Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

The EAC Seed and Plant Varieties Bill 2025 targets organic seeds, aiming to replace them with modified seeds, say smallholder farmers.

Published

11 months ago

on

Smallholder farmers weeding their crops.

By Witness Radio team.

Ssetabi Rauben, a smallholder farmer from Kicuculo village in Mubende district, has a deep connection to farming that dates back to his youth. His personal journey into farming, driven by his family’s need for a livelihood, is a testament to the importance of smallholder farmers in our agricultural system. Ssetabi’s story is just one of many that highlight the potential impact of the EAC Seed and Plant Varieties Bill 2025 on individual farmers.

“With no chance for going further in education, my father gave me land to start a living, and I had to move on. I didn’t go far with my education, so the only resort was to do agriculture since it was my family’s source of living,” He said in an interview with the Witness Radio team.

At 26, Ssetabi, a father of one, dedicates most of his two-acre farm to maize and beans. However, his future in farming, a field he knows best, is under threat. The local seeds he relies on may be outlawed by the 2025 Seed and Plant Varieties Bill of the EAC, potentially dimming his hopes.

The Seeds and Plant Varieties Bill, 2025, recently introduced by the Council of Ministers of the East African Community (EAC), is part of a long-term drive to unify seed regulations across the region.

The draft Bill, as witnessed by Witness Radio, aims to provide for the coordination of evaluation, release, and registration of plant varieties among Partner States; to establish standard processes for seed certification and protection of plant varieties within the Community; and to provide for related matters. According to its promoters, the Bill, based on Article 106 of the Treaty, aims to provide for seed certification, testing, and marketing, thereby facilitating and creating an enabling environment for private sector seed multiplication and distribution.

However, the bill has sparked opposition from civil society organizations, farmer networks, and development partners across the EAC. They argue that it could consolidate corporate control over seeds, curtail the rights of smallholder farmers, and jeopardize agro-biodiversity.

Further, analysis by experts reveals that provisions that risk restricting farmers’ traditional practices of saving, exchanging, and selling seed could have far-reaching consequences for food security, agro-biodiversity, and the livelihoods of millions of rural households.

According to civil society organizations, the Bill threatens to criminalize or restrict traditional practices like breeding, saving, sharing, exchanging, and selling farm-saved seeds. It supports breeders’ rights instead of farmers’ rights. The Bill places a heavy focus on commercial and certified seeds, which could undermine the diverse, locally adapted varieties essential for resilience against climate change, pests, and diseases. This overlooks the importance of farmer-managed seed systems, which are not only central to rural livelihoods and food sovereignty but also an integral part of our cultural heritage.

Many voices warn of serious weaknesses of the bill, which lead to further marginalization of indigenous and smallholder farmers and offer no legal recognition or protection for local farmer-managed seed systems. Despite this, smallholder farmers who are likely to be affected produce the highest amounts of food in the world.

In a critical discussion about the draft bill by Civil Society Organisations and smallholder farmers across East Africa and beyond, several experts on the topic voiced their concerns. Their united front of opposition, a powerful force against the bill, underscores the collective voice’s strength in shaping the bill’s fate.

Dr Peter Munyi, a professional lawyer with extensive experience in agricultural law, explained that the draft stipulates strict testing procedures for seed varieties, with criteria such as distinctiveness, uniformity, and stability being decisive for seed approval. He, however, mentioned that indigenous or farmer-managed seed systems, which are crucial for biodiversity and local food security, are often unable to meet these criteria.

He added, “The testing takes place in laboratories and the value for use and cultivation entails multi-location trials, which is also very expensive, and the only people who can really afford these tests would be commercial seed breeders, perhaps research institutions that USDA and other agencies also fund.”

Mariam Mayet, Executive Director of the African Center for Biodiversity, revealed that the bill is discriminatory and inequitable in its approach because it doesn’t treat all farmers and seeds equally. Her insights add weight to the concerns raised by smallholder farmers and civil society organizations.

Considering the reality of the lives of small-holding farmers, such as Mr. Ssetabi, it is clear that the bill would place an unreasonable burden on the local small farming community.

“We plant and replant our seeds. Our system, inherited from our fathers, has always involved

harvesting, selecting the best breeds, and replanting them; now, if there is a shift as the bill proposes. It’s challenging for people like me because seeds can be expensive at times. Having to buy new seeds every planting season will deepen us into poverty, and people will soon abandon agriculture for those with money.” This financial burden is a stark reality for smallholder farmers like Ssetabi, and the bill only exacerbates their economic struggles.

