Nakedde Anthony

KCCA is celebrating how fast the floods "dispersed" today. This is like a doctor celebrating how fast you stopped bleeding while refusing to remove the knife. ​The focus on "waste management" and "AI images" is a calculated distraction. While littering is a real issue, it is a variable. The Nakivubo Channel’s constriction by the Ham Shopping Grounds is a constant. Engineering is a zero-sum game: when you narrow the primary artery of a city’s drainage to accommodate private profit, the water doesn't disappear. It just waits in the streets. ​By using a photo of the Ham arcade to show "normalized" levels, KCCA isn't just clearing the drains; they are clearing the path for continued impunity. We are being asked to ignore the bottleneck and blame the bottle. ​True urban resilience isn't measured by how fast we mop the floor, but by our courage to fix the leaking roof. ​Stop managing the optics. Manage the engineering.

Uganda’s proposed Sovereignty Bill is the ONLY law in the world openly attempting something this sweeping: it legally turns its own citizens abroad into “foreigners”. The Bill is explicit. A “foreigner” includes “Ugandan citizens residing abroad”. That single clause redraws the boundary of citizenship. It means diaspora money, relationships, and even family support can fall under foreign control rules. So the implications are not abstract. -A mother in Mbale receiving school fees from her son in London. -A boda boda rider in Gulu financed by a brother in Dubai. -A small shop in Mbarara stocked using capital sent from Boston. All could, in theory, fall under foreign influence rules. Then the net widens. The definition of an “agent of a foreigner” includes anyone “directly or indirectly… financed or subsidised” by a foreigner. Not directed. Not controlled. Simply funded. -A journalist paid by a locally registered outlet that receives donor support. -A researcher on a project with partial foreign grants. -An NGO worker whose salary traces back, however distantly, to external funding. All can be classified as “agents”. Clause 22 then imposes a hard ceiling: “a cap on foreign funding of approximately UGX 400 million within any twelve-month period”, beyond which ministerial approval is required. So: -A private hospital built with diaspora investment. -A school supported by an international foundation. -A construction firm using a foreign loan. Then comes the sharpest edge. -Clause 13 creates the offence of economic sabotage, criminalising anyone who “publishes information… that weakens or damages the economic system”. So: -A newspaper reporting a currency slide. -An analyst warning about debt stress. -A civil society group highlighting inflation pressures. Even if accurate, such reporting could fall foul of the law. Finally, Clause 5 prohibits activities that promote foreign interests “against the interests of Uganda”, a phrase the law does not define. Put together, these clauses do something unprecedented. -They do not just regulate foreign influence. -They redefine who is foreign. -They extend control from politics into everyday economic and social life. In most countries, including Ethiopia and Ethiopia, sovereignty laws manage outsiders. Here, Uganda redefined outsiders to include its citizens, basically rewriting the 1995 constitution. Of course it’s in the preparatory and consultation stage and could change for better - or WORSE!