Explainer Series: Examining the “Foreign Agent” narrative in Uganda

Sovereignty at Stake or Political Convenience?

The Africa Press wrote an article in October 2021 following the president of Uganda’s Yoweri Kaguta Museveni’s letter of displeasure in the “runnings” of international bodies in uganda, in 2021.

On January 2, 2021, Uganda’s president Yoweri Kaguta Museveni had written a letter to the Minister of Finance, Planning and Economic Development, Matia Kasaija ordering for  the immediate suspension of the Democratic Governance Facility (DGF) claiming that DGF was financing activities to undermine the government and the politics of this country.

“How and why did the Minister of Finance unilaterally make such a major decision with far-reaching consequences, let alone one whose effect is to surrender the sovereignty of the people of Uganda to foreigners? Was this a reason of subversion, corruption, or criminal negligence, or all of these? Why wasn’t the Cabinet and I consulted?” The president was quoted.

In Uganda’s political scene, phrases like “foreign influence” and “foreign interference” have  gained much traction.

These terms are often used to apply to Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), opposition actors, activists, critical media and journalists elcetions observers , raising the question: Is the government genuinely concerned about foreign meddling in a way that threatens national sovereignty, or has the “foreign influence” label become a convenient tool to consolidate political control by the ruling government.

“It has come to my attention that the Ministry of Finance under the hand of the Permanent Secretary, irregularly and unilaterally authorized a £100 million fund, known as the Democratic Governance Facility, to be operated exclusively by a foreign mission in Uganda. Unlike prior grant arrangements like the Democratic Governance and Accountability project in which there was transparency and representations, the Government of Uganda has no say or oversight on how the Democratic Governance Facility is administered in Uganda,”Museveni said in the letter to Minister Kasaija.” reads a story by Nile Post on the subject on February 24, 2021

The move was made ahead of the 2021 general elections scheduled to take place on January 14. The organization was accused of funding opposition leaders and organizations involved in monitoring elections.

According to Nile Post (in the last paragraph), the former Uganda Media Centre Executive Director, Ofwono Opondo, said that DGF was being used to fund opposition political parties, especially the National Unity Platform headed by Robert Kyagulanyi, the most prominent opposition figure in the 2021 polls. 

The fund was launched in 2011 by Denmark, Sweden, Ireland, Austria, Norway, the  Netherlands and the United Kingdom before leaving in 2016 to provide financial and technical support to government and non-government groups promoting human rights, democracy, justice and accountability.

Origins of the Narrative

The foreign agent narrative started to resurface prominently in 2011, during the Walk to Work protests, which were against the high cost of living in the country. At the time, the government accused Dr. Kizza Besigye, a four-time presidential aspirant and former president Forum for Democratic Change (FDC), of being influenced and supported by external actors, as reported here, here, here, here, here, here, here, which he denied

Since then, the narrative continues to re-emerge at sensitive moments, particularly around national elections, for instance, as reported here, here and periods of heightened civic activity like the passing of the Age Limit bill, as shown here, suggesting that the narrative is less a consistent concern and more a strategic instrument, brought forward when the regime feels pressure or threatened. 

During the campaign period of the previous general election, government authorities accused the opposition of being supported by foreigners. 

Taking us a little back in 2020, Frank Tumwebaze, the Minister of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries, made a response on X to Robert Amsterdam, an International lawyer from the UK, about his quote on the police shooting of former Radio One journalist and online Ghetto TV camera person  Ashraf Kasirye on the National Unity Platform (NUP) post.

Unbelievable how quite the diplomatic community is in the midst of mindless carnage https://t.co/jukVcc8Og0

— Robert Amsterdam (@robertamsterdam) December 27, 2020

“U must be desperate @robertamsterdam, with ur no-starter political project in Uganda. Just know it will be a loss to u & all ur project sponsors.  Ugandans don’t need ur counsel on who to elect for a President. This open meddling of foreign agents is a good eye-opener to Ugandans.” He posted in 2020

During the Age Limit debate the US Ambassador Deborah Malac raised concerns in a statement about freedom of expression in the country amid plans to amend the Constitution to scrap the presidential age limit of 75 years.

She stated: “The United States was ‘deeply concerned’ that recent arrests and raids ‘stifle the Ugandan people’s right to free expression and tarnish Uganda’s global image.” adding: “We are disturbed by reports of raids on NGOs. Infringements on protected rights under Uganda’s Constitution will impede the country’s development.”

To which Ofwono responded in the same article: “While the Government of Uganda notes her concern, it is our considered view that they are misplaced because those so far summoned or held as a preventive measure are well-known to have been making statements over the last couple of months on various public media (Radios, TVs, and social media) threatening violence over what should otherwise be a civil and democratic process and debate in the parliament of Uganda.”

In an editorial opinion written by Ofwono titled “Understanding Negative Foreign Interests in Uganda” in the WatchDog, a Ugandan news site, said that foreigners are funding people or groups and penetrating Ugandan politics. 

“Internally, they have been funding and infiltrating our politics, to build a strong internal opposition among civil society organisations, NGOs, media, professional bodies, and direct support to the opposition parties in and outside parliament into a formidable force as a ‘government-in-waiting’. The other is to try and bring the government into a major conflict with internal constituencies, among them youths whom they have identified as perhaps gullible, especially when there is widespread unemployment. Even among this category, they have identified youths in the music and entertainment industry as a major catalyst in political provocations.” Adding: “Thirdly, is continuous issuance of public rebuke against government on governance and human rights issues as recently happened from the Age limit debate and Arua municipality by-elections, where they just ignored the details of what actually happened, and haven’t condemned the opposition for instigating the violence against President Yoweri Museveni.”

