Ssemakadde’s ULS Challenges Dr. Muganga’s Eligibility for Ministerial Office, Demands Full Disclosure of Vetting Report

By Ben Musanje

The Uganda Law Society (ULS) has strongly cautioned Dr. Lawrence Muganga against regarding as “anti-Rwandan hatred or tribalism” the Parliament’s inquiries into his fitness for appointment as Minister of State for Internal Affairs, arguing that concerns surrounding his qualifications are matters of constitutional and statutory compliance rather than personal attacks.

In a statement issued on Thursday, the ULS Governing Council said it regretted the position taken by Dr. Muganga who is the Vice Chancellor of Uganda’s Richest Mogul Dr. Shudir Ruparelia, on questions regarding his eligibility for the office and emphasized that scrutiny of appointments to high public office should be viewed within the framework of the law.

The Society maintained that the legal position governing the matter is clear. According to the ULS, Article 15(7) of the Constitution of Uganda empowers Parliament to prescribe offices of state that persons holding dual citizenship are not qualified to occupy. The provision is operationalized through Section 23 of the Uganda Citizenship and Immigration Control Act (Cap. 313) and the Fifth Schedule to the Act.

The Society noted that the Fifth Schedule expressly bars dual citizens from holding certain offices of state, including those of Cabinet Minister and Minister of State, unless Parliament amends the Schedule through a formal resolution.

While acknowledging that citizenship is fundamentally a personal matter, the ULS argued that it becomes a legitimate issue of public interest when an individual seeks appointment to a senior public office involving national security responsibilities.

The Society explained that it does not ordinarily investigate or make public pronouncements on citizenship matters. However, it said it was compelled to comment on the issue because Dr. Muganga had publicly addressed the parliamentary vetting process on social media, thereby inviting public scrutiny.

According to the ULS, Dr. Muganga’s public intervention made the matter exceptional and necessitated full clarification as well as strict adherence to the law by all parties involved.

The legal body also cautioned Dr. Muganga and his supporters against portraying legitimate legal scrutiny as anti-Rwanda sentiment, tribalism, racism, or xenophobia.

Invoking Section 3(d) of the Uganda Law Society Act, the Society warned that such claims, if made without verification, risk polarizing public debate, undermining respect for the rule of law, and diverting attention from the constitutional and statutory requirements at the heart of the matter.

The ULS stressed that the issue should not be interpreted as hostility toward dual citizens in general. It maintained that dual citizens remain valued members of Ugandan society and that the restrictions contained in the Fifth Schedule apply narrowly to specified offices of state.

According to the Society, the limitations are based on considerations of national sovereignty and the need for holders of sensitive public offices to demonstrate undivided allegiance.

Beyond the controversy surrounding Dr. Muganga’s appointment, the Uganda Law Society renewed its call for greater transparency in parliamentary vetting processes.

The Society criticized Rule 171(2) of the Rules of Procedure of Parliament, arguing that it is responsible for the current closed-door nature of appointments vetting.

ULS called on the incoming 12th Parliament to scrap the rule and replace it with a more transparent framework that would allow meaningful public participation in the scrutiny of nominees for public office.

Amid growing public debate and competing claims surrounding the matter, the Society revealed that its Governing Council had resolved to formally request the report of the Appointments Committee.

According to the ULS, access to the report would enable it to scrutinize the vetting process and determine whether it complied with constitutional and statutory requirements governing appointments to Cabinet and other ministerial offices.

The Society said the review would also help establish the facts surrounding the process and provide clarity to the public.

It urged the new parliamentary administration to release the report without delay.

The ULS concluded by warning against attempts to exploit the controversy to promote prejudice against any community or category of citizens.

The Society emphasized that xenophobia in all its forms must be rejected and cautioned that the constitutional questions surrounding Dr. Muganga’s appointment should not be used to fuel division or discrimination.

It reaffirmed its commitment to the supremacy of the Constitution, the rule of law, and the protection of Uganda’s sovereignty, stressing that all public appointments must comply strictly with these foundational principles.

The statement was issued by the Uganda Law Society Council on June 4, 2026, at ULS House in Kololo.

The statement bore the signatures of ULS President Isaac K. Ssemakadde, SC, Vice President Anthony Asiimwe, Treasurer Arthur Isiko, Acting Secretary Ssali Babu, Western Region Council Member Samuel Muhumuza, Northern Region Council Member Emmanuel Egaru, Eastern Region Council Member Eddie Nangulu, and Acting Central Region Council Member Alexander Lule.