Defence minister Jacob Oboth-Oboth, CDF Gen Muhoozi Kainerugaba and state minister for internal affairs Gen David Muhoozi. PHOTO/COMBO
The deployment of Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) soldiers to South Sudan has sparked controversy and war of words among critical stakeholders in both Uganda and South Sudan.
The Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) and the minister that supervises him are not reading from the same script nor on the issue, nor the South Sudan authorities that reportedly invited the Ugandan troops.
Gen Muhoozi Kainerugaba, the CDF, first announced the deployment through a video posted on his official X platform, on March 11, showing Ugandan troops descending a gangway of a plane.
He tweeted: “UPDF Commandos arriving in Juba to support South Sudan People's Defence Forces (SSPDF) in the current crisis. Operation 'Mlinzi wa Kimya' has begun. God bless UPDF!”
But quick on the heels of the post, Mr Ibrahim Ssemujju Nganda, the Kira municipality Member of Parliament, on Wednesday last week denounced the unilateral move as illegal. He said the unilateral deployment contravenes the UPDF Act 2005.
UPDF soldiers during a military drill recently. PHOTO/ FILE/ COURTESY
Mr Ssemujju said the deployment of a national army cannot be casually done, but has to be with the full authority of the Parliament.
“I have a motion under Rule 64. The CDF has just announced that he has deployed our military in South Sudan to protect the capital [Juba]. And you know, Mr Speaker, that deployment can only happen with the approval of Parliament. So the motion is that you adjourn the debate on this matter, Mr Speaker, and I raise this matter,” he said.
“The good thing is, we have the Minister for Defence here. We also have a UPDF representative and the Minister of Defence, a very good lawyer, to tell us how this deployment has been done in total violation of the Constitution. That's the motion Mr Speaker, I am seeking to move,” Mr Ssemujju added.
Curiously, Defence minister Oboth Oboth said he was not privy to the fact that the UPDF had been deployed to South Sudan. He said he was not part of the decision-making for the deployment.
“Whatever Honourable Ssemujju is saying, I'm not aware of any formal communication that has been made. You see, as a journalist, he could access information that I, as a lawyer, may not be able to access. Because as a lawyer, [my] information has to be very formal. I don't rely on social media. That's the difference between the two professional bodies. I'm not aware of any formal communication that has been made,” he said.
But Mr Jonathan Odur, the MP for Erute County South, said the fact that the Minister of Defence is not aware of the deployment speaks of how decisions affecting the country are taken without the knowledge of the minister who oversees the operations of the army.
“If it is true, it is a serious matter. Let the government show us that they are actually working. This would not be something difficult for the minister to verify if there is a government running,” he said.
Mr Odur said: “You know under Section 39 [of the UPDF Act, 2005], deployment outside the country for peacekeeping missions can only happen with the approval of Parliament. That is in the law. It even goes to say that if Parliament were in recess, Parliament would be recalled and constituted for that purpose.
“So since it's an urgent matter and the government seems to be in control, unless they are saying they are not in control of this particular CDF that it can actually deploy without the knowledge of government the minister can verify this information and bring it here because it has implications in terms of resources,” he said.
But Deputy Speaker Thomas Tayebwa, who chaired the session, refused to entertain the motion. He said Mr Ssemujju should have written to his office at least two hours before the plenary commenced.
“I don't know whether you got this news when you were here or earlier on because Section 64(2) requires that you write to the Speaker two hours before plenary begins. You know, I have to consider very many issues at stake. I do believe this indeed is a critical matter, but which can be discussed on another day,” he said.
Sudan denies deployment
We were unable to get a response from the South Sudan embassy in Kampala by press time. But across the border, in Juba, the government of South Sudan denied the presence of Ugandan soldiers in Juba.
The country’s Information minister, Mr Michael Makuei, said Ugandan troops were not in Juba and did not offer further explanation when questioned by the local media.
The said deployment has angered a cross section of the South Sudanese who accused Uganda of propping up President Salva Kiir against the interest of the citizens.
UPDF defends position
While Parliament and other critical stakeholders are angry with the deployment, the army has stuck by its decision and confirmed the deployment that South Sudan has denied.
Maj Bilal Katamba, the acting deputy Defence public information officer, on Wednesday last week said: “You have heard from the horse's mouth (the CDF Gen Muhoozi). You got a comment from our Boss [his X-platform]; what do you think? You want me to wash it down or confirm it? When the boss has spoken, then there is nothing I can add.”
Similarly, Col Chris Magezi, the acting Defence public information officer, said the UPDF acted after receiving a request from the South Sudan government for help.
“The UPDF acted decisively on the request of the government of South Sudan to avert a dangerously developing situation and deployed forces accordingly. This action is also in the interest of regional security. The Honourable Minister of Defence is never involved in the operational matters of UPDF. His job is simply to represent us in Parliament,” he said on his X page.
“The Minister will in due course be brought up to speed with the relevant details of our role in the fast unfolding security situation of our crucial ally and northern neighbour. It was important for the UPDF to act with expediency to contain the situation,” reads part of the posts.
