Kampala, March 10, 2026 – Members of Parliament have put the Uganda Police Force on the spot over its continued deployment at the home of opposition leader Robert Kyagulanyi, questioning the justification for the security presence amid reports of vandalism and assault.
The concerns were raised during a session of Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC–Central Government), where legislators reviewed findings in the 2024/25 Auditor General’s report.
Bugiri Municipality MP Asuman Basalirwa criticised police leadership, accusing them of downplaying what he described as serious human rights concerns.
“I don’t know why the Inspector General of Police should casually respond to a matter of grave human rights concern,” Basalirwa said. “A home is not a detention facility.”
He cited past court rulings against prolonged police deployments around private residences, arguing that restricting access violates constitutional rights, including freedom of movement.
Police defend deployment
Deputy Inspector General of Police James Ochaya told the committee that officers were deployed to safeguard the property while Kyagulanyi is away.
“Our presence is to provide security. Since he is not there, if we were absent people could vandalise his property,” Ochaya said.
However, lawmakers questioned the explanation, pointing to reports that the residence in Magere had already been vandalised and that Kyagulanyi’s wife, Barbra Itungo Kyagulanyi, was allegedly assaulted despite the heavy security presence.
PAC Vice Chairperson Gorreth Namugga challenged police to explain the apparent contradiction.
“We understand the home was vandalised and there were videos showing the First Lady of the home being brutalised. Where were the police when that happened?” she asked.
Ochaya maintained that the deployment is intended to prevent a recurrence of such incidents, adding that investigations are ongoing.
Access restrictions questioned
MPs also raised concerns over reports that relatives and lawyers had been denied access to the residence.
Basalirwa said even close family members and legal representatives, including those from the Uganda Law Society, had reportedly been blocked.
“What kind of protection denies family members and lawyers entry?” he asked.
He further alleged that people inside the home were unable to leave freely, with restrictions even affecting those delivering food.
No timeline for withdrawal
Pressed on how long the deployment would last, Ochaya did not provide a clear timeline, saying police would reassess the situation upon Kyagulanyi’s return and could advise him to seek private security.
“My mandate is to protect life and property, detect crime and prevent it,” he said.
Namugga, however, remained unconvinced, questioning the effectiveness of the deployment.
“If police were there, how did attackers reach the home and assault his wife? Who should we hold accountable?” she asked.
Wider concerns
The committee also sought clarification on reports that some of Kyagulanyi’s bodyguards had been arrested over unpaid allowances, an issue Ochaya said he would verify.
The exchange highlights ongoing tensions between security agencies and opposition leaders, with critics arguing that such deployments undermine constitutional freedoms, including movement, association and access to legal counsel.
PAC has directed police to provide further explanations on the deployment, the alleged vandalism, and the status of investigations into the reported assault.
