Government’s decision to fund Uganda Premier League clubs directly follows more than a year of lobbying by the league leadership for public financing to reach clubs rather than remain concentrated at federation and national-team level, documents seen by this reporter show.
The correspondence traces the process from an initial request by the UPL board for talks with government in April 2025, through discussions at State House after CHAN, to a formal Shs6 billion annual funding proposal in March 2026.
And eventually, an August directive ordering the National Council of Sports to disburse money to the 18 Premier League clubs.
The developments provide important context to the reported Shs5.5 billion government allocation for clubs ahead of the 2026/27 season and the debate over how that money should be administered.
The process began on April 12, 2025, when the UPL Board wrote to the First Lady and Minister of Education and Sports Janet Kataha Museveni seeking an appointment to discuss the strategic development of the country’s top flight competition.
The letter, routed through State Minister for Sports Peter Ogwang, argued that Premier League clubs were struggling financially despite their contribution to player development, employment, commercial activity and Uganda’s national teams.
It also questioned the absence of direct support to the league while government was providing approximately Shs17 billion annually to FUFA.
At that stage, the UPL did not ask for a specific amount. Instead, it sought an opportunity to present a roadmap for transforming the league into a sustainable national sports asset.
The league argued that inadequate financing was affecting infrastructure development, player retention, professionalisation and the ability of Ugandan clubs to compete effectively in CAF competitions.
Sources familiar with the process say Premier League clubs were aware of the engagements as the UPL Board continued pursuing government support.
The campaign gained greater momentum during CHAN following Uganda’s 3-1 defeat to Algeria at Mandela National Stadium, Namboole, a match attended by the First Lady.
According to people familiar with subsequent discussions, concerns about player welfare and the financial condition of domestic clubs were raised with government, leading to a broader football stakeholders’ engagement at State House.
Sources say the UPL Board and club representatives were not included on an initial list submitted by FUFA for the engagement but were later invited following intervention from within government.
SC Villa president Omar Mandela, representatives of Vipers and Proline director Mujib Kasule were among the club officials whose representation was reportedly sought.
The significance of that meeting became clearer in a second UPL letter dated March 24, 2026.
That correspondence referred to the post-CHAN State House discussions and showed that the league had moved from simply requesting dialogue to making a specific case for direct government financing.
Under the subject, “Making the case for direct government support to Uganda Premier League clubs,” the UPL requested Shs6 billion annually for the league and its member clubs, together with Shs1 billion in one-off funding to capitalise a UPL SACCO.
The proposed annual funding was intended for player development and academies, coaching education, player salaries and welfare, nutrition, medical services, sports science and technology, continental competition and league administration.
The league argued that clubs were surviving largely on resources from owners, limited sponsorship and gate collections despite being responsible for developing much of the talent that eventually feeds the Uganda Cranes.
Its submission compared the national team to a forest and the Premier League to the nursery bed from which that forest grows, making the case that Uganda could not sustainably invest in national teams while neglecting the clubs developing the players.
The proposal also accepted government oversight over how any public funding would be used, an issue that has since become central to the debate over disbursement.
Five months later, the UPL’s push produced its clearest government response.
A National Council of Sports letter addressed to the UPL refers to an August 25, 2026 directive from the State Minister for Sports instructing NCS to disburse funds to all 18 Premier League clubs for the 2026/27 financial year.
The directive also required the money to be accounted for in accordance with the Public Finance Management Act.
NCS subsequently asked the UPL to submit the bank details, Tax Identification Numbers and names and contacts of accounting officers for all 18 clubs by August 30 to facilitate the payments.
That request is significant because it identifies the clubs as the intended beneficiaries and requires individual financial and accountability details from each one.
It also closely mirrors the direct-support arrangement the UPL had been advocating since 2025.
Sources familiar with the process say government also conducted due diligence on the UPL before advancing the arrangement and was satisfied with its financial and administrative structures, although this reporter has not seen that assessment.
The funding process has meanwhile exposed tensions between FUFA and Premier League stakeholders.
Sources within the league claim the federation became increasingly concerned as the UPL and clubs developed direct engagement with government and later sought to position itself at the centre of efforts to secure support for domestic football.
The documentary record, however, establishes that the UPL’s lobbying for direct government financing began well before the current reported Shs5.5 billion allocation.
FUFA president Moses Magogo was also copied into the March 2026 request, alongside Ogwang and National Council of Sports chairman Ambrose Tashobya, meaning the federation was formally aware of the UPL’s approach.
The issue is no longer simply whether Premier League clubs should receive government support.
The bigger question is who should administer money specifically earmarked for them and whether FUFA’s authority to regulate Ugandan football necessarily means such public funding must first pass through the federation.
For now, government’s instructions to NCS point towards a different model, direct funding to the clubs, with the clubs themselves accountable for how the money is spent.