Parliament has granted Buyaga West MP Dennis Namara leave to introduce a Private Member’s Bill seeking to amend the Administration of Parliament Act, setting the stage for fresh debate on how the Leader of the Opposition (LOP) is elected and held accountable. The decision followed a lengthy procedural debate during which Deputy Speaker Thomas Tayebwa ruled that Namara’s request met the constitutional and procedural requirements for leave to introduce a private member’s bill.
Tayebwa explained that, at the leave stage, the role of the Chair is limited to determining whether a proposed bill complies with constitutional requirements rather than assessing its merits. He said presiding officers examine whether a draft bill would offend constitutional provisions relating to financial matters under Article 93, infringe non-derogable rights, or establish a one-party political system.
“The moment we find that you conform to those provisions, as presiding officers, our hands are tied,” Tayebwa said, adding that it is Parliament—not the Chair—that ultimately decides whether to grant leave to a member. Before putting the question to the House, Tayebwa also clarified that a certificate of financial implications is not required when seeking leave to introduce a private member’s bill. He said the certificate becomes mandatory before the bill is tabled for first reading after it has been drafted.
Before Namara presented his motion, several opposition legislators questioned whether Parliament should revisit proposals similar to those considered during the 11th Parliament.
Kassanda South MP Patrick Nsamba Oshabe argued that political parties had previously expressed their positions on comparable amendments and sought guidance on whether it was appropriate to reopen the matter. Other legislators questioned whether the proposed legislation reflected the priorities of Namara’s constituents.
However, Tayebwa dismissed attempts to interrogate the MP’s political motivations, stressing that every legislator has the constitutional right to introduce a private member’s bill. “I don’t think any member has a right to be told how his constituents will react or not, because he knows the constituents he represents,” Tayebwa said, cautioning members against intimidating colleagues seeking to exercise their legislative mandate.
Moving his motion under Articles 79 and 94 of the Constitution and the Rules of Procedure of Parliament, Namara argued that the Administration of Parliament Act requires reform to strengthen accountability and democratic governance within Parliament.
He said the proposed legislation seeks to provide for the election of the Leader of the Opposition by all opposition Members of Parliament rather than by the largest opposition party alone.
The Bill also proposes to expand the grounds for the removal of the Leader of the Opposition to include incompetence and misconduct. It further seeks to require broader consultation among opposition parties in the appointment of the Shadow Cabinet and to promote greater inclusivity in the appointment of opposition representatives to parliamentary committees and international bodies.
Namara argued that although Uganda adopted multiparty politics in 2005, the current legal framework allows the largest opposition party to dominate decisions affecting all opposition legislators.
“We are talking about anchoring democracy. Democracy cannot only be on the side of the National Resistance Movement. Democracy should be on two sides,” Namara said.
He also questioned why ministers and other public officials are subject to accountability mechanisms while the Leader of the Opposition is not, despite occupying a publicly funded office.
“If every minister of the Government of Uganda can be censured because they draw money from the Consolidated Fund, how come there are no checks and balances on the side of the Leader of the Opposition?” he asked.
Linos Ngopek, who seconded the motion, argued that while the Administration of Parliament Act provides for the election of the Leader of the Opposition, it does not prescribe the procedure for conducting that election.
He contended that the current practice,where the largest opposition party designates the Leader of the Opposition- limits the participation of smaller opposition parties and independent MPs.
According to Ngopek, allowing all opposition legislators to participate in electing the Leader of the Opposition would promote inclusivity, strengthen internal democracy and better reflect Uganda’s multiparty political system.
He also argued that additional accountability measures for the office would improve transparency and leadership within the opposition.
Soroti District Woman MP Ann Adeke Ebaju questioned whether the claims advanced in support of the proposed amendments had been verified.
She asked Namara to provide evidence that other opposition political parties had not been consulted during the appointment of the current Leader of the Opposition, Joel Ssenyonyi.
Tayebwa said such matters would be considered when the Bill is formally introduced and debated on its merits, noting that Parliament was only considering whether Namara should be granted leave to prepare and introduce the legislation.
The House subsequently granted Namara leave to introduce the Administration of Parliament (Amendment) Bill.
The proposed legislation will now be drafted, obtain a certificate of financial implications before first reading, and return to Parliament for formal consideration.
The proposed amendments come amid heightened political debate over the Office of the Leader of the Opposition following recent public exchanges between Leader of the Opposition Joel Ssenyonyi and Chief of Defence Forces Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba.
Ssenyonyi had questioned the military’s role following the arrest of former Kampala Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago, prompting criticism from Gen. Kainerugaba. However, Namara did not explicitly link his proposed Bill to those events while presenting his motion-URN. Give us feedback on this story through our email: kamwokyatimes@gmail.com
