Country Profile on AI Governance: Uganda

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. East Africa mean 1.56 · all 54 states mean 1.76.

1. S1.1

   National AI strategy existence

   Score 1 / 4

   stakeholder engagement

   Note: Ongoing exercise

   Sources ict.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

2. S1.2

   Strategy adoption date

   Score 0 / 4

   N/A

   Note: Ongoing exercise

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: none (adoption date). No formally adopted national AI strategy.

   Sources monitor.co.ug (opens in a new tab)

3. S1.3

   Political commitment signals

   Score 1 / 4

   Ministry of ICT P.S remarks

   Sources nita.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

4. S1.4

   Dedicated AI budget allocation

   Score 0 / 4

   N/A

5. S1.5

   AU Continental AI Strategy alignment

   Score 1 / 4

   stakeholder engagement on AI strategy

   Note: https://ict.go.ug/media/news/shaping-ugandas-ai-future

   Sources au.int (opens in a new tab)

6. S1.6

   Multi-stakeholder consultation

   Score 4 / 4

   UNESCO, Ministry of ICT stakeholder engagement

   Note: The event was on 26 May 2026

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

7. S1.7

   Sector prioritisation

   Score 0 / 4

   Ministry of ICT P.S remarks on 26.5.2026

   Note: Agriculture, health, education, and tourism

8. S1.8

   Implementation roadmap

   Score 0 / 4

   N/A

   Note: Lasts 2023 to 2028, so ongoing

   Sources ict.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

9. S1.9

   Monitoring and evaluation framework

   Score 0 / 4

   N/A

   Note: There is not AI strategy yet

10. S1.10

    Strategy review mechanism

    Score 0 / 4

    N/A

    Note: There is no strategy formulated yet

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. East Africa mean 1.28 · all 54 states mean 1.32.

1. G2.1

   AI-specific legislation

   Score 1 / 4

   No AI-specific legislation enacted as of June 2026. Uganda's National AI and Emerging Technologies Strategy remains under development. The UNESCO AI Readiness Assessment Validation Workshop (26 May 2026) confirmed the absence of AI-specific legal frameworks. The forthcoming strategy is expected to inform future legislation but no draft bill has been tabled in parliament.

   Note: Score = 1 (Nascent). Policy discussion is active at ministerial level but no draft legislation has been tabled. Decision on whether to pursue a policy or framework approach was expected by end-2025 but remains pending as of June 2026. Uganda is classified as having a strategy and policy (Table 1, UNESCO Africa AI Needs Assessment Survey, 2021), these are aspirational documents, not enacted law.

   Sources ict.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

2. G2.2

   Data protection law status

   Score 3 / 4

   The Data Protection and Privacy Act (DPPA) 2019 is enacted and in force. The Personal Data Protection Office (PDPO) is operational under NITA-U. The PDPA had its first criminal conviction in April 2026

   Note: Score = 3 (Established). Law enacted and DPA operational, but enforcement is sporadic, the April 2026 conviction is notable precisely because it is the first of its kind.

   Sources parliament.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

3. G2.3

   DPA AI mandate

   Score 1 / 4

   The PDPO (under NITA-U) has no explicit AI oversight mandate. At the UNESCO AI Readiness Assessment Validation Workshop (26 May 2026), the National Personal Data Protection Director, framed AI governance as aspirational and emphasised critical gaps in environmental safeguards, gender inclusion, and labour market readiness, not within the PDPO's current operational mandate.

   Note: Score = 1 (DPA exists, no AI mandate). PDPO is the de facto data governance authority but its mandate is confined to personal data protection under the DPPA 2019. No informal AI engagement documented in public-facing materials. The forthcoming National AI Strategy may confer an advisory role on the PDPO.

   Sources ict.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

4. G2.4

   DPA staffing and budget

   Score 0 / 4

   No publicly disclosed data on PDPO full-time staff count or annual budget. NITA-U's overall budget and staffing are reported in government budget documents but are not disaggregated for the PDPO specifically.

   Note: Score = 0 / Data unavailable.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

   Sources nitau.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

5. G2.5

   AI regulatory body existence

   Score 1 / 4

   No dedicated AI governance body or council exists as of June 2026. The forthcoming National AI and Emerging Technologies Strategy is expected to propose an institutional architecture, potentially including a national AI authority, but no such body has been formally established or gazetted. NITA-U currently serves as the de facto coordinating body for digital governance.

   Note: Score = 1 (Proposed). NITA-U plays a coordinating role but is not a dedicated AI body. The UNESCO RAM validation workshop (May 2026) confirmed absence of a dedicated AI governance institution.

   Sources digital.nemko.com (opens in a new tab)

6. G2.6

   Institutional design model

   Score 1 / 4

   Uganda's current model is DPA-led by default: the PDPO under NITA-U handles data governance issues that intersect with AI, though without an explicit AI mandate. The Ministry of ICT and National Guidance plays a policy coordination role. The forthcoming AI Strategy signals a potential move toward a hybrid model with a dedicated body, but no formal institutional design decision has been made.

