Uganda walks a tightrope on the Banyarwanda citizenship debate

Dr Muganga was rejected on grounds that he held Ugandan and Canadian citizenship, having also previously held Rwandan citizenship. But, beyond the legal questions surrounding dual nationality, his case caused curiosity because he belongs to Uganda’s Banyarwanda, a community whose quest for citizenship has been building for more than two years.

Long before the Muganga controversy emerged, what started as complaints about difficulty obtaining national identity cards and passports had evolved into one of Uganda’s sensitive constitutional debates.

Leaders of the Banyarwanda community have since sought parliamentary intervention, presidential action and constitutional reforms, arguing that they are necessary to resolve decades of uncertainty surrounding their citizenship and a sense of belonging.

Over the past two years, organisations representing Ugandans of Banyarwanda descent have petitioned Parliament, met with President Museveni and conducted nationwide consultations aimed at securing changes to Uganda’s citizenship framework.

And the campaign has extended beyond Uganda’s borders. The community’s representatives have sought meetings with officials of the European Union, the British High Commission, the United Nations, the United States Embassy, and other members of the diplomatic corps in an effort to draw attention to their concerns.

Their legal adviser, Fred Mukasa Mbidde, a former member of the East African Legislative Assembly, argues that more than six million Kinyarwanda-speaking people in Uganda have been “rendered stateless” because of provisions contained in Article 10 of the 1995 Constitution.

The Article defines who qualifies as a citizen of Uganda by birth. It provides citizenship to persons born in Uganda, whose parents or grandparents belonged to communities indigenous to Uganda as of February 1, 1926, and to persons born outside Uganda who have a parent or grandparent who is a Ugandan citizen by birth. Speaking to The EastAfrican, Mr Mbidde said efforts to resolve the matter were ongoing.

“The government should take this issue seriously. We have a template Bill that will be presented to Parliament. Citizenship is a matter of law, not history and not ethnicity,” he said.

Referring to the 1934 colonial administrative order that governed Uganda before independence, Mr Mbidde argues that anyone residing within Uganda’s territorial boundaries at the time was considered Ugandan. He contends that this principle was altered by the 1995 Constitution.

According to him, many Banyarwanda remain excluded from citizenship by birth because the Constitution ties eligibility to communities recognised within Uganda’s borders as of February 1, 1926. Since many Banyarwanda families migrated to Uganda after that date, they continue to face intense scrutiny when seeking national identity cards, passports and other citizenship documents.

He says the consequences have been severe. Many affected individuals have struggled to access employment, banking services, education opportunities and international travel because they cannot obtain documentation proving their citizenship.

He argues that Uganda, as a modern state, came into existence at independence in 1962 and that citizenship should be anchored in that historical reality rather than colonial-era classifications, warning that if domestic efforts fail to produce a solution, the matter could be referred to the East African Court of Justice.

Drawing comparisons with neighbouring Democratic Republic of Congo, he notes that Congolese law resolved questions surrounding the citizenship of Banyarwanda communities, although political tensions later complicated the matters.

“In DR Congo, there is a good law, but bad governance. In Uganda, there is good governance but a bad law,” he said.

A member of the Constituent Assembly that enacted the 1995 Constitution says the framers sought to distinguish Ugandan Banyarwanda from Rwandan nationals by creating a schedule listing communities considered indigenous to Uganda as of February 1, 1926.But the issue has remained unresolved.

In April 2024, Kalungu West MP Joseph Ssewungu tabled a petition on behalf of the Council for Abavandimwe, a group representing sections of the Banyarwanda community.

The petition accused the National Identification and Registration Authority (NIRA) and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of denying citizenship documents to eligible Ugandan Banyarwanda despite their constitutional recognition. The petition detailed numerous cases of hardship.

Some Ugandans working abroad reportedly lost jobs after failing to renew their passports. Others missed educational opportunities because they could not obtain travel documents.

The petition also claimed that affected individuals had been unable to open bank accounts, register businesses or access essential services because they lacked valid identification documents.

