Prime
Have CSOs joined the electoral reforms debate late?
Youth engage in fist fight during the 2021 elections for the division mayor and councillors in Arua City. PHOTO | FELIX WAROM OKELLO
What you need to know:
- Civil Society organisations want a reduction in the number of lawmakers and public vetting for certain officials, including Electoral Commission members among other demands.
Alarm bells are ringing as the 2026 General Election draws closer, with no tangible reforms.
The Electoral Commission chairperson, Justice Simon Byabakama, in July this year told this publication that they need at least two years to implement electoral reforms, but now the Commission has less than that required time to handle any meaningful reforms.
“Our expectation is that if there is any reform in electoral laws, it should come in time to enable us actualise and implement this reform within the roadmap. ..When the reforms come after the implementation of the roadmap has commenced it will impact negatively. That’s why we want the relevant organs... to bring reforms in time,” he said.
During the launch of the revised road map recently, Justice Byabakama said electoral reforms come with need for financial resources. Therefore, as the reforms are being thought of, they must be backed by resources to implement them.
“Considering the timeframes and commencement of electoral activities for the 2025-2026 General Elections; I wish to caution that any (amendment/ enactment), of the electoral laws having financial implications, may necessitate more resources being required to carry out further demarcation and re-organization of polling stations,” he said.
Mr Kiryowa Kiwanuka, the Attorney General, yesterday said he could not provide an official explanation on the delay because he was out of office.
“Please call me when I am able to get my hands on the documents and I can provide you a concrete explanation. I don’t want to comment when I don’t have the documents on the reforms with me,” he said.
On the other hand, civil society organisations (CSOs) under the umbrella body, Uganda National NGO Forum have proposed a number of electoral reforms which they say, if implemented will ensure participation of citizens and would be democratic, instead of a few politicians owning the process.
While not entirely new, the reforms, among others, seek to restore the presidential term limit, check the growing power of armed forces in managing Uganda’s elections, removing the army from Parliament, checking the powers of the presidency and reducing the size of Parliament.
The CSOs have also proposed a cap on campaign spending, which they say hands over huge advantage to the incumbents, further limiting the participation of others, especially the youth and women.
A 2023 report by Alliance for Campaign Financing Monitoring indicates that the cost of politics in Uganda has experienced a remarkable surge since the country’s return to multiparty dispensation in 2006. The report says in the 2021 polls, campaign spending by candidates vying for direct constituency seats in Parliament stood at an average of Shs511 million ($141,944).
The report, however, said it’s important to note that there were notable exceptions, with some candidates lavishing as much as Shs3 billion, while a few worked with more modest budgets ranging from Shs50 million to Shs70 million.
The report also said contestants for District Women Representative positions in Parliament averaged a campaign expenditure of Shs256 million ($71,110), while city mayoral candidates had an average expenditure of Shs125 million ($34,944), and those running for Municipality Mayor spent an average of Shs61 million ($16,944). District chairperson candidates spent an estimated Shs103 million ($28,611).
“If this trend continues unabated, participating in the 2026 elections may become a domain reserved exclusively for the extremely affluent,” the report said.
The CSOs say this has been worsened by incumbents who have the financial muscles to bribe voters through fundraisings during campaigns and other incentives.
Section 64(7) of the Presidential Elections Act forbids candidates or their agents from carrying out fundraising or giving out donations during the period of campaigns.
However, the Supreme Court noted that under Section 64(9), a candidate may solicit funds to organise for elections during the campaign period.
Furthermore, a President may in the ordinary course of his or her duties give donations even during the campaign period.
The Supreme Court has noted that allowing the incumbent president to make and give donations during elections gives an unfair advantage. In order to create a level playing field for all candidates in the election, an incumbent president who is a candidate should not be allowed to make donations during elections
The CSOs have instead asked Parliament to make laws that will regulate campaign financing to level the ground for all participants.