   Note: Score = 1 (DPA-led, transitional). Current model is DPA-led by institutional default rather than deliberate design. A hybrid co-regulatory model has been discussed in policy circles but not formalised. All this can be reassess when AI Strategy is published.

   Sources nitau.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

7. G2.7

   Malabo Convention ratification

   Score 2 / 4

   Uganda signed the African Union Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection (Malabo Convention) but has not ratified it. As of June 2026, only a small number of AU member states have ratified the Convention;

   Note: Score = 2 (Signed, not ratified).

   Sources au.int (opens in a new tab)

8. G2.8

   Enforcement actions taken

   Score 2 / 4

   In April 2026, a Ugandan court sentenced the director of an online lending platform for failing to register with the Personal Data Protection Office and for unlawfully processing personal data in violation of the Data Protection and Privacy Act 2019. This constitutes a remedial order and criminal conviction, the first documented enforcement action with legal consequence under the DPPA. No AI-specific enforcement actions have been taken.

   Note: Score = 2 (Fine levied / remedial order). The conviction is notable as the first enforcement action under the DPPA but is data protection enforcement, not AI-specific. No algorithmic audits, AI system takedowns, or AI-specific investigations documented.

   Sources ecofinagency.com (opens in a new tab)

9. G2.9

   Extraterritorial provisions

   Score 1 / 4

   The DPPA 2019 does not include explicit extraterritorial provisions addressing foreign AI systems operating within Uganda's borders. The UNESCO RAM Validation Workshop (May 2026) identified cross-border data governance as a critical gap. The forthcoming AI Strategy is expected to address this but no draft text has been published.

   Note: Score = 1 (Under consideration). The DPPA applies to personal data processed within Uganda but lacks explicit extraterritorial reach provisions covering foreign-deployed AI systems .

   Sources parliament.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

10. G2.10

    IP framework for AI

    Score 0 / 4

    No evidence that Uganda's intellectual property legislation has been reviewed for AI-generated content. The Uganda Registration Services Bureau (URSB) administers IP law under the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act 2006 and the Industrial Property Act 2014, but no AI-IP consultation, review process, or amendment has been published as of June 2026.

    Note: Score = 0 (No review). Absence of evidence confirmed by review of URSB publications and Ministry of ICT communications.

    Sources ursb.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

Mean of the 8 scored indicators; 2 carry no score. East Africa mean 1.54 · all 54 states mean 1.51.

No score: 1 not applicable, 1 context only.

1. I3.1

   Data center count

   Score 2 / 4

   Uganda has a small number of operational data centres: (1) NITA-U National Data Centre (government-owned); (2) MTN Uganda data centre; (3) Airtel Uganda/Uganda Telecom infrastructure. The ITU Uganda National AI Landscape Assessment (2025) confirms limited commercial data centre capacity.

   Note: Numeric entry: approximately 2-3 operational data centres. Exact count not officially published in a single government source. NITA-U NDC is the primary government facility.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 2.5 (data centres).

   Sources nitau.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

2. I3.2

   Data center capacity (MW)

   Score 0 / 4

   Total data centre power capacity in megawatts is not publicly disclosed by NITA-U or any Ugandan government source. No aggregate figure is available from regional data centre industry bodies as of June 2026.

   Note: Data unavailable

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

   Sources nitau.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

3. I3.3

   Submarine cable landing points

   ○N/A: Does not apply to this country

   Uganda is a landlocked country with no direct submarine cable landing points. International connectivity is accessed via terrestrial fibre links to Mombasa, Kenya, connecting to EASSy, SEACOM, and TEAMS submarine cables indirectly.

   Note: Numeric entry: 0 direct submarine cable landing points.

   Scoring basis Not applicable; excluded from the pillar mean. Landlocked: excluded from P3 (geography is not governance).

   Sources submarinecablemap.com (opens in a new tab)

4. I3.4

   International bandwidth (Gbps)

   Score 3 / 4

   Uganda's international internet bandwidth has grown significantly through cross-border fibre connectivity. The ITU Uganda National AI Landscape Assessment (2025) confirms expanding bandwidth capacity but notes that rural-urban connectivity gaps persist. Estimated international bandwidth is in the range of 1-2 Tbps as of 2024-2025, accessed via terrestrial fibre through Kenya and Tanzania.

   Note: Numeric entry: 1-2 Tbps as of 2024-2025

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. 1500 Gbps ÷ 50.02m = 29.99 Gbps per million.

   Sources ict.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

5. I3.5

   Hyperscaler presence

   Score 1 / 4

   No major hyperscaler (AWS, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud) has established a local zone, region, or point-of-presence with dedicated infrastructure in Uganda as of June 2026. Cloud services are accessed via South Africa or Kenya nodes. Huawei Cloud and Alibaba Cloud have a greater on-the-ground presence through project-based deployments under the Digital Silk Road framework, including the NITA-U e-government cloud infrastructure built with Huawei.

