Efforts by Opposition legislators to block the formalization of President Museveni’s expansive 83-member Cabinet for the 2026-2031 term hit a brick wall on Thursday, after the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) party used its overwhelming majority in Parliament to legalize the appointments.
The high-stakes parliamentary showdown unfolded just moments after Prime Minister Robinah Nabbanja was cleared by the House for another term in office. Ms Nabbanja immediately moved a motion seeking parliamentary approval to increase the number of Cabinet Ministers from the constitutionally prescribed 21 to 30, and State Ministers from 21 to 51.
The approval effectively legalizes the bloated 83-member executive team announced by President Museveni on Tuesday, which retained Major (Rtd) Jessica Alupo as Vice President and Nabbanja as Prime Minister, while introducing several structural shifts. The executive duo was cleared by a House chaired by the newly elected and sworn-in Speaker, Jacob Oboth Oboth.
The Constitutional loophole
The debate spotlighted a long-standing friction point in Uganda’s supreme law. Under Article 113 (2) of the Constitution, the President is limited to appointing just 21 Cabinet Ministers and 21 State Ministers. However, the subsequent Article 114 (3) grants the President a loophole, permitting an increase in these numbers provided parliamentary approval is secured.
Defending the motion amidst heavy heckling from the opposition benches, Prime Minister Nabbanja argued that the government was not expanding the front bench beyond its previous size, but rather maintaining the status quo from the 11th Parliament.
“The number of Ministers who have been discharging duties is the same number we have brought; we have not changed,” Nabbanja stated. “The rationalization was that we were having duplication of work, so we are here to present the same number we had in the same Parliament.”
Opposition cries foul over cost, patronage
The government’s justification was met with fierce resistance from Opposition lawmakers, who accused the NRM administration of fiscal indiscipline and using ministerial appointments as political rewards.
The incoming Opposition Chief Whip and Jinja South East MP, Paul Mwiru, questioned why the government refuses to stick to the lean executive envisioned by the constitution, especially at a time when resources are desperately needed for public services.
“The ministers are policy makers, and when we reduce the numbers, it is in their interest, but we are finding money for service delivery,” Mwiru argued, drawing sharp retorts from NRM legislators. “It is about the cost. We have been coming here and getting these resolutions, but for today, let us maintain the numbers as they are in the Constitution, so that next time when they don’t work, we shall see what to do.”
Mukono Municipality MP Betty Nambooze Bakireke took it a step further, reminding the House that the 1995 constitutional limits were put in place deliberately to curb imperial presidencies.
“Since we got the Constitution, this country has never tried out this particular article of our Constitution. We should think about what the framers of this Constitution based their limits on. I want to guess that it was limiting top leaders from using appointments to patronise the country,” Nambooze charged.
The rationalization contradiction
The sharpest critique came from the incoming Chairperson of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and Kassanda North MP, Patrick Nsamba Oshabe. He accused Nabbanja of hypocrisy, pointing out that the executive’s push for a large cabinet directly contradicts the government’s highly publicized rationalization policy, which saw the merging of several state agencies to cut public expenditure.
“I was in the 10th and the 11th Parliament,” Oshabe noted. “In the 11th parliament, the Prime Minister came here and convinced the House of the government programme on rationalization… and convinced the country that it is the right way to go, that the Cabinet agreed that they needed to cut down on the expenditure because of the large numbers of government agencies.”
Oshabe added: “We are here with the same Prime Minister who would have moved with numbers under the Constitution. In the wisdom of rationalization, the same Prime Minister cannot come to this House trying to vary to increase. If the objectives of the rationalization were to be achieved, any variation would be going down.”
Population boom and PDM justify expansion
Unmoved by the backlash, Nabbanja and her backers defended the expansion by citing demographic changes and shifting governance demands. Nabbanja noted that Parliament has historically altered cabinet numbers in every session since the Sixth Parliament, establishing a clear legislative precedent.
Furthermore, she argued that Uganda’s governance infrastructure must match its massive population growth.
“Uganda’s population has grown from 20 million in 1995 to 45.9 million in the 2024 census,” the Prime Minister explained. “Districts have expanded from 39 to 146, creating new governance demands. A per-capita increase in ministerial portfolios is necessary to match service delivery needs and ensure equitable representation.”
Nabbanja also maintained that massive grassroots wealth-creation programs require specialized executive oversight. “The government priorities have evolved to address poverty eradication, wealth creation, and inclusive growth. Flagship programmes such as the Parish Development Model (PDM), Emyooga initiatives, and climate resilience strategies require dedicated ministerial oversight to ensure implementation and guarantee accountability at the grassroots level.”
Seconding the motion, Kyaka South MP Jackson Kafuzi echoed Nabbanja’s legal justifications, asserting that the framers of the Constitution deliberately left room for flexibility.
“The President proposes based on governance needs, and Parliament approves to ensure the variation is justified,” Kafuzi stated. “The principle is clear: Cabinet numbers are not fixed; they are varied by law to meet evolving national needs. As you all know, we have gone through an election where a new mandate has been given.”
With the NRM utilizing its numerical strength to carry the vote, the 83 ministers are now set to be officially sworn in to lead the implementation of the NRM’s manifesto for the next five years.