“Parliament should enact a specific law to regulate campaign financing and spending. This will improve the quality of democracy by among others levelling the playing field for all candidates and enhancing the integrity of electoral outcomes. The principles to guide the law should include transparency, accountability, disclosure and providing incentives to citizens to contribute funds to candidates like tax waivers,” CSOs said.
Presidential powers, term limit
The CSOs want the term limit restored for the presidency to check on the excessive powers of the President. They argue that leaders feel more pressure to deliver results and leave office with a positive legacy when there is a term limit and that an individual, no matter how powerful and popular, cannot become indispensable when there is a term limit.
“Term limits are a safeguard to protect democratic principles and prevent the emergence of authoritarian regimes. It helps to maintain a healthy balance of power and prevents the risk of leaders becoming entrenched and unaccountable. Incumbents are less able to use the State’s power to manipulate elections when there are limits to the tenure of the office of the presidency. Further, security officers are more likely to pay allegiance to the institution that they serve rather than the individual when there are term limits as seen in the case of transitions in Kenya, Zambia, and Ghana among others,” the position paper says.
They also say to ensure meaningful elections are carried out in the country, Article 105 of term limits that was removed in 2005 be reinstated and entrenched. They also argued that when reinstated, Article 105 should only be amended through a referendum of all Ugandans eligible to vote.
While the 1995 Constitution declared that the people of Uganda were the sovereign authority and that, the power and authority of government is derived from the people, the powers of the same, according to the CSOs have continuously been eroded by a few people who by use of military forces suppress dissident voices.
Article 1 of the Constitution states that “all power belongs to the people who shall exercise it in accordance with the constitution”. Accordingly, all power and authority exercised by any person or agency of the state or government is derived from the people.”
However, the CSO position paper on electoral reforms said after almost two and half decades under the current constitutional framework, the promise of a new political, economic, and social governance dispensation has been considerably frustrated by distortions in the electoral process.
A man votes in a previous election. Photo | File
“Elections are increasingly characterised by generalised violence, unregulated use of money and deployment of state resources by incumbent political actors. Instead of becoming a dignifying exercise and true expression of citizens’ sovereignty, Uganda’s elections are conducted as a deadly contest between contending political elites. In all this contestation, citizens, either directly or indirectly acquiesce in the subversion of the process or simply look on as helpless spectators,” the position paper states.
While there have been numerous attempts by the government, Opposition political groups, civil society organisations, religious leaders, development partners and many others to strengthen the credibility of Uganda’s electoral process, the CSOs said none of these efforts have materialised into meaningful reform.
“It is, therefore, important for the country to re-examine the process of conducting elections and recommit to creating an environment that makes elections a meaningful expression of citizen sovereignty and citizens’ dignity,” the position paper said.
They said while the promulgation of a new Constitution in 1995 set Uganda on a path to democracy, the evidence of the last two decades shows that the country is drifting towards an electoral stalemate that borders on democratic authoritarianism.
“Electoral rules are routinely ignored and elections are marred with irregularities that make the whole process lack credibility,” they said and added that there is a consensus across the board that Uganda’s electoral process is broken and that there is a need to enact comprehensive constitutional, legal and political reforms if the country is to progress in its democratic trajectory.
The position paper argues that as of now, the President has too much powers, including appointment of Electoral Commission officials and other bodies that are critical in the democratisation and that the President abuses such powers by appointing loyal cadres whose independence cannot be guaranteed.
As a result, they want the Constitution amended to limit the powers of the presidency and establish a mechanism where the appointees of the President to the Judiciary, ministers and members of the Electoral Commission are vetted through a public process with the powers of the President to sign off the appointees.
“Other appointees in agencies and institutions that manage, organise and administer elections should be subjected to public vetting. E.g. Electoral Commission, Uganda Communications Commission (UCC)…,” the CSO position paper recommended.
