Courts, not confrontation, as solution for electoral disputes

_____________

OPINION

By Riziki Nambuya

Uganda’s 2026 presidential and parliamentary elections have come to a close, marking another important chapter in the country’s constitutional and democratic development.

Elections of this scale and significance inevitably generate diverse reactions such as satisfaction in some quarters, disappointment in others and questions that require careful institutional response.

How a nation manages this post-election period is as important as the voting exercise itself. According to the Electoral Commission, more than 21 million registered voters were eligible to participate, with polling conducted nationwide. The elections were largely peaceful, with citizens exercising their civic duty under the framework provided by the Constitution and electoral laws.

As is common in competitive elections, concerns were raised by some stakeholders regarding aspects of the process. These included questions related to voter turnout, the conduct of campaigns, delays at certain polling stations, the use of electoral technologies, and the management of tallying and declaration of results. Such concerns, whether ultimately upheld or dismissed, form part of the normal democratic experience and are anticipated within Uganda’s legal and institutional design.

What is critical at this stage is clarity on how electoral disagreements are addressed. Uganda’s Constitution provides a clear and orderly framework: electoral grievances are resolved exclusively through the courts of law. This principle is not merely procedural; it is foundational to the rule of law and the maintenance of public order.

The legal pathways are well established. Presidential election petitions are determined by the Supreme Court, which is constitutionally mandated to examine allegations of non-compliance and their effect on the final result. Parliamentary election petitions fall under the jurisdiction of the High Court, while other offences and related disputes are addressed at various levels, including Magistrates’ Courts. These mechanisms ensure that grievances are examined through evidence, legal argument, and reasoned judgment.

Importantly, the courts are designed to serve all parties fairly. They provide a neutral forum where claims can be tested against the law, witnesses examined, and remedies granted where justified. This structured process protects both the integrity of elections and the rights of those who participate in them.

Through contrast, resorting to violence, intimidation, or extra-legal action undermines constitutional order. Such actions risk destabilising communities, disrupting economic activity, and eroding confidence in public institutions. From a legal standpoint, they do not strengthen electoral claims; rather, they complicate them and may expose individuals to criminal liability. The Constitution does not recognise the street or force as a forum to settle electoral disputes.

The role of the Judiciary in the post-election period is therefore important. Judicial officers at all levels bear the responsibility of upholding independence, professionalism, and fidelity to the law.

Through handling electoral matters impartially and efficiently, courts reinforce public trust and demonstrate that grievances can be addressed without resort to disorder.

As a nation, Uganda has, over the years, built institutions capable of managing political competition within a constitutional framework. While no electoral process is without challenges, the answer lies in trusting lawful mechanisms and not abandoning them. Citizens, political actors, and institutions alike have a shared duty to exercise restraint, respect the law, and allow constitutional processes to take their course.

The true measure of democratic maturity is not the absence of disagreement, but the commitment to resolve disagreement peacefully and lawfully. In choosing the courts over confrontation, Uganda affirms its dedication to the rule of law, stability, and constitutional governance which are values that must guide us well beyond the 2026 elections.

The writer is a Magistrate Grade 1 at Bukedea Court and a lecturer of law at Islamic University in Uganda