As the government prepares to reintroduce the UPDF Amendment Bill 2024, which seeks to reestablish military courts, Members of Parliament are divided over the proposal to allow civilians to be tried in these courts, a practice that was previously abolished in favor of civilian courts.
Last week, Government Chief Whip Dennis Hamson Obua tabled the bill, sparking further debate and scrutiny over the implications of reviving military courts for civilian cases.
The NRM Parliamentary Caucus held a meeting chaired by their leader, President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, to discuss the matter. During the meeting, Chief Whip Dennis Hamson Obua outlined the reasons for reintroducing military courts, emphasizing their role in addressing specific security-related offenses.
Defense Minister Jacob Oboth Oboth also addressed the issue, explaining that the bill would soon be presented to Parliament for further deliberation.
Asuman Basalirwa, the MP for Bugiri Municipality, expressed opposition to the proposal, arguing that it contradicts the principles of justice and fairness. He stated that there are existing civilian laws capable of handling security-related cases without resorting to military courts.
Charles Tebandeke, the MP for Bbaale County, criticized the move, stating that it undermines the independence of the judiciary and could lead to the misuse of military courts for non-military matters.
James Kakooza, the East African Legislative Assembly (EALA) MP, defended the NRM's position, stating that the proposal is not intended to target political opponents but to strengthen national security and streamline the judicial process.
The abolition of military courts for civilian cases was previously mandated by the Constitutional Court, which ruled that all civilians should be tried in civilian courts. The court also stripped military courts of the authority to try civilians, ensuring that their jurisdiction is limited to military personnel.
The reintroduction of military courts for civilians has sparked widespread debate, with critics warning that it could lead to human rights violations and undermine the rule of law. Proponents, however, argue that it is necessary for addressing security challenges and maintaining order.
As the bill moves forward, it is expected to face intense scrutiny and opposition from lawmakers and civil society organizations advocating for the protection of civilian rights and the independence of the judiciary.
