Canada has extended temporary immigration and border measures affecting Uganda and neighbouring countries over concerns about the ongoing Ebola Bundibugyo outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
The measures, initially introduced in May, have been extended by another 60 days until November 27, 2026.
In a statement issued on September 28, the Canadian government said it remained concerned about the ongoing outbreak in the DRC and the risk of Ebola disease spreading to neighbouring countries, including Uganda and South Sudan.
“Canada remains deeply concerned about the ongoing Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the evolving risk of Ebola disease in neighbouring countries, including Uganda and South Sudan,” the statement said.
The Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) said immigration documents would remain suspended for residents of countries classified as having a high or very high risk of Ebola, including the DRC, Uganda and South Sudan.
This means people whose last country of residence at the time of their application was one of the three countries cannot travel to Canada while the measures are in force, even if they hold a previously approved visa, permit or electronic travel authorisation.
The measures also apply to people who have transited through the affected countries. The extension comes more than a month after Uganda was declared free of Ebola Bundibugyo disease after completing the required 42-day monitoring period without a new confirmed case.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) and Africa CDC announced the end of Uganda’s outbreak on August 27, after 42 consecutive days without a new confirmed case following the discharge of the country’s last patient on July 16.
Uganda reported 20 confirmed cases during the outbreak, including 15 imported cases linked to the DRC and five locally acquired infections. Two people died.
The WHO has, however, warned that Uganda remains at risk of reintroduction because of continued transmission in neighbouring DRC and cross-border movement.
The DRC outbreak remains active, with WHO reporting 5,794 confirmed cases and 2,786 deaths as of August 26. The outbreak has spread across 60 health zones in six provinces.
Ugandan authorities have previously raised concerns about being grouped with the DRC under international travel restrictions, arguing that most of the country’s cases were imported from the DRC and were contained without sustained community transmission.
The Canadian government’s measures are intended to reduce the possibility of Ebola entering the country. Canada says its immigration authorities will continue processing affected applications, but will not finalise them while the measures remain in force.
The restrictions have also drawn criticism from public health officials and advocates who argue that broad travel measures can have economic and social consequences and may not necessarily reflect the epidemiological situation in individual countries.
WHO has maintained that countries should base their response on evidence and international health regulations, while Uganda continues heightened surveillance because of the ongoing outbreak in the DRC.
Canada’s decision raises legitimate questions. Uganda erred when it announced that it was “Ebola free” on 28 July, only 12 days into the internationally established 42-day countdown following the last confirmed case. That premature declaration was unfortunate because the 42-day period is an important epidemiological safeguard for ensuring that no undetected transmission remains. Many developed countries were not going to have confidence in Uganda due this error and we will continue to suffer the consequences of that arrogant and ill-advised announcement.
However, Uganda subsequently completed the full 42-day surveillance period without a new confirmed case, and WHO and Africa CDC formally recognized the end of the outbreak on 27 August.
The continuing Ebola outbreak in the DRC clearly creates a risk of reintroduction into neighbouring countries, including Uganda. But the risk of reintroduction is not the same as an active Ebola outbreak in Uganda. Canada should therefore explain why it continues to apply restrictions to Uganda after WHO and Africa CDC have confirmed that the Ugandan outbreak has ended, and whether the measures are proportionate to the current epidemiological evidence.
I must add that unjustified or disproportionate travel restrictions against countries that transparently report disease outbreaks can create a perverse incentive for governments to delay or even conceal outbreaks in the future, out of fear of economic, trade and travel consequences.
The global health-security system depends on countries detecting, reporting and responding to outbreaks quickly and transparently. International responses should therefore encourage countries to report outbreaks early and follow established public-health protocols; not inadvertently punish them for doing so. Measures should be evidence-based and proportionate to the actual epidemiological risk.
Whmm.
Sanctions.
This is so hypocritical.
Perhaps Uganda should have been more deceptive in concealing the 20 cases?? There must have been Ebola in countries with a common border with DRC like Rwanda, Burundi TZ, Malawi, CAR and potentially as far as Kenya.
The difference here is that these countries understand and know the power of tourism and travel and how much they stood to lose in a busy summer period should they “announce” under the pretext of transparency that they had Ebola cases. I hope Uganda has learned its lesson. Great thing is other countries have eased their restrictions. Canada can hang
Imagine this statement … vis-a-vis the hurriedly passed Ugandan Sovereignty Law … hmm
“The restrictions have also drawn criticism from public health officials and advocates who argue that broad travel measures can have economic and social consequences and may not necessarily reflect the epidemiological situation in individual countries.”