By Michael Aboneka |
The High Court of Uganda on 10th June 2025 dismissed the case of Initiative for Social and Economic Rights (ISER) & 2 Others v Attorney General & NIRA (HCT-00-CV-MC-0066-2022). In this case, theapplicants challenged the mandatory requirement of a National Identification Number (NIN) or National ID card (Ndaga Muntu) under the Registration of Persons Act and other policies to access services such as healthcare and social protection, arguing that this system disproportionately excludes vulnerable populations, including older persons and women. The court’s dismissal of the case has been met withwidespread concerns over the role of digital identity in enabling or obstructing access to essential public services. Despite compelling guidance including expert opinions by Prof. Tom Fisher, Dr. Reetika Khera, Professor Phillip Alston presented in the Amicus Curiae by CIPESA, ARTICLE 19 and Access Now, the Court decided that “Uganda’s ID system is not “digital” because it operates primarily offline. A person cannot be denied access simply because of lack of internet connectivity, among other features of a digital ID system,” ignoring its biometric backbone, centralized database, and digital interfaces. This narrow interpretation failed to account for the structural risks embedded in the system, such as exclusion, surveillance, and data misuse and its wide implication on access to services. The decision of the court has far-reaching effects on the human rights of Ugandans as highlighted below.
Access to services
Uganda’s digital ID system is increasingly integrating into e-governance platforms, given the Government’s approach of digital public infrastructure including digital identity and mobile payments among others for pension schemes, social grants and education services. The Court’s decision effectively legitimizes a system that:
Denies access to services for those without a National ID, who are estimated at 18 Million (about 40%) of the population. Recently, the Ministry of Education mandated all schools to register their learners on a portal under the Education Management Information system (EMIS). The is an education census aimed at facilitating planning, budgeting and decision making. One of the requirements under this census is that the learners, teaching and no teaching staff must possess a NIN. This therefore means that those without a NIN and subsequently a national ID will miss out on being enumerated by the government as learners and hence excluded from the planning and budgeting.
Further, as noted in the application that was before court, the Social Assistance Grants for Empowerment (SAGE) , a government initiative that offers financial assistance to vulnerable elderly individuals and households to help sustain their livelihood, only benefits those on the national Identification Register and, in possession of a national ID. This is ultimately exclusionary of those without an ID. The Court fails to consider that the introduction of the National Identification (NID) system as the primary data source and mandatory means of identification denies access by older persons to the life-saving program, leading to violation of their right to social security.
The Court sadly noted that “the deponents appear to me to be few and isolated cases that could be handled through proper follow up, guidance and assistance rather than as constituting evidence of a failed national ID system.” In furthering this absurdity, the court further goes on to state that “the applicants have not adduced sufficient evidence to prove on a balance of probabilities that there has been actual and systemic exclusion of eligible persons from SAGE benefits on account of use of the national ID system as the primary data source and mandatory means of identification.” This analogy under-looks the fact that the deponents were jeopardized from benefiting from the SAGE because of the challenges of the national ID system. The court also treats these mishappenings as isolated cases not worth consideration.
Undermining Digital Transformation.
Social and economic services across global systems are shifting online, requiring digital authentication. The government of Uganda on 17 August 2023 launched a 5-year Digital Transformation Road Map and is shifting to provision of services using digital platforms through its Digital Public Infrastructure which includes the National ID System, mobile money, Electronic Fiscal Receipting and Invoicing System (EFRIS), Express Penalty Scheme, Digital Tax Stamps and Payment Registration Numbers among others. All these systems require authentication, integrity of data among others. It is therefore not correct for the court to decide that Uganda’s ID system is offline and non-digital.
These ruling highlights deeper concerns about Uganda’s approach to digital public infrastructure (DPI) where there are no strong legal safeguards such as comprehensive and robust data protection laws and independent oversight, these systems risk enabling surveillance, discrimination, and misuse of personal data.
Further, these barriers to accessing essential services (healthcare, education, social protection) due to lack of National ID without alternatives directly challenges Uganda’s compliance with the World Bank’s ID4D inclusion on ensuring universal coverage from birth to death, free from discrimination.
Failure to provide alternatives
The court, in reaching its decision, heavily relied on the respondents’ submissions. The Respondents defended Uganda’s National ID system as a lawful and essential tool for accurate identification in public service delivery. They argued that requiring a National ID to access services like healthcare and social protection is a legitimate administrative practice, not discriminatory. Additionally, they emphasized that the system is primarily offline and does not qualify as a digital ID, countering concerns raised by the Applicants about human rights implications. By accepting these submissions, the court fails to give alternatives albeit the existing failures of the current system. Although the court did not delve into the operational issues of the SAGE, it could have guided and provided alternatives to proof of identification for purposes of promoting access to social services with a goal of promoting the right to life.
The fact that beneficiaries are locked out of a government programme for lack of a national ID which is partly attributed to errors arising from NIRA, the Court should have provided a remedy for the deponents. Use of other alternatives to ascertain identity such as baptism cards, voters’ cards and residence identity cards among others can remedy exclusion and promote access rather than delineating the citizens.
Aggravating Digital Exclusion
The ruling risks deepening digital exclusion of marginalized groups especially rural communities, older persons, and women, the digitally illiterate, and those without access to information and communication technologies like smartphones. Additionally, barriers to enrollment due to distance, documentation gaps, lack of connectivity and bureaucratic inefficiencies legitimizes a system that amplifies digital exclusion and entrenches inequality.
By not demanding stronger legal safeguards or alternative access pathways, the ruling contributes to a digital landscape where essential services become inaccessible to many. Further Biometric failures and data corruption which are synonymous with Uganda’s national identification infrastructure.can render individuals invisible to the system. This potentially exacerbates vulnerability which further undermines Uganda’s commitments under African Union Convention on Cybersecurity and Personal Data Protection which prohibits discriminative data practices against vulnerable groups and the Sustainable Development Goals which in SDG 16.9 provides for legal identity for all.
Recommendations for Reform
To ensure digital identity becomes a tool for inclusion rather than exclusion,
CSOs and Lawyers should consider:
- Appealing against the decision in the Court of Appeal with the hope that the Court will agree with the Applicants and provide more guidance and declarations on the issues pertaining digital rights and access to social services.
- Lawyers must strengthen the evidence before the Court such as disaggregated data not just anecdotal or generalized claims to show clear causal links between the digital ID system and denial of services.
- The case could also have been tested as a constitutional issue that the inaction of the state and denial of the services to the Ugandans such as health services violates their right to life among others.
Uganda should consider:
- Amending the Registration of Persons Act to allow for alternative forms of identification other than the sole reliance on the National ID so as to allow those without it access services using an alternative identification.
- Ensuring that DPI empowers rather than excludes by adopting a human-centered design approach, providing alternative offline pathways to access services, and prioritising legal frameworks that protect individual rights and foster public trust.
- Ensuring community-based enrollment and mobile registration units to ease access by those that cannot access the digital services and also enhancing registrations such as the Education Management Information System.
Providing non-biometric fallback options for authentication, like PIN-based or one-time password (OTP) verification via SMS, physical ID cards embedded with QR codes that link to a person’s profile without requiring biometric input, Local Council identity verification and call-in verification hotlines that authenticate individuals through personal questions or secure codes.