Government Confirms 7-Year Term Proposal as Debate Intensifies

By Skika Reporter

Government has confirmed that a proposal to extend the tenure of Parliament and the Executive from five to seven years is under consideration, igniting fresh political and legal debate across the country.

The Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs said the proposal forms part of a broader package of constitutional reforms compiled by the Uganda Law Reform Commission.

Justice and Constitutional Affairs Minister Norbert Mao revealed that the review seeks to revisit the Constitution comprehensively after three decades of its existence.

“After 30 years, it is time for an inclusive, transparent and comprehensive review of the Constitution,” Mao said, noting that both Parliament and the Executive support a holistic reform process rather than piecemeal amendments.

However, the proposal has drawn sharp criticism from opposition leaders and political analysts, who warn it could undermine democratic accountability and serve narrow political interests.

Ibrahim Ssemujju Nganda recalled that a similar proposal emerged during the 2017 constitutional amendment debates that removed the presidential age limit.

“In 2017, when Yoweri Kaguta Museveni amended the age limit, they also presented the term extension. Court pronounced itself on technicalities,” Ssemujju said.

He argued that the renewed push is politically motivated. “These are selfish individuals who want to stay in office. You cannot benefit from a matter you are part of,” he added.

Kigulu South MP Richard Lumu also raised legal concerns, citing constitutional limitations on Parliament’s powers.

“Government cannot remove a court judgment. Article 92 is very clear — Parliament cannot alter any judgment of a court,” Lumu said, warning that such a move could destabilize the political environment.

Political analyst Yusuf Sserunkuuma questioned the rationale behind the proposal, asking what specific problem the extension seeks to address.

“What question is the amendment addressing?” he asked, noting that any such change would have to apply uniformly to both Parliament and the presidency.

Sserunkuuma suggested the proposal could point to deeper systemic governance challenges, arguing that shorter electoral cycles have not necessarily hindered government performance. He also warned of potential risks, including increased misuse of public resources under extended terms.

Opposition figures have further dismissed claims that longer tenures would stabilize the political landscape, arguing instead that the proposal risks weakening the fundamental role of elections in ensuring accountability.

The re-emergence of the proposal has revived memories of past constitutional battles, intensifying calls for a transparent and inclusive review process. Legal experts and civil society actors are urging government to prioritize reforms that strengthen democratic governance and public trust, rather than altering key constitutional provisions in isolation.