By Mulengera Reporters
Women activists have strongly opposed a proposal in the Marriage Bill, 2024, that seeks to impose a fine of UGX 10 million or a three-year jail sentence on cohabiting couples. They argue that criminalizing cohabitation would disproportionately affect nearly half of Uganda’s population, who live in such unions.
The opposition was voiced by Rose Wakikona, Deputy Executive Director of the Women’s Probono Initiative, while appearing before Parliament’s Joint Committees on Legal and Parliamentary Affairs on February 5, 2025. The committee is currently scrutinizing the Marriage Bill, which was tabled last year by Sarah Opendi (Tororo District Woman MP).
“Marriage is very expensive. To hold a decent wedding in Uganda, one needs at least UGX 10 million just to gather family members. Many families also require a bride price, often involving cows. If people cannot afford marriage, why punish them with jail time?” Wakikona questioned.
She emphasized that 27% of couples in Uganda cohabit without legal recognition, making it impractical to criminalize the practice.
“Cohabitation is a social issue, not a legal one. It cannot be resolved through punitive measures but rather through social interventions, primarily addressing financial constraints. This provision is blind to Uganda’s socio-economic realities, and if passed, it could result in half of the population being imprisoned,” she added.
Criminalization of Cohabitation
Clause 89 of the Marriage Bill proposes a UGX 10 million fine or a three-year jail term for individuals who “hold out” as married without formalizing their union. The Bill defines “holding out” as living together as husband and wife, jointly owning property, having children, or a woman adopting the man’s surname.
Peggy Wako (National Woman MP for Elderly Persons) supported the activists’ stance, arguing that cohabitation has existed for centuries and should be addressed socially rather than legally. “Cohabitation has existed from time immemorial. Let’s resolve these issues socially because many factors are involved,” Wako remarked.
The team of women’s rights organizations opposing the Bill includes: Centre for Women Justice Uganda, Uganda Women’s Network (UWONET), Center for Domestic Violence Prevention (CEDOVIP), Plan International, FIDA, International Justice Mission, WDN Uganda Chapter, Uganda Community-Based Association for Women and Children’s Welfare (UCOBAC), and Uganda Media Women’s Association (UMWA)
Polygamy in Civil Marriages
The activists also rejected a provision in the Bill that seeks to allow polygamy in civil marriages, arguing that it unfairly grants men the right to marry multiple partners while denying women the same option. “When we read this Bill, we realize that polygamy here refers only to polygyny, where a man has multiple wives. It does not recognize polyandry, where a woman has multiple husbands. This is a clear case of gender inequality,” Wakikona said.
The activists cited Uganda’s commitments to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and the Maputo Protocol, both of which promote monogamy as the ideal form of marriage.
“Historically, civil marriages in Uganda have always been monogamous. Introducing polygamy into civil marriages sets a dangerous precedent that could normalize polygamous unions and deny women autonomy,” she added.
However, Peggy Wako strongly opposed the idea of allowing women to have multiple husbands, arguing that it contradicts both culture and nature. “I completely disagree. Women marrying multiple husbands goes against culture and nature. If a woman has two husbands and conceives, how will paternity be determined? We would have to rely on DNA tests,” Wako stated.
Pre-Marital Counseling
The activists also raised concerns about mandatory pre-marital counseling in the Bill, warning that it could reinforce patriarchal norms that oppress women. “As women who have undergone pre-marital counseling, we know that it often emphasizes submission and sacrifice for women while downplaying men’s accountability in marriage,” Wakikona said.
They demanded that guidelines be put in place to ensure that counseling sessions promote gender equality and do not undermine women’s rights. “The type of counseling offered must be clear. If it places men on a pedestal while devaluing women, it becomes a tool of oppression rather than empowerment,” she added.
Financial Burden on Women
On Clause 51, which mandates shared debt liability in matrimonial property, Wakikona warned that the provision could lead to financial abuse of women. “This provision assumes that spouses disclose their financial liabilities to each other. However, in many families, men make financial decisions while women are expected to comply. This creates a power imbalance that could lead to women being burdened with debts they did not consent to,” she argued.
Agnes Nandutu (Bududa District Woman MP) urged the activists to soften their demands to allow the Bill to pass through Parliament, cautioning that previous attempts to pass marriage laws had failed due to contentious provisions-Parliament Watch. (For comments on this story, get back to us on 0705579994 [WhatsApp line], 0779411734 & 041 4674611 or email us at mulengeranews@gmail.com).