   Note: Score = 1 (Limited, no major hyperscaler local infrastructure).

   Sources aws.amazon.com (opens in a new tab)

6. I3.6

   GPU/HPC access

   Score 1 / 4

   The Makerere University AI and Data Science Lab (AI Lab), is Uganda's primary GPU-capable research facility for AI. No national HPC facility exists. No commercial GPU cloud is available domestically. The UNESCO RAM Validation Workshop (May 2026) confirmed limited infrastructure for AI research as a national gap.

   Note: Score = 1 (Limited, academic only).

   Sources air.ug (opens in a new tab)

7. I3.7

   Data localisation provisions

   Score 2 / 4

   The Data Protection and Privacy Act 2019 (Section 19) requires that sensitive personal data be stored within Uganda or in countries with an adequate level of data protection. This constitutes a general data localisation framework. However, enforcement is weak

   Note: Score = 2 (General framework). The DPPA 2019 provides a general data localisation provision but no comprehensive implementing regulations.

   Sources parliament.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

8. I3.8

   Cross-border data flow framework

   Score 2 / 4

   Uganda participates in EAC Digital Economy Framework discussions and is subject to the nascent AfCFTA Digital Trade Protocol, addressing cross-border data flows at the continental level but No bilateral AI-specific data transfer agreements are in force. The DPPA 2019 permits cross-border transfers to countries with adequate protection but no adequacy determinations have been made.

   Note: Score = 2 (Regional framework, nascent). The EAC and AfCFTA frameworks exist but are not operationally binding on cross-border AI data flows. No bilateral data transfer agreements with China, the EU, or the US.

   Sources au-afcfta.org (opens in a new tab)

9. I3.9

   Foreign AI surveillance spending

   ○Context only: Context flag outside the score

   Exact spending figures on foreign AI surveillance systems are not publicly disclosed. However, documented deployments exist: (1) Huawei Safe City project in Kampala CCTV network, command centre, and facial recognition infrastructure procured under government contract; (2) Chinese-supplied ICT infrastructure under broader e-government digitisation programmes supported by Chinese financing. Privacy International and CIPESA have documented the Huawei Safe City deployment but contract values remain undisclosed.

   Note: Score = 0 / Unknown (numeric figure unavailable). Contract values not publicly disclosed.

   Scoring basis Context flag; outside the score.

   Sources privacyinternational.org (opens in a new tab)

10. I3.10

    Sovereign cloud initiatives

    Score 2 / 4

    NITA-U operates the National Data Centre (NDC) in Kampala and has launched a Government Cloud (GovCloud) initiative to host government systems domestically. The GovCloud is operationally active for some ministries and agencies. However, it is limited in capacity and does not constitute a comprehensive sovereign cloud for all government data.

    Note: Score = 2 (Under development / partially operational). GovCloud is active but limited in scope and capacity. Not all government ministries are migrated. No private sector or national AI-specific sovereign cloud initiative exists.

    Sources nitau.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. East Africa mean 1.18 · all 54 states mean 1.20.

1. H4.1

   AI researchers per million

   Score 4 / 4

   0-100 per million

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 50 (AI researchers per million). Raw value read from the evidence: "0-100 per million" [midpoint of 0-100; very wide range, source not given]. Listed for second-edition review: The raw value is the midpoint of an unsourced range of 0 to 100, and it yields the top score.

   Sources universityworldnews.com (opens in a new tab)

2. H4.2

   DPA staff with AI competency

   Score 0 / 4

   N/A

   Note: The AI strategy still under consultation

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

3. H4.3

   University AI programs

   Score 3 / 4

   Makere University, Busitema University, Kyambogo, ISBAT and Cavendish Universities

   Note: Certificates, bachelors and masters

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 5 (universities). Raw value read from the evidence: "Makere University, Busitema University, Kyambogo, ISBAT and Cavendish Universities" [notes: "Certificates, bachelors and masters"; degree type per university n. Listed for second-edition review: The evidence names five universities but does not state that each offers a dedicated AI degree.

