Archival Sense
Member
- Dec 16, 2025
- 47
- 72
Uganda’s Attorney General, Kiryowa Kiwanuka, has directed that all criminal proceedings arising from the nullified provisions of the Computer Misuse (Amendment) Act be terminated following a ruling by the Constitutional Court.
The directive follows a decision by the Constitutional Court of Uganda which declared that the enactment of the Computer Misuse (Amendment) Act did not comply with the procedural rules of Parliament, rendering the contested provisions null and void.
In his statement, the Attorney General explained the legal implications of the court’s decision, stating:
“The import of the orders of the Constitutional Court is that the enactment of the Computer Misuse (Amendment) Act was done without compliance with Rule 24 (now 25) of the Rules of Procedure of Parliament. The impugned provisions were thus null and void. So, all criminal proceedings emanating from the impugned provisions should be terminated,” Kiryowa said.
The ruling means that any ongoing prosecutions based on the annulled sections of the law cannot continue, as they are now considered to have no legal foundation. Legal experts say the decision reinforces the importance of Parliament following proper legislative procedures when passing laws, especially those that affect civil liberties and criminal liability.
The Computer Misuse (Amendment) Act had been widely debated, particularly over provisions related to online speech, harassment, and the sharing of information on digital platforms. Critics had argued that some sections of the law were overly broad and could be used to limit freedom of expression.
With the Constitutional Court’s decision and the Attorney General’s directive, affected individuals facing charges under the nullified provisions are now expected to have their cases withdrawn or dismissed in accordance with the law.
The directive follows a decision by the Constitutional Court of Uganda which declared that the enactment of the Computer Misuse (Amendment) Act did not comply with the procedural rules of Parliament, rendering the contested provisions null and void.
In his statement, the Attorney General explained the legal implications of the court’s decision, stating:
“The import of the orders of the Constitutional Court is that the enactment of the Computer Misuse (Amendment) Act was done without compliance with Rule 24 (now 25) of the Rules of Procedure of Parliament. The impugned provisions were thus null and void. So, all criminal proceedings emanating from the impugned provisions should be terminated,” Kiryowa said.
The ruling means that any ongoing prosecutions based on the annulled sections of the law cannot continue, as they are now considered to have no legal foundation. Legal experts say the decision reinforces the importance of Parliament following proper legislative procedures when passing laws, especially those that affect civil liberties and criminal liability.
The Computer Misuse (Amendment) Act had been widely debated, particularly over provisions related to online speech, harassment, and the sharing of information on digital platforms. Critics had argued that some sections of the law were overly broad and could be used to limit freedom of expression.
With the Constitutional Court’s decision and the Attorney General’s directive, affected individuals facing charges under the nullified provisions are now expected to have their cases withdrawn or dismissed in accordance with the law.
