Blogs
When two giants fight, the grass suffers
A National Data Strategy should help address these challenges. Its success must be measured by whether it improves data quality, protects citizens’ information, enables secure sharing and strengthens public services, not simply by whether new offices are established, writes Bill Dan Arnold Borodi.
Bill Dan Arnold Borodi. (File)
By: Admin ., Journalist @New Vision
______________
OPINION
By Bill Dan Arnold Borodi
We cannot build sovereign artificial intelligence (AI) without reliable data, clear governance and institutions that understand their respective responsibilities. That is why the dispute between the Ministry of ICT and National Guidance and the Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) over the National Data Strategy needs attention. The country needs to move quickly, but it must also get the legal and institutional foundations right.
In my view, Uganda is late in establishing this framework; however, it's better late than never, they say. As AI reshapes economies and security, the country needs to determine how data is collected, protected, shared and used to develop technologies that reflect Ugandan realities.
The controversy emerged on 21 October 2026, when UBOS challenged the strategy, raising concerns about its legality, duplication of existing frameworks and potential encroachment on its statutory mandate. Under the Uganda Bureau of Statistics Act, 1998, UBOS is responsible for coordinating, monitoring and supervising the National Statistical System. The bureau has also pointed to existing statistical frameworks, including the Plan for National Statistical Development.
These concerns deserve a transparent response. The proposed National Data Office and National Data Steering Committee need clearly defined legal authority, responsibilities and relationships with existing institutions. We should not create parallel structures without establishing what gaps they fill and how public money will be used.
However, official statistics and broader national data governance are not identical. Statistical production is central to UBOS’s mandate, while the wider data ecosystem also encompasses cybersecurity, digital public services, private-sector information and the foundations for AI development. The Ministry and UBOS must resolve where their responsibilities intersect without undermining the bureau’s statutory role.
The urgency is evident in documented cases of AI-enabled fraud. In 2024, an employee at British engineering firm Arup’s Hong Kong office joined a video conference featuring people who appeared to be senior colleagues, including the company’s chief financial officer. They were deepfake imitations. Believing the instructions were genuine, the employee made 15 transfers totalling approximately HK 200 million, or US25 million, to fraudsters. The case demonstrated how convincing synthetic images and voices can exploit trust in ordinary business procedures.
Africa faces related threats. INTERPOL’s African Cyberthreat Assessment Report 2026, published in August, reported that AI was enabling 55 per cent of reported cybercrimes across the continent. The report highlighted AI-assisted scams, business email compromise and synthetic identities, alongside weaknesses in real-time information-sharing among banks, telecommunications providers and law enforcement.
For us, these findings underline why secure data systems and clear reporting channels matter. Investigating fraud may require information from several organisations. If those institutions cannot lawfully exchange relevant information quickly, tracing transactions and identifying perpetrators becomes harder. AI can help defenders detect suspicious activity, but it can also help criminals produce convincing impersonations and scale their attacks.
A National Data Strategy should help address these challenges. Its success must be measured by whether it improves data quality, protects citizens’ information, enables secure sharing and strengthens public services, not simply by whether new offices are established.
These foundations also matter for sovereign AI. Adopting a foreign AI model does not automatically give Uganda control over its infrastructure, development priorities or the terms of its use. Building national capability requires reliable datasets, computing resources, skilled researchers, investment and governance that protects the public interest.
However, official statistics and broader national data governance are not identical. Statistical production is central to UBOS’s mandate, while the wider data ecosystem also encompasses cybersecurity, digital public services, private-sector information and the foundations for AI development. The Ministry and UBOS must resolve where their responsibilities intersect without undermining the bureau’s statutory role.
The urgency is evident in documented cases of AI-enabled fraud. In 2024, an employee at British engineering firm Arup’s Hong Kong office joined a video conference featuring people who appeared to be senior colleagues, including the company’s chief financial officer. They were deepfake imitations. Believing the instructions were genuine, the employee made 15 transfers totalling approximately HK 200 million, or US25 million, to fraudsters. The case demonstrated how convincing synthetic images and voices can exploit trust in ordinary business procedures.
