Uganda’s Constitutional Court has struck down key provisions of the amended Computer Misuse Act, dealing a significant blow to a law widely criticised for curbing online freedom of expression.
In a ruling delivered on Tuesday, a panel of five justices declared the 2022 amendments to the Computer Misuse Act null and void, citing procedural irregularities during their passage in Parliament. The court found that lawmakers lacked the required quorum at the time of voting, rendering the amendments unconstitutional.
The invalidated provisions had criminalised a range of online conduct, including the sharing of “malicious” information, ridiculing individuals, and using false identities on digital platforms—offences critics argued were vague and open to abuse.
Petitioners, including journalist Agather Atuhaire and former legislator Winnie Kiiza, welcomed the ruling as a major victory for civil liberties and press freedom.
Reacting shortly after the judgment, Atuhaire expressed excitement about the outcome, saying, “We won, we won… the Constitutional Court agreed with us that the Computer Misuse Amendment Act is unconstitutional and therefore null and void.”
She also previously questioned how the law had been passed, recalling concerns raised during the parliamentary process. “While passing the Computer Misuse Amendment Act in 2022, a member raised an issue about the manner in which it was being passed,” she noted, referencing debates at the time.
Legal observers say the court’s decision reinforces constitutional safeguards on freedom of expression and due process, particularly in the digital age where laws regulating online speech have come under increased scrutiny.
The amendments had been repeatedly used by authorities to prosecute journalists, activists, and government critics, raising alarm among media rights organisations. Petitioners argued that the provisions were overly broad and had enabled the criminalisation of legitimate expression.
While the ruling nullifies the contested sections of the law, analysts caution that its full impact will depend on subsequent legal and legislative actions. Some past convictions secured under the provisions may remain in place unless separately challenged in court.
The Attorney General is expected to study the judgment and could appeal the decision, potentially setting the stage for further legal battles over the regulation of online speech in Uganda.
The ruling marks one of the most significant judicial interventions in recent years on digital rights, and is likely to influence ongoing debates about balancing cybersecurity, public order, and freedom of expression.