4. H4.4

   African-authored AI publications

   Score 2 / 4

   103 African-authored AI publications per year

   Note: Data last updated in 2024

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. 98.3 papers/yr ÷ 50.02m people = 1.97 per million (floors applied). Raw value read from the evidence: "103 African-authored AI publications per year" [unclear whether Uganda-affiliated; notes "Data last updated in 2024"; source not named]. Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

   Sources aiworld.eu (opens in a new tab)

5. H4.5

   AI patents filed

   Score 0 / 4

   N/A

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

   Sources aiworld.eu (opens in a new tab)

6. H4.6

   K-12 CS education

   Score 4 / 4

   Optional for Ordinary level and advanced level secondary school

   Note: For Primary school it is for parents to pay extra fee at school for computer science education if available school by school basis

7. H4.7

   AI workforce training programs

   Score 4 / 4

   Artificial Intelligence Health Lab at Makerere University

   Note: OCULAB diagnosis of TB, Malaria and cervical cancer using AI

   Sources ict.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

8. H4.8

   Labour transition policy

   Score 1 / 4

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Op6sc51WHWQ

   Note: MoU for 3 years between Uganda and China to use AI to boost agriculture

9. H4.9

   Informal economy AI assessment

   Score 1 / 4

   National Information Technology Authority (NITA) 2025 tender for consultancy on digital skills training for targeted groups

   Note: Advert for tender in 2025. It is unclear who won the tender

   Sources nita.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

10. H4.10

    African language NLP coverage

    Score 4 / 4

    Sunflower model in varied Uganda languages lauched accessible for health, agriculture, education, and governance.

    Note: However, www.aistudio.ug a private firm offers services to customers in Uganda

    Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

    Sources ict.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. East Africa mean 0.97 · all 54 states mean 1.05.

1. N5.1

   AI companies count

   Score 2 / 4

   TechBehemoths lists 19 AI companies operating in Uganda as of 2026.

   Note: There is no official government registry of AI companies exists. The number is indicative from commercial databases.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 19 (companies).

   Sources techbehemoths.com (opens in a new tab)

2. N5.2

   Private AI investment (USD)

   Score 2 / 4

   Uganda-specific AI investment data are not publicly disaggregated. Total startup funding in 2025 (to Nov) was USD 12.5 M across 4 equity rounds (all sectors). No Uganda-specific AI VC figure is available

   Note: Country-level AI investment is not separately tracked.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

   Sources tracxn.com (opens in a new tab)

3. N5.3

   AI incubators/accelerators

   Score 3 / 4

   Outbox Hub (Kampala) is the principal tech/AI co-creation hub. The Uganda DeepTech Centre of Excellence launched in late 2024 with an explicit AI/agritech/climate focus. Innovation Village hosts AI-adjacent programmes. Makerere University AI Lab, Hive Colab Most incubators are broad tech hubs with AI components.

   Note: The estimate of 5 covers hubs with substantive AI programming.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

4. N5.4

   Regulatory sandbox (AI)

   Score 0 / 4

   As of 2026, Uganda does not have an operational AI-specific regulatory sandbox. The government is 'exploring regulatory sandboxes' as part of its AI governance roadmap. Uganda's only live fintech sandbox (under Bank of Uganda) is not AI-specific. A national AI law is expected and will likely introduce sandbox provisions.

   Note: CIPESA(https://cipesa.org/2025/11/now-more-than-ever-africa-needs-participatory-ai-regulatory-sandboxes/) notes Uganda's AI governance lags on participatory sandbox design.

   Sources digital.nemko.com (opens in a new tab)

5. N5.5

   Government AI procurement

   Score 2 / 4

   Uganda Revenue Authority (URA), Uganda Investment Authority (UIA), and the Uganda National Meteorology Authority (UNMA) deploy AI tools procured largely through ad hoc or project-based contracts. No formal AI-specific procurement framework or domestic-preference policy for AI solutions exists. A 2025 commentary recommends embedding explainability and audit rights into AI procurement contracts but no policy mandates this yet.

   Note: Procurement is driven by individual MDAs, not a cross-government AI sourcing policy.

   Sources nucamp.co (opens in a new tab)

6. N5.6

   AI safety evaluation capacity

   Score 0 / 4

   Makerere University AI Lab and the AI Health Lab (launched May 2024, co-funded by Government of Uganda) conduct applied AI research and evaluation. The Makerere University Centre for AI and Data Science (Mak-CAD) was formally launched in March 2025. No government AI safety evaluation facility or accredited testing lab exists.

   Note: Mak-CAD and AI Health Lab are the primary evaluation nodes; both are university-based.

   Sources news.mak.ac.ug (opens in a new tab)

7. N5.7

   ISO/IEC 42001 adoption

   Score 2 / 4

   Uganda's AI regulation guidance references ISO/IEC 42001, ISO 38507, and related standards as benchmarks Uganda 'aims' to align with. No documented pilot or certified adoption is identified. UNBS is the official ISO member body but has not published an AI-specific technical committee or work programme item on ISO/IEC 42001.

   Note: Standards are referenced in policy documents but no adoption or certification evidence found.

   Sources digital.nemko.com (opens in a new tab)

8. N5.8

   Standards body AI competency

   Score 2 / 4

   The Uganda National Bureau of Standards (UNBS) is an ISO member and operates multiple technical committees covering engineering, food, chemicals, services, and business management. No UNBS technical committee or work programme item specific to AI has been identified. The 2024 UNBS Standards Work Programme does not list AI.