Considering that smallholder farmers like Ssetabi contribute significantly to the World’s food production, the potential impact of the bill on food security is a cause for concern. Once this bill is passed, there will be a burden on food security and, hence, an increase in poverty levels. The bill’s potential impact on food security cannot be overstated, making it a critical issue for all stakeholders.

Smallholder farming accounts for approximately 75 percent of agricultural production and over 75 percent of employment in East Africa, with up to 70–80 % of seeds planted originating from farmer-managed seed systems. The bill must be reconsidered in light of these implications to prevent a potential crisis. The significant role of smallholder farmers in East Africa’s agricultural sector underscores the urgency of this issue.

“Yet, these systems are in no way recognized in the draft Bill, and the provisions of the bill would install new barriers for farmers’ seed systems and prohibit the saving, reuse, exchange, selling, and sharing in the seed system”. A civil society network raised the alarm.

Ssetabi says. “Some of us rent land, so this is another challenge. Such seeds also need fertilizers.

Now, look at the costs of renting land, seeds, and fertilizers. Don’t you think this is a ploy to remove us from the farming system?” He questioned.

The concern over the bill extends beyond Uganda to other countries where it is being introduced. In Kenya, for example, farmers and the Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service (KEPHIS)—a government parastatal mandated to ensure the quality of agricultural inputs and produce, thereby safeguarding the economy, the environment, and human health—rejected the bill. They warned that its enactment could weaken government oversight and expose farmers to substandard and counterfeit seeds.

“Giving seed producers the responsibility to determine the quality of their own seeds will erode government oversight and compromise seed quality,” The Managing Director of KEPHIS, Prof Theophilus Mutui, mentioned in an article published by the Eastleigh Voice.

Civil society organizations appeal that if the bill is to proceed, it must include strong, explicit protections for smallholder farmers, particularly around exceptions to breeders’ rights.

Additionally, stakeholders should advocate for a separate legal framework or policy that recognises and supports farmer-managed seed systems. Without such measures, the region risks enshrining a seed regime that deepens inequality, erodes biodiversity, and undermines the right to food.

Related posts:

A front page of the draft Bill.
The EAC Seed & Plant Varieties Bill, 2025, is a potential threat to smallholder farmers, as it aims to disengage them from the agriculture business, according to experts. CSOs and Smallholder farmers are urgently convening to scrutinize the EAC Seed & Plant Varieties Bill, 2025. Omoro farmers task Naro on crop varieties African governments are giving in to corporate pressure and undermining local seed systems – report Commercial sugarcane growing is killing indigenous seed varieties in the Busoga region – Report

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Smallholder farmers were excluded from the consultative process for the East African Community Seed and Plant Varieties Bill, 2025: CSOs across the EAC call for a time extension and greater inclusion of smallholder farmers in shaping the bill.

Published

1 hour ago

on

September 7, 2026

By

By the Witness Radio team.

Civil society organizations throughout the East African Community are raising their voices, urging that smallholder farmers and farmer-managed seed systems practitioners receive the recognition they deserve in the upcoming East African Community Seed and Plant Varieties Bill, 2025.

This call to action follows public hearings held across EAC partner states from August 26 to 28, 2026. Diverse voices gathered to shape the future of regional seed legislation. However, participation by smallholder farmers and farmer-managed seed systems practitioners was limited.

These hearings united government officials, farmers, civil society groups, researchers, seed regulators, commercial seed sector representatives, and other stakeholders, all eager to share their perspectives and recommendations on the Bill.

The proposed legislation aims to create a unified approach to seed and plant variety regulation across the region. It covers seed certification, variety release, and the movement and trade of seeds across borders.

Civil society organizations from several countries argue that the proposed framework overlooks the vital role of smallholder farmers and farmer-managed seed systems practitioners who have sustained farming communities for generations.

They emphasize that although the formal and commercial seed sector is important, farmers must retain the freedom to save, exchange, multiply, and replant seeds within their communities.

In Kenya, civil society organizations participated in the public hearings, advocating for recognition of farmers, farmer-managed seed systems, traditional landraces, and community seed banks.

Tabby Munyiri of Seed Savers Network said the concern was not about rejecting the formal seed sector, but ensuring that farmers have a choice.