It further alleged that some Ugandan embassies abroad had declined to assist individuals whose citizenship status had been questioned, leaving them stranded overseas.

According to Wilson Kajwengye, former chairperson of Parliament’s Committee on Defence and Veteran Affairs, which handled the petition, investigations revealed that thousands of registrations had been flagged by NIRA because of inaccuracies or possible fraudulent acquisition of identity documents.

The committee found that more than 4,500 applicants had been red-flagged for further verification, while another 4,300 individuals had received notices relating to inaccurate information or suspected fraudulent registration.

While the immediate concerns revolve around passports and identity cards, the debate has increasingly shifted toward constitutional reform.

Simon Kayitana, leader of the Umubano Task Force, one of the groups advocating Banyarwanda rights, says community representatives met with President Museveni and he promised to consult the Attorney-General on the matter.

In January 2025, the President issued an executive order stating that the problem lay not in the Constitution itself, but in the way citizenship laws were being administered.

President Museveni argued that Uganda’s citizenship framework had already been settled under Chapter 3 of the Constitution and emphasised that citizenship by birth is an inherent right rather than a privilege granted by immigration officials. He directed authorities to presume citizenship unless there was credible evidence to the contrary.

The President also ordered that national identity cards should not be confiscated or cancelled without due process and instructed government agencies to address anomalies affecting children born to Ugandan citizens.

But Mr Kaiyitana argues that the executive order provided only temporary relief: “The issue must get a permanent solution,” he said. “We are going to engage Members of Parliament. The issue is not ethnicity, but citizenship. You cannot force Banyarwanda to become citizens of Rwanda simply because there is an ethnic group there that shares their language and name.”

He argues that Banyarwanda are not alone. According to him, several other communities have also been affected by the constitutional provisions governing citizenship.

The Uganda Human Rights Commission has previously highlighted challenges faced by communities such as the Benet, Maragoli, Bakingwe and Bagabo, many of whom fall outside the categories recognised as indigenous communities under the Constitution.

Therefore, the Banyarwanda say constitutional amendments would create a broader and more practical basis for determining citizenship and help resolve disputes affecting communities that have lived in Uganda for generations.

Mr Kayitana says President Museveni once told community representatives they were free to choose between Uganda and Rwanda. But he says that cannot be put to choice, saying many Banyarwanda have no ancestral or social ties to Rwanda and, therefore, regard Uganda as their only homeland.

The debate has also exposed disagreements over citizenship procedures.

A former immigration official argued that many Banyarwanda had failed to pursue registration and instead assumed their Ugandan citizenship was automatic. But Mr Kayitana rejects that explanation, saying the registration process itself presents barriers.

According to him, applicants are required to obtain clearances from their country of origin, including police records and proof of nationality.

“Many of our people were born in Uganda and have no records in Rwanda. When they approach the Rwandan authorities, they are told there is no information about them. How then can they obtain the required clearance?” he asked.

The Banyarwanda presence in Uganda stretches back generations. Many settled in southwestern Uganda through pre-colonial migration into Ankole and Kigezi. Additional migration occurred following political upheavals in Rwanda, including the 1959 anti-Tutsi revolution that displaced thousands of refugees.

Today, Banyarwanda communities are concentrated in the districts of Kisoro, Kabale, Ntungamo, Isingiro, Mbarara and Kamwenge. According to the 2024 census, more than 524,000 people identify as Banyarwanda, making them one of Uganda’s big ethnic communities.

The reforms being proposed extend beyond changing a date in the Constitution. The leaders are also advocating for the introduction of citizenship by birth on Ugandan soil while maintaining the existing citizenship-by-descent provisions. They argue that the current system leaves many citizens vulnerable to suspicion, particularly during periods of political tension between Kampala and Kigali.

In some areas, particularly Kisoro, communities that once identified as Banyarwanda have increasingly adopted the identity of Bafumbira, reflecting the sensitivity surrounding citizenship and belonging.

For Uganda, the Banyarwanda question remains more than a legal dispute. It is a test of how the country balances citizenship, history, ethnicity and national identity.