Tensions that arose last year over the regulation of Uganda’s post-secondary education are set to ease after Attorney General Kiryowa Kiwanuka issued a formal opinion affirming that the National Council for Higher Education and the new Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) Council operate under distinct, non-conflicting mandates.
In a detailed legal review of the Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) Act, the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act (UOTIA), the National TVET Policy, and the draft National Higher Education Policy 2025, the Attorney General found no new conflicting mandates between the two systems.
“…my opinion is that there is no conflict or overlap between the TVET system and the higher education regulatory system. My view is that TVET system and higher education regulatory system operate independent of each other,” the Attorney General noted.
The Attorney General issued this opinion in December last year. The document, which has now been obtained by Uganda Radio Network, has been circulating among various government offices and key stakeholders since then.
Several institutions are understood to have received copies only in recent months, sparking considerable debate and high-level consultations. The debate on the subject intensified after the TVET Act took effect. Section 5(1) of the Act mandates the TVET Council to accredit TVET programmes, while Section 4(d) of the UOTIA gives the NCHE similar accreditation responsibilities.
NCHE Chairperson Prof. Joy Kwesiga petitioned the Ministry of Education, warning that overlapping mandates between the TVET Act and the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act (UOTIA) could create regulatory conflicts, inefficiencies, and confusion for institutions and students.
Prof. Kwesiga, who also serves as Vice Chancellor of Kabale University, cautioned that the new law risked creating a parallel education pathway. She highlighted uncertainties around qualification alignment, graduate rights, and the status of non-TVET diploma programmes in higher institutions.
Universities under NCHE have traditionally enjoyed academic freedom to develop and assess their own programmes, but the TVET Act requires diploma and certificate programmes classified as TVET to register with the TVET Council and submit trainees for assessment by the Uganda Vocational and Technical Assessment Board (UVTAB). Institutions were given 12 months to comply, with UVTAB leading curriculum development in consultation with providers.
Education experts warned that these changes could undermine efforts to eliminate overlapping mandates across government agencies and create confusion for both public and private institutions, including chartered universities.
However, in his review, Kiryowa Kiwanuka pointed to Section 125 of the TVET Act as clear evidence of Parliament’s intention for the TVET and higher education systems to operate independently.
He noted that this model is consistent with global best practice. According to the opinion, more than 70 countries worldwide maintain distinct governance structures for TVET and higher education, with coordination between the two systems achieved through national qualifications frameworks.
The Attorney General drew comparisons with countries whose systems Uganda has studied or adopted elements from, including Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Finland, the United Kingdom, Singapore, Kenya, South Africa, Botswana, Rwanda, Ghana, and Ethiopia.
In those jurisdictions, post-secondary education operates under two independent systems with separate statutory authorities for TVET and higher education.
“The comparative situation in other countries shows a consistent legal and policy pattern… countries are seeking to strengthen skills development and modernise their post-secondary systems by deliberately establishing a specialised TVET authority distinct from the academic higher education regulator,” he stated.
This separation allows each regulator to focus on its strengths: competency-based, industry-driven oversight for TVET programmes on one side, and academic, research-oriented quality assurance for universities on the other, while maintaining smooth articulation through a unified qualifications framework.
“Viewed against the international norm, Uganda’s approach under the TVET Act and the UOTIA reflects a mainstream, coherent, and globally validated model rather than any departure from accepted regulatory practice,” the AG added.
He further acknowledged that perceived overlaps often surface when institutions offer mixed programmes. However, Sections 30 and 118 of the TVET Act provide clear guidance with a university offering TVET programmes needs to comply with the TVET Act only for those specific programmes.
Sources at the Education Ministry and the National Council for Higher Education (NCHE) who spoke to this publication acknowledged some implementation gaps in the TVET Act. However, they noted that these issues are being addressed through ongoing stakeholder consultations, development of new policies, and proposed amendments to the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act-URN. Give us feedback on this story through our email: kamwokyatimes@gmail.com