   Note: UNBS is active but has no dedicated AI TC

   Sources lawgratis.com (opens in a new tab)

9. N5.9

   AI risk assessment frameworks

   Score 0 / 4

   No sector-specific mandatory AI risk assessment frameworks are in force in Uganda currently. The government is 'exploring structured risk-assessment methodologies' as part of AI law preparation. Uganda's Data Protection and Privacy Act provides a limited basis for data-related risk assessment but does not constitute an AI risk framework. The AI National Taskforce is developing a conceptual governance framework but it has not been promulgated.

   Note: Risk assessment is in conceptual/task force stage only.

   Sources lawgratis.com (opens in a new tab)

10. N5.10

    University-industry AI partnerships

    Score 3 / 4

    Makerere University has multiple documented formal partnerships: (1) Mak-CAD (March 2025) with Google, Wellcome Trust, NIH, and APHRC; (2) MoU with SoonPay LLC (Dec 2025) for fintech AI; (3) MoU with Astria Learning (Oct 2025) for AI eCampus; (4) AI Health Lab (May 2024) co-established with the Ministry of ICT; (5) Makerere AI Lab partnership with Infectious Diseases Institute (IDI) and HAINET. These constitute joint labs and formal programmes.

    Note: Mak-CAD and AI Health Lab are the clearest examples of institutionalised university-industry-government AI collaboration.

    Sources cocis.mak.ac.ug (opens in a new tab)

Mean of the 7 scored indicators; 3 carry no score. East Africa mean 1.16 · all 54 states mean 1.26.

No score: 3 not scored (excluded from the mean).

1. E6.1

   Algorithmic impact assessment

   Score 0 / 4

   No law or regulation mandates algorithmic impact assessments (AIAs) in Uganda as of June 2026. The forthcoming AI law is anticipated to introduce mandatory ethical impact assessments, and the May 2026 UNESCO RAM consultation explicitly identified the absence of AIA requirements as a governance gap. The Data Protection and Privacy Act (2019) requires data protection impact assessments (DPIAs) for high-risk data processing but this does not extend to algorithmic accountability. CIPESA and UNESCO stakeholder consultations have called for AIA obligations; none have been enacted.

   Note: DPIAs under DPPA are the nearest analogue but do not cover algorithmic decisions as such.

   Scoring basis Confirmed absence, scored 0. Unscored in profile; evidence affirms absence: "No law or regulation mandates algorithmic impact assessments (AIAs) in Uganda as of June 2026."

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

2. E6.2

   Bias audit requirements

   Score 0 / 4

   No mandatory bias audit requirements exist in Uganda for AI systems, high-risk or otherwise. The AI governance framework under development references non-discrimination and bias reduction as principles, and CIPESA's 2025 rights-based AI policy playbook recommends 'diverse and representative datasets to mitigate biases related to ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status', but this remains voluntary advocacy, not enforceable obligation. The UCC AI Taskforce's composition itself drew criticism for gender and youth under-representation, showing the absence of binding diversity-in-AI rules.

   Note: Bias-mitigation language appears in civil society recommendations and emerging policy drafts but no binding requirement has been promulgated.

   Scoring basis Confirmed absence, scored 0. Unscored in profile; evidence affirms absence: "No mandatory bias audit requirements exist in Uganda for AI systems" [voluntary advocacy only].

   Sources cipesa.org (opens in a new tab)

3. E6.3

   Transparency obligations

   Score 0 / 4

   There are no binding AI-specific transparency requirements are in force. The forthcoming AI law is expected to mandate algorithmic transparency obligations for high-risk systems, and Uganda's Data Protection and Privacy Act requires controllers to notify data subjects about how their data is used. The UN Global Pulse Ethical AI Framework (developed with the Ministry of ICT) promotes transparency as a principle, and the Nemko Digital 2025 guidance documents recommend documentation and explainability. These are advisory instruments, not statutory obligations.

   Note: Transparency is widely promoted in policy documents and international cooperation frameworks but not yet legally mandated.

   Scoring basis Confirmed absence, scored 0. Unscored in profile; evidence affirms absence: "There are no binding AI-specific transparency requirements are in force." [advisory instruments only].

   Sources digital.nemko.com (opens in a new tab)

4. E6.4

   Citizen redress mechanism

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   Uganda's Personal Data Protection Office (PDPO), established under NITA-U, accepts formal complaints from citizens regarding data processing violations. The PDPO is mandated to investigate complaints within 21 days and can issue administrative remedies. A landmark July 2025 ruling against Google LLC (Ssekamwa Frank & 3 others v. Google LLC, Complaint No. 08/11/24/6683) confirmed citizens can use the PDPO to challenge data practices of AI-deploying entities. However, the PDPO cannot award monetary compensation; courts retain jurisdiction for damages. No dedicated AI-specific complaint channel exists.