“We recognize the importance of the formal seed system, and we believe that farmers should be able to have an option; farmers should be able to have a choice, and that is why we are calling for an inclusive law,” Munyiri said.

She highlighted that traditional and indigenous seed varieties are crucial for preserving biodiversity and equipping farmers with more options as they adapt to shifting climate conditions.

In Uganda, civil society organizations echoed these concerns, stressing the need to explicitly recognize farmer-managed seed systems rather than relying on vague references to farmers in the proposed regional framework.

During the consultations, Dr. David Kabanda of the Center for Food and Adequate Resources Rights Africa (CEFROHT) urged lawmakers to safeguard farmers’ rights and ensure that commercial interests do not undermine farmer-managed systems.

“We need to critically and deeply think about this issue as East Africans. We can wake up to a very sad reality, and it has started happening, when a few corporate companies take over everything,” Kabanda said.

Kabanda also questioned whether the proposed Bill aligns with the international and African commitments that EAC partner states have pledged to uphold.

He cited the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, particularly Article 9, which addresses farmers’ rights. Kabanda argued that the regional legislation should reflect these commitments and criticized the Bill for what he described as inadequate attention to farmers’ rights.

In Tanzania, civil society representatives described a consultation process that brought together a wide range of stakeholders. David Manongi of the Tanzania Alliance for Biodiversity (TABIO) noted that farmers, women, youth, civil society organizations, government officials, researchers, and seed regulators all took part in the discussions.

He added that civil society organizations held preparatory meetings before the public hearing to review the Bill and consolidate concerns and recommendations.

“The meeting provided us with an opportunity to review the Bill and consolidate the concerns and recommendations,” Manongi said.

According to Manongi, stakeholders advocated measures to safeguard farmer seed systems. They focused on ensuring that farmer-managed seed systems and community seed banks are recognized within the regional framework.

In Rwanda, civil society representatives voiced worries about the lack of awareness among organizations that work directly with smallholder farmers regarding the consultations.

Dieudonne Sindikubwabo, who works with the Rwanda Organic Agriculture Movement (ROAM), said many organizations working closely with farmers were unaware that the public hearings were taking place until the process had begun.

“I work with smallholder farmers daily. But when you look at how the Bill is designed, I feel very little involvement of smallholder farmers was done,” Sindikubwabo said.

He explained that his concerns went beyond participation to the substance of the proposed legislation.

Sindikubwabo pointed out that the Bill favors commercialization but falls short in clearly outlining farmers’ rights to keep, exchange, and multiply seeds.

“The Bill is not in favor of smallholder farmers, because they are just focusing on commercialization,” he said.

In Burundi, civil society representatives questioned the inclusiveness of the consultation process, noting they were not formally invited and that farmers were missing from the discussions.

Tusiime Pauline, a legal adviser assisting Burundian civil society organizations, stressed that the absence of farmers was especially troubling since the proposed legislation will directly impact them.

“We didn’t have the farmers there because farmers were not invited,” Pauline said.

She noted that civil society representatives still attended and presented recommendations after preparing submissions and proposed amendments to the Bill. However, she lamented that the discussions largely ignored concerns about farmers’ absence.

“We managed to attend the hearings despite lacking a formal invitation. Leaving out civil society and farmers without inviting them makes the process unfair,” she said.

In Somalia, civil society representatives voiced broader worries about whether rural communities have the awareness and capacity to understand and participate in policy discussions that directly affect them.

Mohammed Hassan from the Center for Dryland Development & Resilience Systems (CDDRS) emphasized the need to share information about the proposed legislation with rural communities, especially those relying on farming and traditional production systems.

“We need to make sure information about these policies reaches rural communities, so the people directly affected can understand what is being discussed and have an opportunity to participate.”

Hassan pointed out that public awareness is crucial because many rural communities may lack sufficient information about policy debates at national and regional levels.

The stories shared by civil society representatives from six of the eight EAC partner states reveal a patchwork of experiences with the consultations, bringing a range of perspectives into the ongoing debate over seed and plant variety regulation in East Africa.

Although the proposed law aims to establish a unified regulatory framework for the region, civil society organizations are urging lawmakers to ensure it also reflects the lived realities of farmers who rely on seed systems beyond the formal commercial market.

