Split in the Opposition: Joel Ssenyonyi’s walkout sparks uproar

Tensions have erupted within Uganda’s opposition ranks in parliament following the abrupt decision by Leader of Opposition Joel Ssenyonyi to walk out during the debate on the controversial UPDF Amendment Bill, 2025.

Some opposition MPs have expressed anger and frustration, saying they were not consulted before the walkout and that their efforts to draft a minority report were disregarded. The UPDF Amendment Bill had initially been non-contentious, save for a clause that sought to formally integrate the Special Forces Command (SFC)—the elite unit tasked with protecting the President and key installations—into the main structure of the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF).

However, the political landscape shifted significantly in January 2025, when the Supreme court nullified several clauses in the existing UPDF Act that permitted the trial of civilians in military courts.

In response, the government withdrew the bill originally tabled in December 2024 and later reintroduced a revised version on May 13, 2025, reinstating clauses previously ruled unconstitutional. Speaker of parliament Annet Anita Among assigned the committee on Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, along with the committee on defence and internal affairs, to fast-track the bill’s review before parliament’s fourth session ends.

Despite objections from the opposition about the speed of the process, they participated in the brief public hearings, which lasted just three days.

OPPOSITION INITIALLY AGREES TO DEBATE

On Monday, May 20, Ssenyonyi convened a meeting of opposition MPs where it was resolved they would join in the parliamentary debate scheduled for the following day. He acknowledged the process was flawed but emphasized the importance of voicing their objections during plenary.

“We were dismayed by the disregard for parliamentary rules in how this bill is being rushed,” Ssenyonyi reportedly told colleagues.

“Nonetheless, we’ll attend the debate to raise our concerns.”

While this decision was being made, several opposition MPs on the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee were working to finalize a minority report. Three MPs, who requested anonymity to speak candidly, said they had successfully convinced some ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) members to oppose several controversial clauses.

“The MPs had voted down about three clauses, including one that listed President Museveni and Gen. Salim Saleh as statutory members of the UPDF High Command,” one MP said.

“But when Committee Chair Steven Baka Mugabi saw the tide turning, he abruptly adjourned the meeting.”

Another MP added that Mugabi later informed them that NRM committee members were to meet President Museveni before resuming discussions.

MINORITY REPORT FINALIZED AMID HOPES OF A BREAKTHROUGH 

Following the walkout of NRM members, Mugabi handed over responsibility for compiling the minority report to opposition MPs including Medard Lubega Sseggona, Asuman Basalirwa, Mathias Mpuuga, and Richard Lumu.

The opposition team worked overnight at a hotel to finalize the report, drawing from Supreme court rulings and constitutional provisions to challenge clauses allowing military trials of civilians.

“We had a solid report,” one MP said. “We believed we could convince some NRM MPs to vote with us. In the past, we’ve successfully forced them to amend problematic provisions.”

SSENYONYI WALKS OUT, SHOCKING COLLEAGUES 

Despite the optimism, Ssenyonyi took a dramatically different course the next day. Less than 30 minutes into the debate, he announced a walkout, denouncing the proceedings as illegitimate.

“I was very hard pressed, together with my colleagues, to sit here and participate in a sham process,” Ssenyonyi declared on the parliamentary floor.

“When you bring a bill here, you should allow time for public input. But you’re saying you don’t want our input. That’s why, Madam Speaker, you didn’t rein in the committee to give stakeholders adequate time. So, we shall leave you here to process your bill.”

Following the walkout, Ssenyonyi convened another opposition caucus meeting to justify his actions. However, multiple MPs who had worked on the minority report were reportedly furious, accusing him of undermining their efforts.

“Why did we waste our time writing a report if you knew it wouldn’t be presented?” one MP quoted Bugiri Municipality MP Asuman Basalirwa as asking during the meeting.

INTERNAL RIFT OVER STRATEGY 

Some MPs, who preferred anonymity, revealed that radical measures had even been discussed to block the bill’s passage.

“There were MPs who were willing to do anything—even take the Speaker’s mace—to prevent the bill from being passed on Tuesday,” one MP said.

“Maybe it would have passed eventually, but not on that day.”

The walkout, they said, robbed the opposition of its chance to challenge the bill formally using parliamentary procedure. Richard Lumu, the MP for Mityana South, is one of the few opposition legislators who has publicly expressed dissatisfaction with Ssenyonyi’s decision.

