A high-level meeting between Chief of Defence Forces Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba and Nation Media Group (NMG) owner Rostam Aziz has ignited fresh debate, with media personality Mordecai Muriisa warning that the issue now goes beyond a media shutdown to a deeper institutional concern.
The meeting, held at the Special Forces Command headquarters in Entebbe, followed the dramatic closure of NMG outlets in Uganda, including NTV Uganda, Daily Monitor, KFM, and Dembe FM.
Armed soldiers reportedly surrounded media premises and forced stations off air, a move that has since drawn scrutiny across media and political circles.
Reacting to the development, Muriisa posed a pointed question: when did Uganda’s military assume the role of regulating the media?
According to accounts shared after the meeting, Gen. Muhoozi presented a dossier accusing NMG of biased reporting, publishing falsehoods, and engaging in political activism.
The claims were echoed by PLU publicist Andrew Mwenda, who framed the shutdown as a response to alleged violations by the media house.
However, Muriisa argues that such explanations only deepen public concern rather than resolve it.
He noted that Uganda already has established civilian institutions mandated to handle disputes involving the press, including the Uganda Communications Commission (UCC) and the Uganda Media Council.
These bodies, he emphasized, are legally responsible for enforcing professional standards and addressing complaints against journalists and broadcasters.
“The sequence is what raises questions,” Muriisa observed, pointing to reports that enforcement action came before any visible regulatory process.
The media personality warned that bypassing these institutions risks blurring the line between military authority and civilian oversight.
He questioned what role remains for independent regulators if the military can directly intervene in newsroom operations and later engage media owners over editorial decisions.
Muriisa further cautioned that labeling critical reporting as “activism” could narrow the space for legitimate journalism.
According to him, such interpretations risk creating an environment where scrutiny of power is discouraged.