But Mr Abdallah Kiwanuka, the Mukono North MP, and a member of the Defence and Internal Affairs Committee, on Wednesday described the UPDF deployment to South Sudan without Parliament approval as unfortunate.
“They acted outside the law because we did not see any motion in Parliament on the deployment but rather learnt about it in the media. They are doing what they did in DR Congo, which is very bad because this is the taxpayers’ money we are talking about. I call upon all right-thinking Ugandans to rise up and condemn this act and force President Museveni and his son to follow the law,” he said.
UPDF officers undergo drills in South Sudan in the past. PHOTO/DPU
The 1995 Ugandan Constitution, specifically Article 208, mandates that the military (Uganda People’s Defence Forces - UPDF) be subordinate to civilian authority, meaning the military is under the control of the civilian government.
The UPDF Act, 2005, further states that “appropriate civil authority” means the President, a minister, the Inspector General of Police, a resident district commissioner, or a district police commander.
Gen Muhoozi, the CDF, is President Museveni’s son.
Activists Respond to Uganda’s Deployment in South Sudan
Dr. Remember Miamingi, a South Sudanese governance and human rights expert, has strongly criticized Uganda’s alleged troop deployment to South Sudan, arguing that it exposes deep governance and transparency failures.
In an opinion piece on Radio Tamazuj, Dr. Miamingi warned that the conflicting reports about Uganda’s military presence have eroded public trust and could escalate the conflict, drawing in broader regional interference.
“This marks Uganda’s second major deployment to our country in under a decade—another troubling example of how President Museveni has propped up President Kiir’s intransigent savagery so that his family can continue to cash in at the expense of peace and stability in South Sudan and the region. This toxic relationship has profound negative implications for both South Sudan and Uganda,” he stated.
He further argued that Uganda’s intervention in South Sudan’s internal power struggles weakens the national army and exposes the country to external manipulation.
“When a nation depends on a foreign force to settle domestic conflicts, it signals to neighboring countries that South Sudan cannot defend its people and territorial integrity. This emboldens those with vested interests in a fragmented and destabilized South Sudan, knowing they can assert influence or encroach upon our sovereignty without fear of resistance,” Dr. Miamingi said.
While acknowledging Uganda’s historical support during South Sudan’s liberation struggle, he noted that the relationship has been strained since Uganda’s military first intervened in 2013.
“Many in South Sudan now perceive Uganda as aiding a government viewed by ordinary citizens as oppressive, illegitimate, and disconnected from their plight. Many believe Uganda no longer stands with ordinary citizens but with a national government widely seen as brutal and self-serving,” he added.
AU, IGAD Speak Out
The African Union (AU) and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) have condemned the escalation of violence in South Sudan and urged all parties to exercise restraint.
President Museveni and his South Sudan counterpart Salva Kiir during a meeting at State House Entebbe on September 14, 2023. PHOTO/PPU
At the 43rd Extraordinary Assembly of IGAD Heads of State and Government, chaired by Djibouti’s President Ismaïl Omar Guelleh, the leaders reaffirmed their commitment to the 2018 Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS).
The summit called for dialogue as the only path to resolving political differences and expressed deep concern over the deteriorating security situation, rising ceasefire violations, and violent clashes.
In particular, IGAD leaders condemned the killing of South Sudan People’s Defense Forces (SSPDF) Commander Gen. Majur Duk in Nasir, Upper Nile State, and the attack on a UN helicopter evacuating personnel.
They urged all parties to immediately de-escalate tensions, respect the ceasefire, and expedite the implementation of transitional security arrangements. Additionally, they called for the release of detained officials unless credible evidence justifies legal proceedings.
Meanwhile, African Union Commission Chairperson Moussa Faki Mahamat expressed alarm over the escalating violence in Upper Nile, Western Equatoria, and Western Bahr el-Ghazal, warning that it threatens the entire peace process.
“The Chairperson strongly condemns this violent escalation and calls for utmost restraint by all parties. He urges authorities to hold perpetrators accountable, protect civilians, and urgently engage in national dialogue,” the AU statement read.
What the Ugandan law says on deployment
Section 39 of UPDF Act, 2005, states that the President may deploy troops outside Uganda for purposes of— (a) peacekeeping; or (b) peace enforcement. But says it shall be done with the approval of Parliament and where the President deploys troops under this section when Parliament is on recess, the Speaker shall immediately summon Parliament to an emergency session to sit within 21 days after the deployment, for purposes of ratifying that deployment.
Section 40 of the same Act says where troops are to be deployed outside Uganda under a multilateral or bilateral arrangement with other countries, the Minister of Defence shall enter into an agreement, in this section referred to as a Status of Forces Agreement, with the host country or organisation.
“The deployed troops shall not be subject to the law of the host country or the jurisdiction of any court or tribunal deriving power under that law. Deployed soldiers who commit any offence may be repatriated for trial in Uganda. Where the circumstances surrounding the commission of an offence by a person deployed outside Uganda require that the person be tried and punished at the scene of the crime, that person may, with the approval of the appropriate authority, be tried and punished under the laws of Uganda,” the law says.
