National Sports Act looks like a deceptive gamble 

In the realm of lawmaking, just because something isn’t an outright lie doesn’t mean it isn’t a masterclass in deception. Such is the case with the recently enacted National Sports Act.

It is a piece of legislation that promises change but delivers ambiguity, and whose true intentions lie shrouded in controversy. Honestly, the Act was long overdue to overhaul the archaic sports laws as well as rules and regulations. However, deeper scrutiny shows the Act addresses symptoms without touching the malaise that continues to bedevil sports.

The most conspicuous flaw of this Act is its failure to address gross misconduct and fraud within sports. Fine, it addresses malpractice and match-fixing, but fraud is a much more grave offense, one that should not be relegated to the confines of sporting bodies to handle.

To understand how this works, you ought to look back at the cases of fraud in sports, especially football. Moses Magogo’s continued hold on the Fufa presidency, despite his admission to stealing World Cup tickets meant for Ugandans, exemplifies this flaw. His plea-bargain with Fifa and two-month suspension did little to rectify the offense.

So, the Act does not tie up Fufa when it comes to fraud because the federation is governed by Fifa statutes, which free Fufa from legal and political interference in Uganda.

So, Fufa operates outside the new Act and should one seek redress against them under the Act, Fufa would hide behind Fifa statutes as a shield on top of invoking the infamous clause of ‘bringing the game into disrepute.’

Meanwhile, the clause prohibiting the recording of sporting events is a puzzling one, as it blurs the line between personal and commercial interests. It appears that Moses Magogo, the president of Fufa, has his eyes set on monopolizing domestic and international football matches through Fufa TV and Fufa radio.

This move threatens to stifle other broadcasters’ ability to inform the public about sports. Where do we draw the line between sharing public information and pursuing commercial gain if someone posts footage on social media?

Another glaring omission in the Act is the absence of a clause to assimilate special talents into the fold of Ugandan sports. As European countries like France, Belgium and England, among others, flourish by embracing talent from across the world, Uganda misses out on an opportunity to nurture exceptional athletes who could dominate the global stage.

For instance, Kenyan-born Phillip Omondi wouldn’t have been Uganda’s greatest if quick-witted people like Bidandi Ssali didn’t assimilate him to become Ugandan. The same goes for legends such as Patrick Nathan and Timothy Ayiekoh.

In its article titled Naturalisation in sport, legal firm Bignon Lebray notes that although much of European nationality is governed by each country’s civil laws, sports laws deviate to create sports-related beliefs about nationality. Even the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) clauses state that sports nationality is a purely sporting concept that defines the rules for qualifying players for participation in international competitions.

These are two different legal orders, one of public law and the other of private law, which do not overlap and do not conflict. And then there is the matter of government funding for clubs, which the Act fails to address. In a country that generously offers tax exemptions and rebates to foreign companies, there should be an avenue for these entities to contribute to sports development.

The corporate social responsibility of investing in education, health, and sports should be a moral obligation, yet this Act falls short of facilitating it.

So, with billions spared, why wouldn’t companies be obligated to invest at least a fraction of that sum in the future of Ugandan sports?

In conclusion, I find the National Sports Act in its current form to be a deceptive document, promising progress but delivering uncertainty. It’s not too late to reevaluate its contents to ensure that Uganda’s sports landscape truly benefits from its legislation as the supreme law, and not just a select few who seek to exploit its ambiguities for personal gain.