Executive Power Without Restraint: How the Collapse of the Rule of Law Is Re-shaping Governance in Uganda

The rule of law is the central pillar upon which constitutional governance rests. When it weakens, executive power ceases to be bounded by law and instead becomes governed by discretion, coercion, and fear. The steady erosion of the rule of law has fundamentally altered the character and exercise of executive authority, raising grave constitutional and moral questions.

Articles 98 and 99 of the Constitution vest executive authority in the President, designating him both Head of State and Government, and mandating Him to execute the laws of Uganda. This authority, however, is not absolute. It is explicitly constrained by the Constitution itself; reinforced by the presidential oath, which requires the President to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution and to govern according to the law.

Executive power is therefore fiduciary in nature, held in trust for the people, not exercised above them. When state actions routinely violate constitutional guarantees, the executive ceases to be a constitutional custodian and instead becomes a source of constitutional injury.

One of the clearest manifestations of the collapse of the rule of law is the routine use of excessive force by the police. Public order management has increasingly been characterised by violent dispersals, arbitrary arrests, and disproportionate use of lethal and non-lethal force against civilians. The police, constitutionally mandated to protect life and property, have in many instances become an instrument of intimidation. When law enforcement acts with impunity, executive power shifts from lawful authority to raw coercion, undermining public trust and eroding legitimacy of the state itself.

Since 2020, we’ve witnessed a disturbing rise in abductions, often carried out by armed men in unmarked vehicles, with victims held incommunicado for days or weeks. Families are left without information, courts are bypassed, and legal safeguards are rendered meaningless. These abductions signal a profound breakdown of constitutional order. Executive power, when exercised outside the legal framework, becomes clandestine and unaccountable. Absence of transparency is not incidental; it is the very mechanism through which unlawful power sustains itself.

The Constitution guarantees the right to liberty and the right to be produced before a court within prescribed timelines. Yet prolonged detention without trial has become increasingly common, especially in politically sensitive cases. Detention without trial is not merely a procedural violation; it is an assertion that executive convenience outweighs constitutional rights. It converts justice system into an accessory rather than a check on power, hollowing out the separation of powers that underpins democratic governance.

Perhaps the gravest indictment of executive overreach is the continued use of torture. The prohibition against torture is absolute, non-derogable under both the Ugandan Constitution and international human rights law. No emergency, no political objective, and no security justification can excuse it. When torture occurs, it represents the complete abandonment of lawful governance. It signals that the executive has stepped outside the moral and legal boundaries of the Constitution, replacing law with cruelty as a tool of control.

The convergence of police brutality, abductions, unlawful detentions, and torture points to a deeper constitutional crisis; one in which executive authority increasingly operates without restraint. A state that governs through fear rather than law may command obedience, but it forfeits legitimacy. Restoring the rule of law is therefore not an abstract legal demand; it is a constitutional necessity to reclaim executive power as an instrument of service rather than domination.

Without the rule of law, executive power does not strengthen the state, it corrodes it from within.

Email: sarah.bireete@gmail.com