Current Discussions and Developments in Uganda’s Arbitration Landscape

Uganda has developed a conducive legal environment for arbitration, largely governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (ACA), Cap 5. This Act, inspired by the UNCITRAL Model Law and Arbitration Rules, has been adapted to fit Uganda’s specific needs while upholding the standards of international arbitration. Both domestic and international arbitration are available in Uganda, and the ACA’s provisions allow a wide range of disputes, including commercial and investment disputes, to be settled through arbitration.

In the recent past, Uganda has taken significant strides in establishing a robust framework for arbitration, particularly in the mining sector. The Mining Act and Minerals Act, Cap 159, expressly recognises arbitration as a viable dispute resolution mechanism for mining disputes. The Investment Code Act, Cap 74, provides avenues for arbitration in disputes between investors and the government, offering pathways for arbitration either under the ACA or through the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).

As a signatory to the ICSID Convention since 1966, Uganda has maintained a favourable stance toward international arbitration. This is reinforced by its membership in both the East African Community (EAC) and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA). Both the EAC and COMESA treaties recognise arbitration as a suitable method for resolving disputes. In the recent past, there have been cases brought against Uganda at ICSID, the most recent example being ICSID Case No. ARB/15/11 Total E &P Uganda BV vs. Republic of Uganda. A number of cases have also been initiated in the Permanent Court of Arbitration against Uganda, such as Rift Valley Railways (Uganda) Limited, RVR Investments Limited and KU Railways Holdings v. Republic of Uganda, PCA Case No. 2019-07.

Furthermore, Uganda’s bilateral investment treaties frequently include provisions that provide for arbitration in internationally recognised institutions such as ICSID and the International Chamber of Commerce. For instance, the Uganda - France BIT (2003), Uganda - South Africa BIT (2000), Uganda - Nigeria BIT (2003), China - Uganda (2004) and the Uganda - Netherlands BIT (2000), Belgium-Luxembourg Economic Union - Uganda BIT (2005), all permit arbitration under ICSID rules. These agreements demonstrate Uganda’s dedication to fostering a favourable environment for foreign investment while addressing the complexities of investment disputes.

While Uganda does not yet host a major international arbitration centre, it has institutions such as the Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution (CADER) and the International Centre for Arbitration & Mediation, Kampala (ICAMEK). Uganda also has private arbitration institutions such as Praxis Conflict Centre, which stands out for its commitment to personalised and effective conflict resolution with a team of experienced mediators, arbitrators, and conciliators. These institutions have gained traction in handling international arbitrations with rules comparable to those of other international centres, like Kigali International Arbitration Centre. Additionally, Uganda is a signatory to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 1958), commonly known as the New York Convention. One of the benefits of being a signatory to the New York Convention is that it facilitates the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in member countries. This means that parties to arbitration agreements can have their awards enforced in other member states without undergoing lengthy and complex court procedures.

Uganda’s arbitration framework emphasises party autonomy, a central principle in arbitration that allows parties to customise proceedings to their needs. Parties can select their arbitrators, agree on the governing rules, and choose the language of arbitration.

Uganda is a signatory to the New York Convention, which enables the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. However, Uganda’s ratification of the ICSID Convention, coupled with its application under the ACA, makes enforcement more streamlined. By treating foreign arbitral awards as decrees of the court, Uganda provides a more straightforward and reliable enforcement process, particularly attractive to foreign investors who may need assurance that awards will be upheld.

In alignment with the UNCITRAL Model Law, Ugandan courts maintain a limited, supportive role in arbitration. They assist with the appointment of arbitrators, interim relief, and the enforcement of awards but largely respect the autonomy of the arbitration process, avoiding unnecessary interference. This minimal judicial intervention is a marked advantage, ensuring that arbitration remains a private and efficient means of dispute resolution.

Uganda has positioned itself as a regional leader in arbitration, offering a modern, flexible, and investor-friendly legal framework that is well-suited to handle both domestic and international disputes. The country’s commitment to arbitration under the ACA and its membership in international treaties like the ICSID and New York Conventions underscore its dedication to supporting business and investment through reliable dispute resolution mechanisms. By upholding party autonomy, ensuring efficient processes, and maintaining minimal court intervention, Uganda’s arbitration ecosystem stands out as a model in East Africa.

As arbitration continues to gain traction across East Africa, Uganda’s proactive approach and robust legal framework will undoubtedly reinforce its reputation as a safe and appealing hub for arbitration. The alignment with international standards, combined with local institutional support, positions Uganda not only as a vital participant in East Africa’s arbitration landscape but also as an influential driver of regional economic growth and foreign investment.