Their submissions raise broader questions about how the regional seed system can balance commercial interests, farmers’ rights, biodiversity, and the ongoing use of indigenous and farmer-managed seed systems.

The organizations are also calling for the concerns voiced during the consultations to be genuinely considered before the Bill moves forward in the legislative process.

For farmers, the outcome of this process could determine how they access, save, exchange, and use seeds for years to come. As the EAC weighs the recommendations from the consultations, all eyes are now on how these competing perspectives will shape the next version of the proposed law.

Related posts:

CSOs and Smallholder farmers are urgently convening to scrutinize the EAC Seed & Plant Varieties Bill, 2025. The EAC Seed & Plant Varieties Bill, 2025, is a potential threat to smallholder farmers, as it aims to disengage them from the agriculture business, according to experts. Civil society organizations across East Africa have revived their campaign against the EAC Seed and Plant Varieties Bill 2025, just as the regional parliament opens the floor to public consultations. East African Community member states launched public hearings this week for the Seed and Plant Variety Bill 2025, marking a significant step in shaping the region’s agricultural future. The EAC Seed and Plant Varieties Bill 2025 targets organic seeds, aiming to replace them with modified seeds, say smallholder farmers.
Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Six other Anti-EACOP Activists remanded to Luzira over alleged unlawful assembly.

Published

2 days ago

on

September 5, 2026

By

By the Witness Radio team

The Law Development Centre (LDC) Magistrate’s Court has charged and remanded six youth activists attached to the Rooted in Resistance movement to Luzira Prison over alleged unlawful assembly.

The six are Mukiibi Isaac, Mawanda Arafat, Mugerwa Nicholas, Opio Innocent, Friday John and Onyango Ronald.

They are among 16 activists arrested on Monday, September 1, 2026, as they attempted to deliver petitions to Parliament and the offices of TotalEnergies in Kampala, calling for greater scrutiny of Uganda’s oil developments and opposing further investment in fossil fuels.

The activists were protesting against projects including the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) and the Tilenga oil project, arguing that continued investment in fossil fuels threatens communities, the environment and Uganda’s climate commitments.

Their lawyer, Kakuru Tumusiime, said that the six had been detained for more than 48 hours before being brought before a magistrate.

He argued that the continued detention amounted to a violation of their constitutional rights and called on the government to listen to the concerns being raised by young people rather than responding to protests with arrests.

“Our Constitution is clear that if a person has been arrested, he should be presented before court within 48 hours after his detention or else he should be granted a police bond,” Kakuru said.

He further accused the authorities of violating the activists’ human rights and said the defense team had already taken steps to challenge the alleged violations.

“We had filed an application for mandatory bail that had not been fixed. I think when they heard about the application, they rushed to bring them before court,” Kakuru said.

The six were subsequently remanded to Luzira Prison until September 17, 2026.

According to Section 62 of the Penal Code, any person who takes part in an unlawful assembly commits a misdemeanor and is liable, on conviction, to imprisonment for a term of one year.

The activists say their opposition is rooted in concerns about the environmental and social consequences of Uganda’s decision to develop its oil resources.

At the center of their campaign is EACOP, the planned 1,443-kilometre heated crude oil pipeline that will transport crude from Uganda’s oil fields in Hoima to the port of Tanga in Tanzania.

The pipeline is expected to transport crude produced from Uganda’s upstream oil projects, including the Tilenga project operated by TotalEnergies and the Kingfisher project.

The activists argue that Uganda should be investing more heavily in renewable energy rather than expanding fossil fuel production at a time when countries around the world are under pressure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Their position is that economic development should not come at the expense of people’s land, livelihoods and the environment.

Their demonstrations and petitions have called for Uganda to reconsider continued investment in fossil fuel infrastructure and instead accelerate the transition towards renewable sources of energy.

Rooted in Resistance was formerly known as Students Against EACOP and has become one of the youth-led groups consistently challenging Uganda’s fossil fuel development.

The group says young people have a stake in decisions being made today because they will live with the environmental and economic consequences of those decisions for decades to come.

During Monday’s demonstration, the activists wore orange T-shirts bearing the words “Rooted in Resistance” and carried banners and placards with messages including “No to Oil,” “Oil is temporary, nature is permanent” and “Uganda deserves an oil-free future.”

The demonstration ended with arrests as the activists attempted to deliver their petitions.