   Note: The PDPO is the operative channel; a dedicated AI redress mechanism is anticipated in the forthcoming AI law.

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

   Sources pdpo.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

5. E6.5

   Judicial AI remedy

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   Uganda has no specialist AI tribunal. Ugandan courts have general jurisdiction over digital and technology disputes grounded in the Computer Misuse Act, the DPPA, and constitutional rights provisions. The 2023 Uganda High Court ruling allowing civil society intervention in the national digital ID case (concerning AI-related human rights risks) constitutes an emerging precedent. The PDPO-Google ruling (July 2025) reserved damages jurisdiction to courts, indicating courts are being drawn into AI/data disputes. No reported AI-specific judgments have been identified; the legal basis is developing through data protection and human rights litigation.

   Note: Jurisdiction exists in principle; AI-specific case law is nascent.

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

   Sources cipesa.org (opens in a new tab)

6. E6.6

   AI advisory body diversity

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   The UCC AI Taskforce (inaugurated July 2024, 23 members) includes academics, government officials, and some technical experts including Dr. Joyce Nakatumba-Nabende (Makerere AI Lab). However, it drew significant public criticism for under-representation of youth and women, with commentators describing the composition as 'a gathering of clan elders'. CFMA's January 2025 analysis explicitly cited the taskforce's 'minimal public engagement and underrepresentation of women and youth'. The February 2026 UNESCO RAM consultative workshop called for 'expanded women, youth and persons with disabilities participation'. Some multi-disciplinary breadth is present; gender and youth diversity remain inadequate by stakeholder consensus.

   Note: Disciplinary breadth exists (tech, academia, regulators) but documented gender and youth gaps prevent a 'diverse and representative' rating.

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

   Sources thecfma.org (opens in a new tab)

7. E6.7

   Global AI governance participation

   Score 0 / 4

   Uganda is not a member of GPAI (46 members, primarily OECD and G20 economies; Uganda not listed). Uganda participates in UNESCO AI processes, it committed to the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI (2021) and is engaged in the UNESCO AI Readiness Assessment (RAM) process initiated in 2025-2026. Uganda's Ministry of ICT also participates in AU-level AI governance and GlobalPolicy.AI initiatives. The Nemko 2025 guide confirms Uganda engages in 'AU-level digital-governance initiatives'. Engagement is observer/participant rather than full membership or leadership in any major multilateral AI forum.

   Note: UNESCO RAM participation and AU engagement are documented; no GPAI, OECD, or G7 membership.

   Scoring basis Confirmed absence, scored 0. Unscored in profile; evidence affirms absence: "Uganda is not a member of GPAI" [note: text also documents UNESCO/AU participation (observer/participant)].

   Sources oecd.ai (opens in a new tab)

8. E6.8

   Civil society AI engagement

   Score 0 / 4

   Civil society organisations (CIPESA, Pollicy, WOUGNET, CFMA) are active in Uganda's AI governance discourse and have participated in stakeholder dialogues. The February and May 2026 UNESCO RAM consultations formally included civil society alongside government, academia, and private sector. A 2023 High Court ruling allowed CSO intervention in the digital ID case. However, CIPESA's own 2025 State of Internet Freedom report found Uganda's AI policy processes to be 'often opaque and dominated by state actors, with limited multistakeholder participation'. No standing formal advisory role for civil society in AI policymaking has been institutionalised.

   Note: UNESCO RAM and stakeholder dialogues are time-bound, not permanent institutional mechanisms.

   Scoring basis Confirmed absence, scored 0. Unscored in profile; evidence affirms absence: "No standing formal advisory role for civil society in AI policymaking has been institutionalised." [note: time-bound UNESCO RAM consultations included CSOs (ad.

   Sources cipesa.org (opens in a new tab)

9. E6.9

   African ethical framework reference

   Score 0 / 4

   Uganda's national AI governance documents do not explicitly cite Ubuntu or named African ethical frameworks. However, Uganda has committed to the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI (2021) and is aligned with the AU Continental AI Strategy (2024), which explicitly prioritises Ubuntu and African cultural values as part of its ethical foundations. CIPESA's 2025 AI rights-based policy playbook for Uganda advocates for human-rights-grounded, people-centred governance but does not invoke Ubuntu by name. The May 2026 national UNESCO RAM consultation referenced consent and community participation principles consistent with African relational ethics, without naming Ubuntu.

   Note: African ethical values enter Ugandan AI governance indirectly through AU and UNESCO alignment rather than explicit citation in domestic documents.

   Scoring basis Confirmed absence, scored 0. Unscored in profile; evidence affirms absence: "Uganda's national AI governance documents do not explicitly cite Ubuntu or named African ethical frameworks." [indirect via AU/UNESCO alignment].

