Uganda’s political primaries and the quiet crisis of democratic accountability

______________

OPINION

By Amiri Wabusimba

Across many global democracies, internal party primaries offer a crucial mechanism for political renewal, grassroots engagement, and institutional legitimacy.

In Uganda, however, the lead-up to the 2026 general elections, marked by the July 17 internal party primaries, particularly those within the National Resistance Movement (NRM), reflects an uneasy paradox.

While presented as instruments of democratic consolidation, these processes increasingly reveal deep-seated structural inconsistencies, raising questions not only about intra-party governance but also about the trajectory of political accountability in the country.

Recent developments from within the ruling party point to troubling patterns. Constituency-level irregularities have become disturbingly common, with voter rolls allegedly tampered with, procedural ambiguities weaponised, and administrative frameworks manipulated by politically connected aspirants.

In several districts, there have been unverified but recurring reports of electoral officials being facilitated sometimes transported by candidates themselves, blurring the line between supervision and complicity.

These practices are not merely lapses in administrative diligence. They expose a deeper erosion of trust in party institutions and, by extension, state systems. When aspirants can unduly influence party structures without consequence, the legitimacy of electoral outcomes whether internal or national becomes precarious.

An equally telling dimension of this unfolding dynamic is the electoral defeat of senior figures, including ministers, Resident District Commissioners (RDCs), and sitting Members of Parliament. Under different circumstances, such losses might indicate a healthy culture of political self-correction.

Yet in Uganda’s context, these defeats rarely result in introspection or retirement from public roles. Instead, reappointments often through presidential discretion usher many backs into senior governmental or advisory positions. The message this sends is unambiguous: political loyalty, not electoral endorsement, is the currency of upward mobility.

This dynamic reinforces a centralisation of authority that compromises institutional checks and weakens democratic resilience. Uganda’s political party in power, with President Yoweri Museveni at once its national leader and party chairman, presides over an architecture that conflates state apparatus with partisan strategy.

This convergence complicates notions of neutrality, particularly in institutions charged with oversight, such as the Electoral Commission, security agencies, and public media. Unlike in many mature democracies where ideological clarity, procedural predictability, and civic deliberation are cornerstones of internal party legitimacy, Ugandan political parties tend to operate within fluid, personality-driven ecosystems. Shifts in allegiance often reflect tactical realignments rather than principled divergence. This has fostered a political landscape where internal party democracy is more performative than participatory.

Compounding these institutional weaknesses is the continued use of openly visual voting mechanisms during primaries where voters line up behind their preferred candidates. While officially presented as efficient, this method, particularly in rural communities, raises serious concerns about privacy, coercion, and intimidation. Such practices deter participation, fuel political apathy, and undermine the very credibility that primaries are meant to bolster. Perhaps more subtly, but no less critically, this electoral choreography affects public perception beyond the ruling party.

Opposition formations many of which are preparing for their own internal primaries face a different set of challenges: under-resourced institutions, limited operational cohesion, and susceptibility to factional splintering.

Their ability to distinguish themselves as credible alternatives will depend not on rhetoric alone but on whether they model transparency, consistency, and institutional discipline in their own processes.

To reverse the trend of democratic atrophy, reform must move beyond cosmetic adjustments. A genuine renewal of Uganda’s political system both within and across parties requires a reimagining of how authority is earned, how legitimacy is retained, and how institutions can be structured to outlast personalities.

Key among these reforms must be the depoliticisation of state institutions. Bodies such as the Electoral Commission and the national broadcaster must be structurally insulated from partisan influence, with clearly delineated mandates and robust public oversight.

Similarly, appointments to public office especially strategic roles like RDCs or cabinet portfolios should be grounded in measurable performance, not allegiance.

In an age where technology facilitates anonymity and accuracy, clinging to methods that expose voters to potential reprisal is both regressive and damaging. Voter education, digital registry integrity, and enforceable codes of conduct must become non-negotiable standards.

Uganda’s political parties stand at a crossroads with the ruling party’s primaries currently dominating the public narrative, the conduct of opposition groups in their forthcoming processes will be equally consequential.

Should they mirror the ruling party’s opaque tendencies, the prospect of democratic renewal narrows further. On the other hand, if they rise to the challenge by anchoring their legitimacy in systems, not strongmen, they may yet redefine what political engagement means in the Ugandan context.

Globally, the most enduring democracies are not those immune to institutional stress, but those that use moments of internal crisis to reinvent their norms, reassert the rule of law, and recalibrate the balance between authority and accountability. Whether Uganda’s political class across the spectrum is ready to engage in such a transformation remains an open and pressing question.

The writer is a communication specialist, diplomatic Scholar, Journalist, political analyst and Human rights activist