On Tuesday, September 1, ten of the activists were charged before Buganda Road Court with public nuisance and remanded to Luzira Prison.

The latest court proceedings involving the six activists have added another chapter to the increasingly tense debate over Uganda’s oil industry, which has led to the criminalization of more than 100 activists.

Related posts:

The 15 Anti-EACOP protesters appearing before Buganda Road Chief Magistrates Court.
Breaking: 15 Anti-EACOP Activists have been charged with common nuisance and remanded to Luzira prison. Ten out of sixteen Rooted in Resistance activists now face charges and have been sent to Luzira Prison after standing up against Uganda’s oil development. Another group of eleven environmental activists have been charged with common nuisance and remanded to Luzira Prison for opposing the EACOP project. Hon. Dr. Lulume Bayiga Remanded to Luzira Prison in Critical Condition, Accuses Minister Kibule of his Condition 12 anti-Eacop activists decry delayed justice after spending 100 days on remand
Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Wakiso LCs warned against using official stamps to facilitate land grabbing

Published

2 days ago

on

September 5, 2026

By

Wakiso Town Council Mayor, Mr Fredson Mukalazi Kasiwukira (L), hands over an official stamp to an LC 1 chairperson.  PHOTO/NOELINE NABUKENYA

Newly sworn-in village chairpersons in Wakiso District have been warned against colluding with land grabbers and wealthy individuals to facilitate illegal land transactions, with authorities threatening to arrest those who misuse official stamps.

The village leaders have also been told to stop looking at an official stamp as a source of income and instead find legitimate employment to support themselves.

Wakiso Deputy Resident District Commissioner, Ms Angel Namulimbe, said her office continues to receive numerous complaints related to fraud and land grabbing, many of which allegedly involve village leaders.

“Our office is always full of cases of fraud and land grabbing, and many of these cases involve LC leaders,” she said.

She warned that village leaders found colluding with land grabbers would be arrested.

The RDC made the remarks on Thursday while presiding over the swearing-in and commissioning of village chairpersons and the handing over of official stamps to them in Wakiso Town Council.

Eight of the 13 village chairpersons in the town council and one of the six LC II leaders in the area were sworn in and issued with official stamps.

Ms Namulimbe said she would take firm action against any leader found using the stamp improperly.

Wakiso Town Council Chairperson, Mr Fredson Mukalazi Kasiwukira, accused some village leaders of working with wealthy individuals to frustrate residents and facilitate questionable land transactions.

He warned the leaders against allowing their offices to be used by people seeking to deprive residents of their land.

“Security has been alerted. In case you are reported misusing the stamp, we shall recall it,” he warned.

He also urged village chairpersons to be their eyes on the ground to ensure locals participate actively in all the ongoing government programmes.

“Parish Development Model has been extended up to the village level with LC 1s responsible for identifying prospective beneficiaries,” he said.

Mr Atanansio Musambwa, the Wakiso District vice chairperson and district representative for the area, urged the sworn-in leaders to put the interests of residents first and avoid engaging in practices that could undermine public trust.

He also asked them to pay greater attention to children and other vulnerable residents in their villages.

Wakiso Town Council Clerk, Mr Jimmy Mabanja, while handing over the stamps and other tools of authority to the leaders, reminded them that the items are official tools meant to support the enforcement of laws and proper administration.

He warned the leaders against using the stamps for personal gain or authorising transactions that do not meet the required legal procedures.

The village chairpersons pledged to exercise greater caution in the use of the stamps and other official materials entrusted to them.

Led by Mr Twaibu Kafuuma, the chairperson for Kaasangombe Cell, chairpersons also raised their concerns to the town council authorities, including enhancing their pay from Shs10,000 to Shs1m a month.

They also asked for identity cards, noting that they find it hard to identify themselves in case of community events.

“For example, during the National Cleaning Day, some chairpersons are beaten up by security officers because they cannot identify themselves,” Mr Kafuuma said.

Source: monitor.co.ug

Related posts:

NEMA hindering environment restoration in Wakiso – leaders Campaigning LC I Chairpersons Barred from Land Transactions Until Polls End. A community in Yumbe district has raised serious concerns about allegations of land-grabbing involving an aspirant for Uganda’s Parliamentary Speakership, affecting over 50 families. Police disperse Amolatar protest over land dispute 394,000 Land Titles Affected By Closure Of Ministry Of Lands Offices In Wakiso
Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates