EC chairperson Simon Byabakama Mugyenyi. PHOTO/ FILE
You have commenced your second term as chairperson of the Electoral Commission. How would you rate your performance in the first term?
One needs the input of other stakeholders if they are to appropriately rate themselves. I, however, want to think that the Commission did well given the circumstances under which we operated. We held elections that held the country together and we were able to address other issues.
The staff of the Commission had, for example, not received any salary increments in 16 years. We addressed that, which motivated and galvanised the staff around our call for team effort and development of a team spirit. That enabled us to deliver on our mandate. That is just one of the indicators, but by and large, the first term was, in my view, very successful.
You talked of “under the circumstances”. What sort of circumstances are you talking about?
First of all, you have to recognise that some of the stakeholders have an unnecessary negative perception of the Commission. However much we endeavour to be transparent, they remain suspicious of our activities and conduct.
Secondly, at times the necessary resources do not come at the time we need them. Elections cannot be postponed. Whereas you can postpone the issuance of passports and driving permits, you cannot postpone elections because the Constitution stipulates that you have to hold them at a specific time. So whether the resources are available or not you must ensure you elections within the stipulated time.
What are you trying to do to change perceptions about the Commission?
When you have a bad or negative opinion about an individual, the onus is upon you to reach out and engage them so that you clear the mist or misgivings you have about them. We have an open door policy. Any political party which wants to discuss any cause of discomfort with us, or where they feel that we are not transparent, is free to come and we discuss.
Have you engaged any of the stakeholders?
If I have a problem with you, it is me meant to come to you and say “I have a problem with you”. I expect any political party or individual that has issues that pertain to the overall work or execution of our mandate to come and say, ‘Electoral Commission, we have a problem with you’. We expect them to come. It is not for us to go and say, ‘Do you have a problem with us? Can you come and we talk?’
You said there is a problem, which you know about. Why then do you not reach out?
We have informed all political parties that we are open to engaging if any issues that have come up in the course of driving their political work forward. One can only improve if there are people assessing them and pointing out the areas which they should be working on. That is why I am saying let them come and say ‘EC the problem is this’. Let us not wait for general elections to come because at around that point in time, people are heated up. This would be the appropriate time to engage.
What are some of the challenges that you had to deal with?
They have been many. Covid-19 was a major challenge, but so was the role of other stakeholders. One of the issues that impacts on the work of the Commission is the lack of appreciation of the role that the different stakeholders play in ensuring we have free and fair elections. Some of the ills that undermine the possibility of a peaceful and free election is not the work of the commission.
When supporters of party X engage in violence; when a candidate defies the guidelines issued by the Commission on how they should conduct themselves; when candidates defy the law; when candidates bribe voters and; when candidates use incendiary rhetoric or divisive language, all that impacts on the election.
So our main emphasis now is to tell the people to know their roles, recognise that they are key players in the process and realise that they must act in accordance with the law if we are to have a peaceful, free and fair election. It is very easy to achieve that if the different stakeholders realise their role and act in accordance with the law.
Some quarters have described the 2021 General Election as the most difficult one that Uganda has had. How was it like to manage it?
Elections in Uganda take on a carnival like atmosphere. People dancing, others on top of trucks, boda-bodas zooming around exhibiting all manner of riding skills and so on. All that was put aside.
The Commission issued some guidelines in line with the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) put in place by the Ministry of Health. Unfortunately some people thought they were aimed at restricting their campaign efforts.
The apparent defiance prompted law enforcement to step in, which resulted into the November 2020 unrest in which we unfortunately lost young lives.
Covid-19 was particularly challenging. It disadvantaged the candidates. They could not campaign in the normal way we know and the voters could not come out in huge numbers. It was difficult, but we thank God that we managed to hold a credible election.
Voter turnout has been below 70 percent in the last four elections. About 69.19 percent in 2006, 59.29 percent in 2011, 67.61 percent in 2016 and 59.2 percent in 2021. What is the cause?
Low voter turnout is of great concern because we believe we have done enough sensitisation. Covid-19 and the restrictions could have affected the turnout in 2021, but we are undertaking a study to establish what could have happened over the years and what can be done to improve the turnout.
I have, however, come to realise that some Ugandans have not yet taken cognisance of their duties under the Constitution. They do not know that it is their duty to register to vote and that it is a right to vote.
People have not appreciated the power and weight of their ballot in the process of democratisation and determining the calibre of leadership they should have. We must rally Ugandans on their duty to involve themselves in electoral processes, especially coming out on polling day to cast their vote.
This would also cure wastage of resources. In 2021, there were about 18.5 million voters on the national voters’ register. We printed over and above that number of ballots because the law allows any voter who unintentionally spoils a ballot to demand for another ballot paper. More than 10 million ballot papers meant for presidential elections were not used. That is money lost.
Doesn’t the low voter turnout and number of invalid votes suggest weaknesses in your voter education programmes?
So many stakeholders have told us that we are weak in the area of voter education. The law says we are supposed to carry out continuous voter education. We do not have to wait for the electoral cycle. Unfortunately, we are given only Shs320 million every financial year. We have told Parliament and the Ministry of Finance that we need Shs3 billion per year for that purpose, but the money has not been forthcoming.
So we tend to be more robust when it comes to general elections because the budget for general elections is bigger, but my humble view is that by then, the ground is stirred by so many players jostling for the same audience so our message gets lost in the noise. If we had adequate resources, the best time to conduct voter education would be now.
We are preparing for the next general election. Do you think the existing legal framework is adequate?
I am not underplaying the need for an adequate legal framework in the conduct of elections, but I must point out that having the most comprehensive legal frameworks may not necessarily enable you to achieve what you want.
Anyways, as managers we have already communicated to the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs on those areas where we think reforms are needed. One of the areas where we need reforms is in the area of campaign financing.
There have been concerns about the increased commercialisation of our politics. This is auctioned democracy, which is unacceptable. We must have democracy that is based on principles, values and ideas. We have recommended that we have a law capping what one should spend.
We have made the proposals, but what happens if they are not constituted into laws? Does it mean that we cannot conduct a credible election?
No. The Commission strives to deliver a credible free and fair election in the prevailing circumstances. So a legal framework is good, but our duty as managers is to ensure we execute our mandate to deliver a free and fair election even if it does not come through.
Polling officials at a station in Kampala in 2016. PHOTO/ FILE
You have previously talked about building a better electoral system for stronger democracy in Uganda. What deliberate steps have you taken to achieve that?
I have at every opportunity emphasized that having an improved electoral system, delivery of a free and fair election is not the work of the Electoral Commission alone. The Commission cannot work in isolation.
Improving electoral systems and processes is a comprehensive and holistic engagement in which all stakeholders must be involved.
This, along with a peaceful, free and fair election, can be delivered if political parties, their supporters, candidates and whoever else has a stake in the country work together with one singular objective. However much the Commission introduces measures for a smooth electoral process, it will not be possible unless other stakeholders are flowing in the same direction.
The Commission may, for example, deliver electoral materials and all the appropriate technology to the polling station in time, but then you have people who invade the polling station, grab the ballot papers, they pre-tick and stuff them into the ballot boxes. Now is it because the EC acted shabbily? Or was it because it did not deliver the materials on time?
Stakeholder engagement is critical when we talk of improving electoral processes and systems because stakeholders play a key role. We are emphasizing that everyone should stick in their lane. If you are competing in athletics and you cross into the other lane you are disqualified. That is why we previously proposed that the EC be given powers to summarily punish candidates who do not comply with campaign regulations and guidelines. We proposed to Parliament that we be given power to, for example, suspend one’s campaigns but the proposal was shot down.
What sort of election should we expect in 2026?
Our projection, planning and objective is to deliver a credible, free and fair election, devoid of the kind of mishaps and unfortunate episodes including violence and death that occurred in 2021. We should not be losing lives in any election. That is not democracy.
Uganda does not exist for elections. Elections are not what defines what makes Uganda tick for everybody. We should not look at elections as an end in themselves. We want people to realise that we need to work for a Uganda beyond the general election of 2026. But again, can the Commission deliver this by itself if other stakeholders are not willing to abide by the law? If the Commission issues guidelines, which apply to all of us, let us comply.
