag the country into war with our neighbours. He has attacked neighbouring countries, insulted leaders, and made inflammatory remarks against tribal groups. We cannot afford to have such individuals wielding unchecked power,” he said.

Ssenyonyi also criticised the current closed-door vetting process conducted by the Appointments Committee of Parliament, of which he is a member.

“We need to reform the system and introduce public vetting for key public officials. Let citizens have a say,” he said.

He proposed that the names of nominees be made public in advance to allow for civic engagement and for any concerns to be raised—practices already observed in countries like Kenya. He also suggested that the vetting proceedings be open to the public and broadcast through the media.

“If someone is competent, they should have no fear of public scrutiny. I would welcome public vetting myself. It gives the public a chance to assess you and builds confidence in your appointment,” he said.

Ssenyonyi lamented what he termed the CDF’s disregard for parliamentary oversight.

“When summoned, he insulted MPs, calling them clowns, because he knows they have no say in his appointment. Since Parliament doesn’t vet him, he feels no accountability,” Ssenyonyi noted. He criticised the Parliamentary Committee for failing to hold the CDF accountable after he snubbed their summons.

“They just said, ‘Leave him alone, he is Museveni’s son.’ That’s not how a constitutional democracy should function,” he added.

The opposition’s proposal underscores a broader push for transparency and democratic oversight within Uganda’s security sector. With growing concern over the militarisation of politics and the concentration of power within the executive, the call for vetting the country’s top military commanders may signal a turning point in the conversation about constitutionalism and accountability in Uganda.