The CSOs also said where the President reigns supreme, cases of militarisation of Ugandan politics has taken a centre stage as witnessed in previous elections where army generals have allegedly brutalised the Opposition, unleashing the soldiers to violently beat up opposition supporters across the country.
The CSOs say the military has increasingly taken a central role in elections in Uganda and that elections have increasingly become violent while the military and other security forces have become more visible and active protagonists in electoral contests at all levels.
According to the position paper, over the years, security officers acting both individually and in their official capacity have become increasingly conspicuous in manipulating and influencing elections and their outcomes.
“The law should be amended to provide for punitive punishments for security personnel who engage in partisan politics, perpetuating violence and committing irregularities for different candidates during elections.
Article 208(2) of the Constitution of Uganda provides that the Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces (UPDF) shall be non-partisan, national in character, patriotic, professional, disciplined, productive and subordinate to the civilian authority.
The position paper, however, said previous trends in Parliament, especially on controversial Bills like the removal of term limits in 2005 have proven that it is difficult for the UPDF to be non-partisan during such debates. It argued that in a multiparty system of governance, there are two sides in Parliament, i.e. the ruling party and the Opposition.
“Amend the Constitution to remove UPDF representation from Parliament to enable them to adhere to Article 208(2) of the Constitution. Article 78 (1) (c) of the Constitution is repealed,” it said.
Other reforms
The reforms proposed by the CSOs include reducing the size of Parliament, adoption of gender parity in the Constitution of Uganda, separating Cabinet from the Legislature where lawmakers who become ministers must resign, and granting equal access to all candidates in use of State owned media outlets.
According to Parliament, by end of April, Uganda had 529 Members of Parliament, including ex-officios, with 33.8 percent of them being women, which the CSOs said is used to patronise Ugandans and serve as rubber stamp for the Executive. They propose that the number be cut down to save resources that can then be channelled to service delivery.
The position paper proposes that each district should have one man and one woman in the twelfth Parliament, which will reduce the number of directly elected MPs to 292 and 5 representatives of People with Disabilities, making it to a total 297.
The papers said the current structure of elections vests the ownership and control of the exercise in Electoral Commission, whose members are appointed by the President makes it extremely difficult for the citizens to own the electoral process.
They have proposed the amendment of the Constitution to provide for the appointment and recruitment procedure of Commissioners to the Electoral Commission to strengthen Article60 (8).
Voters destroy electoral materials in protest after they were delivered late at their polling stations during the 2016 General Election. Photo | Michael Kakumirizi
Top court’s ruling
The Supreme Court ruled in 2016 that:
1. The time for filing and determination of the petition should be increased to at least 60 days to give the parties and the Court sufficient time to prepare, present, hear and determine the petition, while at the same time being mindful of the time within which the new President must be sworn in.
2. the Rules should be amended to provide for the use of oral evidence in addition to affidavit evidence, with leave of court.
3. UBC failed in this duty as a State-owned media organisation to provide equal coverage to all presidential candidates.
4. the law should make it explicit that public servants are prohibited from involvement in political campaigns.
5. the law should be amended to prohibit the giving of donations by all candidates including a President who is also a candidate.
Key dates for 2026
•Nomination of village Special Interest Group Committee Candidates June 2, 2025.
• Nomination of parliamentary candidates, latest by September 17, 2025.
• Nomination of local council candidates, latest by the third week of September 2025.
• Nomination of presidential candidates to end by October 3, 2025.
• Campaigns to commence on the second week of October 2025.
• Those interested in Local Government positions must resign from public service by
Saturday August 2, 2025
• Presidential aspirants must resign from public service by Wednesday, October 1, 2025
• Parliamentary aspirants must resign from public service by Friday, June 13, 2025.
• An updated National Voter Register to be ready by the end of May 2025.
• Display of voters register between April 18, 2025 and May 8, 2025.
•The polling period for presidential, parliamentary and local councils starts on Monday, January 12, 2026 and ends on Monday, February 9, 2026.
