The Constitutional Court of Uganda has nullified key provisions of the Computer Misuse Act, including the 2022 Amendment, ruling that they violate the Constitution by unjustifiably restricting fundamental rights.
The judgement was delivered on March 17, 2026, by a bench sitting in Kampala.
The petition was filed by a coalition of civil society and media organisations, including Unwanted Witness Uganda, the African Centre for Media Excellence, the Editors’ Guild of Uganda, and individual journalists and activists such as Agather Atuhaire and former opposition leader Winnie Kiiza. They challenged the Attorney General over the law’s impact on freedom of expression, access to information, and civic space.
Eagle Online couldn’t get a comment from Ms. Atuhaire as her phone number was off
The Computer Misuse Act was originally enacted in 2011 to criminalise cyber offences, including unauthorised access to computer systems, electronic fraud, and cyber harassment.
In 2022, Parliament passed an amendment broadening the law to criminalise the sending or sharing of malicious, false, or unsolicited information online, misuse of social media under a false identity, and unauthorised sharing of information about children.
The petitioners argued that several provisions, particularly those introduced in 2022, were vague, overly broad, and could criminalise ordinary online expression, investigative journalism, and legitimate civic engagement. They maintained that the law infringed on Article 29 of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression.
The government, represented by the Attorney General, defended the law, saying the measures were necessary to protect public order, national security, and citizens from cybercrime. They argued that the law provided legal tools to tackle online offences in an increasingly digital society.
In its ruling, the Constitutional Court sided with the petitioners, noting that the law’s provisions failed to meet constitutional standards for clarity, proportionality, and protection of fundamental freedoms.
The judgement effectively invalidates the legal basis for prosecutions under the challenged sections.
Civil society actors hailed the ruling as a victory for digital rights, saying it protects journalists, activists and ordinary citizens from arbitrary criminalisation online.
The decision may prompt Parliament to revise the law to balance the regulation of online conduct with constitutional protections.
