How Separation of Powers Failed in Uganda

Special Report | September 17, 2025

T he principle of separation of powers was written into Uganda’s 1995 Constitution to safeguard democracy by creating checks and balances among the three arms of government — the Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary. Three decades later, critics say the arrangement has collapsed, with one arm consistently overshadowing the others.

Executive Dominance

Analysts point to repeated constitutional amendments as evidence of executive overreach. The removal of presidential term limits in 2005, and later the scrapping of the presidential age limit, cemented the presidency’s grip on power. Parliament, instead of acting as a counterweight, has often aligned itself with executive interests, particularly in budget approvals and policymaking.

A Weakened Legislature

Parliament’s oversight role has diminished over time. Instead of scrutinising policies, the House has frequently fast-tracked laws and budgets championed by the Executive. Critics argue this undermines the people’s representation and reduces Parliament to a rubber-stamp body.

Judiciary Under Pressure

The Judiciary, though constitutionally independent, has also faced challenges. Judges have at times been accused of yielding to political pressure, while institutions such as the Inspectorate of Government and Human Rights Commission — designed to check state power — are criticised as toothless.

Lessons for the Future

Experts warn that without real independence of institutions, the promise of the 1995 Constitution will remain unfulfilled. They say reviving separation of powers is crucial to restoring public trust in governance and strengthening democracy in Uganda.

Published on 9/17/25 2:00 PM