This comparative legal study examines the tension between recent Ugandan governance legislation and established principles of African administrative law. It addresses the critical problem of whether laws designed to enhance public administration may, in practice, unduly restrict civic space and undermine administrative justice. Employing a doctrinal methodology, the research conducts a systematic analysis of specific Ugandan statutes, including the Computer Misuse (Amendment) Act and the Public Finance Management Act. These are evaluated against core regional benchmarks derived from the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the evolving jurisprudence of African human rights bodies, focusing on accountability, transparency, and participatory governance.

The analysis, based on a review of primary legal sources and pertinent Ugandan case law up to the present, identifies a discernible gap. It finds that while legislative intent often purports to streamline governance, the operationalisation of these laws frequently centralises executive discretion and limits judicial and public oversight. This divergence underscores a key challenge for administrative law in the African context: balancing effective governance with robust safeguards for citizens’ rights. The study concludes that for Ugandan governance legislation to foster sustainable development, future reforms must be more deeply informed by a substantive, pan-African administrative jurisprudence. The findings offer significant implications for policymakers and jurists seeking to draft laws that genuinely enhance governance while empowering citizens.