He added in the article: “Right now, we are in the middle of a strategy by foreign governments and agents led by certain western countries to cause regime change in Uganda outside the constitutional framework. Their first line of action is to demonstrate how undemocratic this government is. The second, is multi-pronged fronts to bring government into conflict with major constituencies. Externally, they have tried and will continue to project Uganda as an unstable and unsafe place to invest, live and do business in. The ongoing rancor over Uganda’s engagement with China and with Russia is one such example.” 

Since then reports about deportation of foreigners accused of interfering with or funding Ugandan NGOs were made here and suspension of DGF here, here, here  and here in 2023 after its activities being suspended in 2021

How It Is Framed

On numerous occasions, Ugandan authorities have stated; foreign funding, specifically from Western governments and international NGOs, as a direct threat to sovereignty and stability. 

President  Museveni wrote a letter to the Finance Minister, Matia Kasaija questioning how his ministry allowed working with DGF.

“The foreign mission and its co-founders have been given free rein by the Ministry of Finance to choose which activity, entities and amounts to finance without the knowledge or consent of the Government. A big percentage of these funds have been used to finance activities and organisations designed to subvert Government under the guise of improving governance”. Reads the fourth paragraph of the Independent Magazine

In the letter, Museveni then asked Kasaija, to explain how and why the Permanent Secretary, Keith Muhakanizi, authorized the operations of DGF without the involvement of cabinet and tasked the Inspectorate of Government, the Inspector General of Police (IGP), the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP), and the Statehouse Anti-Corruption Unit to investigate Muhakanizi and other government officials over possible subversion, corruption and or criminal negligence.

“I am therefore directing you to immediately, suspend the activities of this fund, until the cabinet has fully reviewed this matter and a new governance structure in which the elected representatives of the people of Uganda have appropriate oversight has been put in place and approved by me,” he added in the last paragraph of the independent

Addresses by government authorities have been made warning of external actors seeking to manipulate domestic politics or destabilise the country, positioning itself as the protector of national integrity.

“President Museveni has given a stern warning to European diplomats in Kampala over claims that the embassies are recruiting politicians and government officials for espionage,” reads the first paragraph of a Daily Monitor story

Interestingly, this selective framing creates the sense that the narrative is more political than protective because it never highlights the many times the ruling government has engaged in treaties with foreign bodies as foreign influence.

Timing and Broader Strategy 

The intensification of this narrative during and after electoral seasons mirrors authoritarian strategies  elsewhere that muzzle up observers o, for example, Russia, the  “Foreign Agent” law enacted in 2012 and has recently been amended, was used to stigmatise NGOs and opposition groups, framing them as extensions of Western influence.

Although Uganda has not passed such a law, it borrows the rhetoric. Vague claims of foreign plots are deployed to justify the suspension of NGOs, the arrest of activists, or the restriction of media freedoms.

The Critics’ Perspective: A Political Weapon

The labelled groups argue that the narrative is less about defending sovereignty and more about restricting freedoms. 

A report by the Daily Monitor in August, 2021 stated that highly placed sources revealed that some EU envoys were getting frustrated with government’s delay to lift the suspension after the parties hammered out new rules of engagement in the addendum that government is yet to sign. But even if DGF was given a new lease of life, the facility will operate under strict conditions. 

Written on June 2, 2021, by the then Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Bagiire Vicent Waiswa, Ambassador Patrrick Mugoya and the Danish Envoy, NicolJi Abraham H. Peterson. 

“According to the addendum to the Memorandum of  Understanding (MoU), a copy the Daily Monitor has seen, the new agreement gives government the latitude to place DGF’s activities under the microscope.” reads the Monitor story 

 They are often engaged in legitimate work strengthening governance, advancing human rights, or providing election oversight, and while they may receive foreign support, that in itself does not prove subversion.

The accusation works rhetorically. By branding critics as agents of foreign influence, the government undermines their credibility, casts doubt on their motives, and discourages citizens from supporting them. 

This has the effect of narrowing civic space and silencing voices that challenge the state. In practice, the foreign agent label functions as a smear tactic, one that does not rely on evidence but on suspicion and fear.

In the article by Africa News, Peter Walubiri, also a constitutional lawyer, said the directive could slow government operations.

“I think the President now wants to personally be in charge because the same Article 123 envisages the President authorising any other person to negotiate agreements and treaties. The President is refusing to allow officials he has delegated work to work…I think that is unfortunate. The President wants to micro-manage the agreement-making process. The President should give general guidance to his ministers under the guidance of the AG. Look at an institution like Makerere University, it enters agreements with many organisations but that means the vice chancellor must first line up at the President’s Office to be authorised,” he said

According to the constitution, article 123 states: Execution of treaties, conventions and agreements.

(1) The President or a person authorised by the President may make treaties, conventions, agreements or other arrangements between Uganda and any other country or between Uganda and any international organisation or body, in respect of any matter. 

Conclusion

Foreign interference can pose real risks in certain contexts, but Uganda’s pattern suggests the “foreign agent” narrative functions primarily as a political tool.