“Ssenyonyi knew we were writing a minority report,” Lumu told reporters. “We thought he should have held a meeting for us to discuss our report with the entire opposition caucus before deciding to walk out.”

TENSIONS DEEPEN AS OPPOSITION SPLITS OVER WALKOUT TENSIONS

While some MPs supported the walkout led by Leader of Opposition Joel Ssenyonyi, others remain critical, arguing it undermined the efforts of those who had invested time and resources in drafting a minority report intended to challenge the bill on legal and constitutional grounds.

Supporters of the walkout defended the decision during a heated internal meeting, citing fears for personal safety and limited space for open debate within parliament.

“People like Nsamba Oshabe were saying that outside parliament, there were drones and soldiers waiting to arrest them like they have done in the past. Therefore, walking out was the best option,” one MP said.

According to this camp, the environment around Parliament had become increasingly hostile, making it unsafe for opposition MPs to express themselves freely during the debate.

SKEPTICISM AMONG OPPOSITION RANKS

However, several MPs remained unconvinced by Ssenyonyi’s explanation. Some speculated that the walkout had less to do with security and more to do with internal political dynamics, particularly surrounding Mathias Mpuuga, the former Leader of the Opposition who has since fallen out with the National Unity Platform (NUP).

“They couldn’t allow Mpuuga to shine in the moment when all the eyes of the entire country were on parliament,” said one MP, referring to reports that Mpuuga had been slated to present the minority report.

Another MP argued that online sentiment may have played a role in influencing Ssenyonyi’s decision: “You know our leaders pay a lot of attention to social media. So, they bowed to pressure from supporters online. Of course, I also suspect that Ssenyonyi must have received a call from Kyagulanyi. I don’t think he can take such a step without outside intervention.”

MINORITY REPORT IN LIMBO

After the walkout, a new challenge emerged: how to present the minority report, which had been carefully prepared by a group of opposition MPs including Asuman Basalirwa and Medard Lubega Sseggona.

Both MPs declined to present the report, fearing they would be perceived as defying the collective decision to boycott the debate. Eventually, Okot Bitek Moses, MP for Kioga County, stepped in to present the minority report so that it could be entered into the official Hansard record.

BILL PASSED AMIDST OPPOSITION ABSENCE

With the opposition benches empty, NRM MPs proceeded to pass the bill largely unchanged, except for one amendment by Muhammad Nsereko, MP for Kampala Central. Nsereko’s amendment specified that any uniform considered part of the armed forces must bear an official emblem.

Among its key provisions, the passed bill:

• Allows civilians to be charged in military courts if they aid or abet individuals subject to military law in committing crimes such as murder, treason, kidnapping, aggravated robbery, and cattle rustling.

• Introduces new qualifications for military court officials, requiring chairpersons of unit and division military courts to possess law degrees and valid practicing certificates.

• Requires the Chairperson of the General Court Martial to have qualifications equivalent to a High Court judge.

• Mandates that appointments to these positions be made by the UPDF High Command in consultation with the Judicial Service Commission.

OPPOSITION MINORITY REPORT: LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL CONCERNS 

The minority report, authored by opposition MPs, raised eight major concerns, arguing that the bill is unconstitutional and undermines the rule of law.

Their objections included: Contravention of the Constitution

• Illegality of military trials for civilians

• Violation of the separation of powers

• Lack of public participation

• Unconstitutional expansion of military court jurisdiction

• Parliament’s overreach in legislating on judicial matters • Lack of independence and impartiality in military courts

• Non-compliance with Supreme Court advisory orders

The report emphasized that under Article 210 of the 1995 Constitution, Parliament’s power to legislate on military courts is limited to disciplinary issues concerning UPDF members.

“The minority unanimously are of the opinion that the General Court Martial and other military courts do not have constitutional jurisdiction to try civilians or adjudicate non-disciplinary criminal offences—even if committed by members of the UPDF,” the report stated.

“Military courts are internal disciplinary bodies, not general criminal courts, and cannot override the constitutional mandate that all criminal justice, including fair trial rights under Articles 28 and 44, lies exclusively with the ordinary Courts of Judicature.”

LEGAL CHALLENGE PLANNED

Following the parliamentary walkout and passage of the bill, Ssenyonyi announced that the opposition would challenge the law in court once President Yoweri Museveni, who praised MPs for passing the bill, formally assents to it.

The move signals the beginning of a legal battle over the controversial provisions that could once again put Uganda’s military justice system under judicial scrutiny.