Parliament Adopts Rule Limiting Debate on President, Sparking Controversy

Uganda’s Parliament has passed an amendment to Rule 72 of its Rules of Procedure, imposing new restrictions on how lawmakers discuss the President during debates. The amendment, spearheaded by Abdul Katuntu, seeks to uphold decorum in the House by preventing MPs from imputing improper motives to the President or invoking his name to influence discussions—unless a formal motion is tabled.

Katuntu defended the rule, stating that it aims to protect the dignity of the presidency and ensure parliamentary discourse remains issue-based rather than personal. However, the decision has drawn sharp criticism from opposition MPs and free speech advocates.

Felix Okot Ogong (Dokolo South) expressed concern that the rule could stifle debate, cautioning against excessive regulation that limits parliamentary engagement. “Let’s not create rigid laws that silence MPs,” he warned.

Speaker Anita Among backed the amendment, arguing that structured debate fosters order. “The President can only be discussed when a motion is tabled,” she asserted.

However, Opposition Leader Joel Ssenyonyi opposed the move, highlighting the potential risk of limiting MPs’ ability to seek clarifications on presidential statements or policies affecting Ugandans. “How do we hold the President accountable if we can’t reference his statements in debate?” he questioned, adding that existing parliamentary rules already empower the Speaker to intervene when discussions become inappropriate.

The rule change is part of an ongoing review of parliamentary procedures, but critics fear it could weaken legislative oversight. As the new restriction takes effect, MPs face the challenge of balancing respectful discourse with their duty to scrutinize the executive.