KAMPALA: Uganda’s long-running battle over digital freedom registered a significant victory on March 17. The Constitutional Court swept the Computer Misuse Act off the books. The law was one of the country’s most controversial speech laws. Critics said it had blurred the line between cybercrime enforcement and the criminalisation of dissent. The ruling directed that no trial based on the Computer Misuse Law should proceed henceforth. Consequently, the Uganda speech law that silenced many online critics has been dismantled.
The ruling was welcomed by X users in Uganda, free speech advocates, lawyers, and the general public. In a country where criticism of authorities can easily land one in jail, the decision brought relief. Abductions by masked security operatives have been a feared reality for government critics. The court’s action removes a primary legal tool used against them.
TikTokers Bear the Brunt
A week before the landmark ruling, a TikToker faced jail under the now-defunct law. Ibrahim Musana, also known as Pressure 24/7, was remanded to prison by City Hall Magistrates Court. He was allegedly spreading hate speech against Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba, the Chief of Defence Forces. Muhoozi is also the son to President Yoweri Museveni. Musana was charged based on sections of the Computer Misuse Act.
In November 2024, three TikTokers were remanded to jail by Entebbe Chief Magistrates Court. They allegedly insulted President Museveni, First Lady Janet Museveni, and Muhoozi. David Ssengonzi, Isaiah Ssekagiri, and Calvin Kayanja were put behind bars on various charges. The Uganda speech law had been consistently used to target critics of the First Family. Janet Museveni is also the Minister of Education and Sports. Gen. Muhoozi has actively taken on a political role, thanks to his presidential ambitions.
No Quorum During Passage
The Constitutional Court also said the law was passed by Parliament without a quorum. This finding further exposed the lengths the government had gone to target online critics. The lack of quorum meant the legislative process itself was flawed. Justice Irene Mulyagonja, who wrote the majority judgement, lambasted the Speaker of Parliament Anita Among. She criticized how the Speaker handled the matter during legislation.
“It is my view that these anomalies resolve the question as to whether or not there was a quorum on the passing of the Bill into law in favour of the petitioners,” Mulyagonja wrote. She added, “I would find so because the evidence (the Hansard) that was produced by the Attorney General to prove the assertions of the Clerk does not show that the Speaker complied with the impugned provisions of the Constitution and the Rules of Procedure of Parliament.” Therefore, the Uganda speech law was invalid from the start.
Digital Resistance and Government Response
The ruling brings into focus Uganda’s Digital Public Infrastructure. A highly agitated population uses social media platforms to demand accountability. They expose corruption and offer unfiltered criticism of public officials. DPI refers to the foundational digital systems that enable service delivery at population scale. These include digital ID, payments, and data exchange platforms.
To counter digital resistance, the Ugandan government went after individual actors using laws like the Computer Misuse Act. Occasionally, it resorted to extreme measures such as switching off the internet during tense periods. For instance, the government ordered a four-day internet blackout during the 2026 elections. President Museveni was declared the winner with a 71.6 percent victory against main opponent Robert Kyagulanyi, also known as Bobi Wine. The blackout aimed to control the narrative during a contested election.
Popular Platforms Targeted
X and TikTok are the most popular social media platforms in Uganda. It is not surprising that the Uganda speech law has been used to go after users on these platforms. Agora Discourse, a digital public square advocating for free speech, profiled more than 30 TikTokers in April 2025 who had been jailed under the now-defunct law. Agora on its X account said the jailed TikTokers were all sentenced by Magistrate Stella Maris Amabilis of the Entebbe Magistrates Court.
Most of the TikTokers were Gen Z, a tech-savvy generation that has come of age in the social media era. They use the video-sharing app to rewrite the rules of protest and governance. They were jailed on the notorious charges of “hate speech and spreading malicious information.” The Uganda speech law gave authorities broad discretion to define what constituted malicious information.
Free Speech Advocates Welcome Ruling
George Musisi, a lawyer for the petitioners against the law, told journalists, “The law was draconian. It brought offences like sharing unsolicited information and sharing malicious information. ‘Who defines what is malicious?’ we asked. We also found that the law contravened the constitution as far as freedom of speech and the press are concerned.” His words captured the essence of the challenge against the Uganda speech law.
The ruling emanated from a consolidated constitutional court petition filed in 2022. Over 26 petitioners were involved, including Collaboration on International ICT Policy for Eastern and Southern Africa (CIPESA), Human Rights Network for Journalists Uganda, Chapter Four, Uganda Law Society, African Centre for Media Excellence, and activists Winnie Kiiiza and Agather Atuhaire. Their collective action brought down the law.
Implications Going Forward
The striking down of the Computer Misuse Act represents a significant victory for digital rights in Uganda. However, the government may attempt to introduce new legislation. Activists remain vigilant. The underlying tensions between authorities and online critics persist. Social media will continue to be a battleground for free expression.
For those previously charged under the law, the ruling brings hope. Cases based on the Computer Misuse Act cannot proceed. Individuals like Ibrahim Musana, David Ssengonzi, Isaiah Ssekagiri, and Calvin Kayanja should see their charges dropped. The Uganda speech law that imprisoned them no longer exists. Nevertheless, the struggle for digital freedom continues. The court victory is one battle won in a longer war.
