KAMPALA UGANDA: 20 August 2026- A sharp conflict between executive action and judicial authority looms following Prime Minister Robinah Nabbanja’s decision to schedule the formal commissioning of the CN Sugar Limited factory in Namayingo District for September 4, 2026. The move comes despite a binding High Court order that halted the facility’s operations, creating a significant constitutional and regulatory stand-off.
In an official communication dated August 13, 2026, Prime Minister Nabbanja directed the Minister of Trade, Industry, and Cooperatives to finalize all administrative preparations ahead of her scheduled visit to open the factory. The Prime Minister noted that her actions were in direct alignment with instructions issued by President Yoweri Museveni.
However, the directive directly intersects with a major ruling issued on January 20, 2025, by High Court Justice Douglas Singiza Karekona in Uganda Sugar Manufacturers Association (USMA) Limited v. Attorney General & 3 Others. In that decision, the High Court held that prior permissions granted to CN Sugar by the Ministry of Trade were legally void because statutory licensing power resides exclusively with the Uganda Sugar Board under the Sugar Act, rather than the ministry.
The court issued two key mandates:
Immediate Cessation of Operations: CN Sugar was ordered to halt all sugar and jaggery milling activities until it successfully secured a valid license from the legally designated statutory body.
Zoning Compliance: The court established that the establishment of CN Sugar’s factory violated national sugar policy guidelines, which prohibit new mills within a 25-kilometer radius of existing facilities to protect sugarcane supply chains from unsustainable depletion.
The original dispute was not simply about paperwork. Existing sugar manufacturers raised concerns that new factories were being established in areas where sugarcane supply was already limited.
Preempting the Regulatory Framework
While CN Sugar has since re-applied for licensing under the current statutory process, its application remains pending. The Sugar Industry Stakeholders Council is scheduled to convene on August 21—just days before the planned commissioning—to evaluate the submission.
Critics and legal observers point out that an application for a license does not grant operational authority. By fixing a public commissioning ceremony prior to the council’s decision, the executive branch risks creating the perception of a predetermined outcome, potentially constraining the statutory body’s independence to evaluate the factory’s compliance with zoning laws and resource availability.
The ongoing situation highlights broader concerns regarding the rule of law and regulatory governance in Uganda:
Separation of Powers: A political directive or executive ceremony cannot legally supersede an active High Court injunction, which remains binding unless formally stayed, modified, or set aside on appeal.
Regulatory Autonomy: Statutory bodies must retain the authority to approve or deny operational licenses based on legal criteria without administrative pressure from fixed political timelines.
Policy Consistency: Bypassing established 25-kilometer radius limits threatens the economic viability of established millers and surrounding outgrower schemes.
Unless the government clarifies that CN Sugar has formally secured a statutory license and resolved its legal status regarding the court’s zoning order, the September 4 commissioning plan remains fundamentally at odds with the judicial framework governing Uganda’s sugar sector.
