By Swift Reporter
The Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) has rejected allegations published by The New York Times concerning Chief of Defence Forces General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, describing the claims as unfounded and accusing sections of the Western media of portraying Uganda’s leadership unfairly.
In a statement issued in Kampala on Saturday, October 10, 2026, Colonel Chris Magezi, the Acting Director of Defence Public Information, challenged an October 8 article by journalist Megan K. Stack titled “The Authoritarian Future Is Already Here.”
The military spokesperson disputed allegations in the article concerning alleged abuse of Ugandan writer Kakwenza Rukirabashaija during detention, including claims attributed to Kakwenza about his treatment and alleged encounters with General Muhoozi.
Magezi maintained that General Muhoozi had never met Kakwenza, dismissing the allegations as false. However, the statement did not provide independent evidence to substantiate that denial.
UPDF Questions Media Reporting
The UPDF argued that the latest publication formed part of what it described as a pattern of negative coverage of General Muhoozi by international media organisations.
Magezi cited previous reports by The Telegraph, The Wall Street Journal and The Economist, arguing that their coverage relied on sensationalism and politically biased interpretations of Uganda’s affairs.
He accused sections of the Western media of promoting narratives that undermine African leaders and suggested that some foreign commentators had preferred political successors to President Yoweri Museveni.
The military maintained that Uganda’s future leadership should be determined by Ugandans rather than external actors.
A central issue in the UPDF response was the account attributed to Kakwenza in the New York Times article, which reportedly described severe mistreatment during detention, including beatings and physical injuries.
Magezi questioned the credibility of the allegations and argued that serious accusations required evidence and proper verification rather than accounts he characterised as hearsay.
However, the UPDF statement did not present independent medical findings or other documentation resolving the disputed claims. The competing accounts could not be independently established from the statement alone.
Military Defends Its Record
The UPDF also defended General Muhoozi’s military career, describing him as a decorated officer with decades of service.
Magezi said the military operates within Uganda’s legal framework and is constitutionally mandated to support civil authorities when required, including in maintaining law and order.
He added that service members who violate the law should face disciplinary measures and accountability.
The statement further maintained that Uganda’s courts remain available to hear cases supported by evidence, including matters involving alleged violations of citizens’ rights.
The UPDF concluded by warning against what it described as external interference in Uganda’s internal affairs.
The dispute adds to ongoing international scrutiny of Uganda’s governance, human rights record and political succession debate. The allegations and the military’s denial remain contested, underscoring the importance of independent verification and credible evidence when reporting on serious claims involving public officials.
