Why the Sovereignty Bill is Bad

Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed., 2019), defines sovereignty as “the supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power by which any independent state is governed.” Article 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda provides that all power belongs to the people, that all authority in the State emanates from the people, and that the people shall express their will and consent on who shall govern them and how they should be governed through regular, free and fair elections or referenda. The Protection of Sovereignty Bill must be read against that constitutional starting point. Foreign influence is a real concern, and the Bill’s Memorandum identifies interference in Government policy and programmes, foreign aid that comes with influence, and the use of online platforms to disseminate misinformation and facilitate social discord. Those concerns give the Bill its stated rationale. The legal issue is whether the Bill remains within that rationale while preserving the constitutional meaning of sovereignty as power located in the people, because once a law enacted in the name of sovereignty uses broad definitions, wide controls and heavy reporting obligations to regulate citizenship, participation, capital and ordinary economic life, it begins to move beyond protection of the State and into a wider restructuring of the space within which citizens live, work and engage.