Uganda’s Copyright and Neighbouring Rights (Amendment) Bill, 2025 continues to spark intense debate both in Parliament and among the public following its second reading on March 12, 2026. While lawmakers did not reject the bill, proceedings were adjourned to March 17, 2026 after Anita Among, the Speaker of Parliament, called for a detailed cost benefit analysis of its most controversial provisions.

At the center of the debate is Clause 9, which proposes that broadcasters, bars, digital platforms, and other public performers must compensate producers and performers with royalties whenever sound recordings or audio visual works are used commercially. The proposal aims to replace the long standing system where artists often receive little or no payment when their work is played publicly.

Government Pushes for Reform

The bill was tabled by Justice Minister Norbert Mao, who argued that the reform is necessary to protect creative professionals whose work is frequently used without fair compensation.

He told Parliament that many musicians have long been frustrated by the widespread use of their music without earnings.

“Musicians are frustrated that their works are exploited, copied and played and they don’t earn,” Mao said during the debate, emphasizing that the bill seeks to ensure that intellectual property belonging to creatives is rewarded properly.

He also pointed to new monitoring mechanisms, including a proposed copyright tracking system that would monitor music played in bars, radio stations, television channels, and digital platforms to ensure accurate royalty distribution.

Support for the reform also came from Attorney General Kiryowa Kiwanuka, who explained that media houses could still negotiate promotional arrangements with artists if the creators themselves request free exposure. Otherwise, payment for usage would be required.

Artists and Lawmakers Back Clause 9

Artist and Member of Parliament Rachel Magoola strongly defended the bill in Parliament, arguing that compensating creators is an internationally recognized standard.

She told lawmakers that broadcasters who benefit from airing music should share that value with the artists who created it.

Her support reflects growing momentum from Uganda’s creative community, which has long argued that the current system leaves musicians and other creators financially vulnerable despite their work being widely consumed.

Critics Raise Concerns

Despite strong backing from creatives, several legislators have raised concerns about the bill’s potential economic impact.

David Kabanda questioned whether mandatory payments could negatively affect artists by reducing airplay, arguing that radio and television stations also play a role in promoting musicians.

Similarly, Michael Lulume called for a comprehensive analysis examining how the bill might affect broadcasters, consumers, and the wider economy.

The Parliamentary Committee on Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, chaired by Stephen Baka, has generally supported revenue sharing proposals but acknowledged the need for careful evaluation before final approval.

Given the sensitive nature of the debate, Speaker Anita Among suspended proceedings to allow lawmakers more time to examine the financial and operational implications of the proposed reforms.

Artists Mobilize Public Support

Outside Parliament, Uganda’s creative community has launched an energetic campaign in support of the bill.

Leading the effort is Eddy Kenzo, president of the Uganda National Musicians Federation. Kenzo has urged politicians to put aside political differences and support the amendment, describing it as essential for the dignity and financial stability of artists.

He has also called on musicians and other creatives to attend the next parliamentary sitting in large numbers, hoping to demonstrate strong public support for the reforms.

Kenzo has further announced plans to meet Speaker Anita Among to explain how the proposed copyright tracking system would work and how it could ensure transparent royalty payments.

Vice President of the federation Sheebah Karungi has also taken an active role in mobilizing support. She has urged musicians to defend Clause 9, describing it as the key provision guaranteeing that artists are paid when their music is played on radio, television, or in public venues.

Another prominent voice, Pallaso, has warned that delaying the reform could leave Ugandan creatives behind in the rapidly evolving digital and artificial intelligence era.

A Pivotal Moment for Uganda’s Creative Industry

Supporters of the bill argue that it would modernize Uganda’s copyright framework and bring it closer to international standards. Advocates also believe the reform could significantly boost the country’s creative economy by ensuring musicians, filmmakers, and writers earn from their work.

Critics, however, remain concerned that increased costs for broadcasters and public venues could lead to reduced airplay or higher costs for consumers.

As Parliament prepares to resume debate on March 17, the stakes remain high. The outcome could determine whether Uganda moves toward a more structured royalty system or maintains the status quo.

For many artists who have spent decades seeking fair compensation for their work, the upcoming parliamentary session may represent a defining moment in the fight to protect creativity and intellectual property rights in Uganda.