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

10. E6.10

    Youth participation

    Score 0 / 4

    There is no formal standing mechanism for youth participation in Uganda's AI governance. The UCC AI Taskforce (2024) was widely criticised for excluding youth: ChimpReports reported that 'the team unveiled on Friday did not have any representation from the youth' and 'most members are above 45 years of age'. The February 2026 UNESCO RAM workshop explicitly included 'youth innovators' among its participants, and the May 2026 consultation called for expanding youth participation 'beyond mere consultation processes'. UNDP Uganda's Digital Transformation Roadmap includes youth digital skilling but governance participation is not institutionalised.

    Note: Youth were included in UNESCO RAM consultations (2026) but no permanent youth advisory role in AI governance exists.

    Scoring basis Confirmed absence, scored 0. Unscored in profile; evidence affirms absence: "There is no formal standing mechanism for youth participation in Uganda's AI governance." [note: youth included in 2026 RAM consultations (ad hoc)].

    Sources chimpreports.com (opens in a new tab)

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. East Africa mean 1.54 · all 54 states mean 1.55.

1. R7.1

   AU AI Strategy alignment

   Score 1 / 4

   Stakeholder meeting on AI strategy held on 26/05/26

2. R7.2

   Kigali Declaration endorsement

   Score 3 / 4

   signatory

   Scoring basis Official signatory list applied. Signatory of the Africa Declaration on AI (Kigali, 4 April 2025), C4IR list: "Endorsed" = 3.

   Sources c4ir.rw (opens in a new tab) · c4ir.rw (2) (opens in a new tab)

3. R7.3

   REC AI governance coordination

   Score 0 / 4

   N/A

4. R7.4

   Cross-border AI agreements

   Score 4 / 4

   UAE and NITA-U; Japan-Uganda; Uganda-United Kingdom; China-Uganda; UNESCO-Uganda

   Sources presight.ai (opens in a new tab)

5. R7.5

   Election integrity AI provisions

   Score 0 / 4

   Internet was shutdown during 2026 general elections

6. R7.6

   Disinformation response framework

   Score 1 / 4

   Internet was shutdown during 2026 general elections

7. R7.7

   AI election incidents documented

   Score 1 / 4

   Internet was shutdown during 2026 general elections Commentary by PS of Ministry of ICT on responsible use of AI safeguards in democracy ahead of the polls on 02/01/26 www.ict.go.ug

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 1 (rule band). Scored on documented institutional response, not incident count. Raw value read from the evidence: "Commentary by PS of Ministry of ICT on responsible use of AI safeguards in democracy ahead of the polls" [incidents: 0 stated; internet shutdown 2026]. Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

8. R7.8

   Platform content moderation

   Score 1 / 4

   UCC regulates by media briefs relying of Uganda Communication Act, 2023 and Broadcasting Standards of 2023, Uganda Media Centre media briefs issuing warnings, prosecuting offenders in court

9. R7.9

   Geneva Dialogue participation

   Score 0 / 4

   No evidence available

10. R7.10

    G20/multilateral AI engagement

    Score 4 / 4

    India AI Impact Summit 2026, UNESCO Global AI Forum 2025, Africa AI Summit 2025

    Sources monitor.co.ug (opens in a new tab)

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. East Africa mean 0.94 · all 54 states mean 0.78.

1. M8.1

   AI governance budget disbursed

   Score 0 / 4

   No dedicated, itemized budget line for AI governance has been publicly disclosed in Uganda's national budgets. Uganda's FY2025/26 budget focuses on agriculture, industrialization, digital transformation, and market access, with no explicit AI governance budget line. Calls have been made to fold AI rules into NDP4 so ministries receive dedicated allocations, but this has not yet occurred.

   Note: Budget allocation is expected once the National AI Policy and Task Force are formally established. Track NDP4 budget lines for future AI governance allocations.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (USD). Raw value read from the evidence: "with no explicit AI governance budget line". Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

   Sources parliament.go.ug (opens in a new tab)

2. M8.2

   Health AI regulation

   Score 1 / 4

   Uganda has no national guidelines on how to conduct AI research in an ethical manner, and ethics committees lack the resources, expertise, and training to appropriately address AI health research risks. Uganda is expected to introduce its first dedicated AI law between late 2025 and 2026, with the forthcoming legislation likely to mandate human oversight in sensitive sectors such as healthcare

   Note: Scoring: Under discussion. Digital health guidelines (2020–2025) provide general digital health standards but are not AI-specific. Score = 1.

   Sources pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (opens in a new tab)

3. M8.3

   Health AI devices approved

   Score 1 / 4

   Uganda's National Drug Authority (NDA) issued two circulars in March and October 2024 on mandatory registration of surgical instruments, with a compliance deadline of February 2026, but current law does not grant the NDA full authority to regulate all medical devices, and there is no specific AI health device approval framework. The National Drug and Health Products Authority Bill 2025, introduced to parliament in September 2025, proposes to create an authority to oversee the registration and distribution of medical devices, but has not yet been enacted

   Note: Score represents known deployments (22 AI X-ray units), not a formal regulatory approval list. NDA is still working toward Maturity Level 3 for medical device regulation.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

   Sources africanlawbusiness.com (opens in a new tab)

4. M8.4

   Government AI system registry

   Score 0 / 4

   Uganda's forthcoming AI legislation is likely to require registration or notification for high-risk systems, but no such registry exists today. Calls have been made for "centralised, auditable AI inventories" but these are described as aspirational steps rather than existing systems.

