The Imperative of Strict Accountability: Enforcing Uganda’s Official Secrets Act Against Leakers

In Uganda’s rapidly digitizing environment, the unauthorized disclosure of confidential information poses a serious threat to national security, economic stability, corporate interests, and public order. Leaks by government staff, military personnel, social media influencers, journalists, and media houses often stem from ignorance of legal obligations, a desire for fame, political motives, or sheer recklessness. These actions are not just oversights; when they violate non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) or breach the Official Secrets Act (Cap 302), they become serious criminal offenses that warrant severe punishment.

The Official Secrets Act, enacted in 1964 and still in force, explicitly criminalizes the wrongful communication and mishandling of protected information. According to Section 4(1), any person who possesses or controls secret official code words, passwords, sketches, plans, models, articles, notes, documents, or information entrusted in confidence due to their government office, contracts, or employment commits an offense if they:

(a) Communicate it to unauthorized persons, except where duty to Uganda requires such communication.
(b) Use it for the benefit of any foreign power or in a manner that adversely affects Uganda.
(c) Unlawfully retain it or fail to comply with disposal directions.
(d) Fail to take reasonable care, thereby endangering its safety.

Subsection (2) further criminalizes the communication of information related to munitions of war to any foreign power or in any way that prejudices Uganda’s safety or interests. Subsection (3) targets those who knowingly receive such information in violation of the Act (unless they prove it was against their will). Subsection (4) addresses unlawful retention, sharing, or failure to return official documents or code words.

These provisions directly apply to modern leaks: government insiders sharing State House documents via WhatsApp, military officers posting classified promotion lists or operational details on social media, or journalists and influencers disseminating sensitive material without authorization. Recent cases, including UPDF officers jailed for social media leaks and investigations into mass State House document exposures, underscore violations of these rules.

Under Section 15 of the Act, if no specific penalty is specified, offenders are guilty of an indictable offense that carries a maximum imprisonment penalty of 14 years upon conviction. Alternatively, the Director of Public Prosecutions may choose to prosecute before a magistrate, with a maximum possible sentence of 7 years imprisonment. This strict framework reflects the serious nature of actions that endanger national interests, far beyond minor infractions.

While press freedom is constitutionally protected, the Act makes no exceptions for the media. Journalists or reporters who publish leaked confidential information, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe it was communicated in violation of the Act, commit an offense under Section 4(3). Media houses that sensationalize or fail to verify such material for clicks or narratives amplify the breach, often turning protected information into public weapons that distort facts, incite division, or compromise security.

Social media influencers further exacerbate this issue by originating or sharing damaging posts, sometimes directly involving official secrets, for engagement or personal agendas. Their viral reach can transform isolated leaks into national crises, yet they too fall under the Act’s prohibitions on unauthorized communication or receipt.

The Edward Snowden case serves as a powerful precedent. In 2013, Snowden leaked thousands of classified NSA documents, which led to charges against him under the Espionage Act for unauthorized disclosure and theft, offenses that carry decades in prison. Authorities considered his actions to have caused “tremendous damage” to national security, exposing military secrets unrelated to privacy and potentially aiding adversaries. Snowden fled into exile, demonstrating that bypassing established channels for public disclosure can invoke severe consequences.

In Uganda, similar rationale applies: leaks under the Official Secrets Act can expose defense strategies, oil negotiations, or anti-corruption efforts to foreign powers or internal threats. Just as the U.S. treated Snowden’s breach as a betrayal deserving pursuit, Uganda must rigorously apply the Act’s penalties, which can include up to 14 years of imprisonment, to deter leakers in all roles. Leniency fosters repetition; strict enforcement safeguards national sovereignty.

To protect Uganda’s future, accountability must be unwavering:

• Government staff and insiders who originate leaks violate entrusted confidence and face primary liability under Section 4, risking dismissal, prosecution, and lengthy imprisonment.
• Journalists and reporters who knowingly publish or receive prohibited information must also be held accountable.

By ensuring strict accountability across the board, Uganda can strengthen its commitment to national security and integrity.