Opposition MPs on Thursday boycotted President Yoweri Museveni’s State of the Nation Address (SONA), escalating tensions between the government and opposition lawmakers ahead of the national budget presentation and amid growing political debate over governance and accountability issues.
The boycott, led by the Opposition Parliamentary Caucus under the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition, Joel Ssenyonyi, saw opposition legislators stay away from the annual constitutional event, arguing that previous presidential addresses have repeatedly failed to address key concerns affecting ordinary Ugandans.
Speaking ahead of the address, Ssenyonyi said the decision was reached after consultations within the Opposition’s shadow cabinet. He argued that the annual address had become largely ceremonial, with recurring promises that have not translated into meaningful improvements in public service delivery, anti-corruption efforts, and economic welfare.
The boycott comes at a politically significant time as Uganda continues to navigate debates surrounding governance, public expenditure, electoral reforms, and proposed legislation such as the Protection of Sovereignty Bill, 2026, which has generated discussion among civil society organizations, political actors, and business groups.
Opposition leaders maintain that Parliament should focus more on issues directly affecting citizens, including healthcare, infrastructure, unemployment, and the cost of living. They argue that government spending priorities require greater scrutiny to ensure public resources are directed toward service delivery.
Despite the absence of opposition legislators, the State of the Nation Address proceeded as scheduled, with government officials and ruling party legislators attending the event. The annual address provides an opportunity for the President to outline the country’s progress, priorities, and policy direction ahead of the reading of the national budget.
Government officials have previously downplayed opposition boycotts, maintaining that parliamentary business and constitutional processes continue regardless of political disagreements. Similar walkouts and boycotts have occurred in previous years, often reflecting wider disputes over governance, economic management, and the role of opposition parties in Uganda’s political landscape.
Political analysts say the latest boycott highlights the widening divide between the government and opposition ahead of continued legislative activity and future political engagements. They note that while such actions draw attention to opposition grievances, they also raise questions about how political actors can engage constructively on matters of national importance.
As Parliament prepares for the national budget reading, attention is now shifting to how both government and opposition leaders will articulate their competing visions for Uganda’s economic and political future.