   Note: Scoring: Planned. Proposed legislation mentions registry requirements but none is operational. Score = 1.

   Sources digital.nemko.com (opens in a new tab)

5. M8.5

   AI governance M&E reports

   Score 0 / 4

   The Uganda National AI Landscape Assessment Report, developed jointly by the Ministry of ICT and National Guidance and the ITU, based on a 2024 review, assesses infrastructure readiness, AI skills in government ministries, agencies and departments, and proposes an AI risk management framework. No additional published M&E reports specifically tracking AI governance implementation outcomes were found

   Note: Score = 1 (one confirmed published assessment). No recurring M&E cycle yet. UNESCO RAM process may produce a second report in 2026.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (reports). Raw value read from the evidence: "No additional published M&E reports specifically tracking AI governance implementation outcomes were found" [AI Landscape Assessment is a readiness assessment]. Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

   Sources itu.int (opens in a new tab)

6. M8.6

   Agriculture AI governance

   Score 2 / 4

   Uganda's AI governance work includes agriculture as a priority sector, and sector-specific oversight is part of the 2025 policy roadmap, but formal guidelines or legislation specific to agriculture AI do not yet exist. Discussions following a high-level government retreat in August 2024 at Kyankwanzi acknowledged transformative AI applications in health, agriculture, education, and tourism, but have not produced sector-specific rules.

   Note: Scoring: Under discussion. Agriculture AI is acknowledged in strategy documents but sector-specific governance provisions are absent. Score = 1.

   Sources digital.nemko.com (opens in a new tab)

7. M8.7

   Financial services AI governance

   Score 3 / 4

   Uganda's Digital Transformation Roadmap 2023/24–2027/28 promotes using AI to enhance mobile money platforms, improve credit scoring for micro and small enterprises, and strengthen fraud detection systems, though it does not provide detailed AI-in-finance measures. The Uganda Microfinance Regulatory Authority (UMRA) published Tier 4 Digital Lending Guidelines to regulate internet-based lending apps, though these are fintech-focused rather than AI-specific.

   Note: Scoring: Central bank guidance (general, not AI-specific). Data Protection & Privacy Act 2019 applies to AI data processing. Score = 1.

   Sources oecd.org (opens in a new tab)

8. M8.8

   Education AI governance

   Score 0 / 4

   Uganda does not yet have a finished national AI law, and for education, the Ministry of ICT has signalled a decision by end-2025 on whether to adopt a formal AI policy or a sector-driven approach, with an emerging framework that is explicitly human-rights-based. A 2023 Ministry of Education policy initiative on integrating AI in education has been referenced in academic literature but no adopted national education AI policy has been publicly confirmed

   Note: Scoring: None. The Ministry of ICT references education as a priority sector but education-specific AI governance has not been formalized. Score = 0.

   Sources nucamp.co (opens in a new tab)

9. M8.9

   Measurable governance outcomes

   Score 1 / 4

   A 2024 study documents six government ministries/departments and agencies where AI is live, including the Uganda Investment Authority's AI-enhanced CRM cutting investor wait times, URA's AI for risk profiling and fraud detection, UNMA's AI-based weather forecasting, and KCCA's network of over 100 air-quality sensors, though the same study cautions that only a small slice of MDAs have integrated AI systematically. Documented protective governance outcomes specifically from AI governance frameworks (rather than AI tools) remain anecdotal.

   Note: Scoring: Anecdotal. Outcomes are reported in operational contexts (efficiency gains) rather than formal governance/protective outcome assessments. Score = 1.

   Sources nucamp.co (opens in a new tab)

10. M8.10

    WHO AI health guidance adoption

    Score 3 / 4

    Uganda's emerging AI governance framework incorporates core WHO-aligned principles such as non-discrimination, bias reduction, algorithmic transparency, human agency, and data protection, and policymakers participate in AU-level digital governance initiatives incorporating ethical guidelines. However, no formal government instrument confirming official adoption of WHO's Ethics and Governance of AI for Health guidance was found. A Ugandan expert (from Kampala) was among the 20 leading experts WHO consulted in developing its AI for health ethics guidance, indicating awareness and engagement, but not formal adoption

    Note: Scoring: Alignment process. Uganda is actively aligning with UNESCO/WHO AI ethics frameworks through the RAM process but has not formally adopted the WHO health AI guidance document. Score = 2.

    Sources digital.nemko.com (opens in a new tab)