Africa faces related threats. INTERPOL’s African Cyberthreat Assessment Report 2026, published in August, reported that AI was enabling 55 per cent of reported cybercrimes across the continent. The report highlighted AI-assisted scams, business email compromise and synthetic identities, alongside weaknesses in real-time information-sharing among banks, telecommunications providers and law enforcement.
For us, these findings underline why secure data systems and clear reporting channels matter. Investigating fraud may require information from several organisations. If those institutions cannot lawfully exchange relevant information quickly, tracing transactions and identifying perpetrators becomes harder. AI can help defenders detect suspicious activity, but it can also help criminals produce convincing impersonations and scale their attacks.
A National Data Strategy should help address these challenges. Its success must be measured by whether it improves data quality, protects citizens’ information, enables secure sharing and strengthens public services, not simply by whether new offices are established.
These foundations also matter for sovereign AI. Adopting a foreign AI model does not automatically give Uganda control over its infrastructure, development priorities or the terms of its use. Building national capability requires reliable datasets, computing resources, skilled researchers, investment and governance that protects the public interest.
Consider the practical implications. Agricultural services need dependable information to support farmers; health planners need reliable records while protecting patient confidentiality; and developers of local-language AI need data that reflects Uganda’s languages and communities. These outcomes require deliberate investment and responsible implementation.
Uganda should also connect its efforts to a wider African approach. The African Union’s Continental Artificial Intelligence Strategy, published in 2024, provides a framework for developing AI capabilities around African priorities and strengthening cooperation. Countries can benefit from collaborative research, African-language datasets, cybersecurity partnerships and shared investment where pooling resources is practical. Cross-border cybercrime and the high costs of advanced AI infrastructure make cooperation economically and technically valuable.
Uganda’s immediate task is to resolve the dispute through evidence and law. The government should clarify the mandates of proposed structures, identify gaps in existing frameworks, explain the projected costs and establish measurable implementation priorities. UBOS’s statutory responsibilities must be respected, while the Ministry’s wider digital policy role should be clearly defined.
As the African proverb reminds us, “When two elephants fight, the grass suffers.” The public should not bear the cost of institutional uncertainty through weaker services, duplicated expenditure or missed opportunities.
Uganda needs a National Data Strategy that is legally sound, practical and capable of supporting secure data use and responsible AI. Better late than never, but the next step must be implementation grounded in law, evidence and a clear national purpose. Africa’s AI future will depend on our ability to develop our capabilities, protect our people and work together where shared action delivers more than isolated efforts.
The writer is a Journalist, AI safety and strategist
danbill80@gmail.com
Uganda should also connect its efforts to a wider African approach. The African Union’s Continental Artificial Intelligence Strategy, published in 2024, provides a framework for developing AI capabilities around African priorities and strengthening cooperation. Countries can benefit from collaborative research, African-language datasets, cybersecurity partnerships and shared investment where pooling resources is practical. Cross-border cybercrime and the high costs of advanced AI infrastructure make cooperation economically and technically valuable.
Uganda’s immediate task is to resolve the dispute through evidence and law. The government should clarify the mandates of proposed structures, identify gaps in existing frameworks, explain the projected costs and establish measurable implementation priorities. UBOS’s statutory responsibilities must be respected, while the Ministry’s wider digital policy role should be clearly defined.
As the African proverb reminds us, “When two elephants fight, the grass suffers.” The public should not bear the cost of institutional uncertainty through weaker services, duplicated expenditure or missed opportunities.
Uganda needs a National Data Strategy that is legally sound, practical and capable of supporting secure data use and responsible AI. Better late than never, but the next step must be implementation grounded in law, evidence and a clear national purpose. Africa’s AI future will depend on our ability to develop our capabilities, protect our people and work together where shared action delivers more than isolated efforts.
The writer is a Journalist, AI safety and strategist
danbill80@gmail.com