Who will fix NRM’s dilemma?

______________

OPINION

By Quillino Bamwine

In the last elections, some Members of Parliament stood on the independent ticket and won.

Many of these were NRM-leaning candidates who had rejected the outcome in the primaries.

This scenario is set to play out again in the forthcoming parliamentary elections. Many NRM candidates rejected the results and appealed for justice.

Indeed, an electoral tribunal was put in place, and it handled over 100 petitions. But it looks like even the verdict of the tribunal is not convincing, with many still saying they are not satisfied with the ruling.

The recent rulings by the National Resistance Movement (NRM) Electoral Tribunal have reaffirmed the party’s primary election outcomes, but the spectre of disgruntled members running as independents looms large. This recurring issue underscores deeper systemic challenges within Uganda’s dominant political party, threatening its cohesion and electoral dominance.

The tribunal dismissed most petitions, citing technicalities, such as lack of sworn affidavits and poor documentation, fuelling accusations of a flawed process. Critics like former MP Asharf Olega argue that irregularities — delayed declarations, voter inflation, and intimidation — were ignored, eroding trust in internal democracy. The lone successful petition (Beatrice Wembabazi’s case) hinged on clear procedural violations, exposing inconsistencies in how disputes are adjudicated. Some candidates argue that the tribunal’s reliance on technicalities over substantive grievances suggests a prioritisation of procedural finality over fairness.

Also, reports of extortion by middlemen claiming to influence rulings — though denied by tribunal officials — point to a credibility crisis. Who are the middlemen who extorted or tried to extort to influence the outcome? This is an allegation that should be taken up by investigating authorities like the Criminal Investigations Directorate. If, indeed, this happened, it is criminal and it should be fully dealt with. Investigate and prosecute individuals extorting money in the tribunal’s name. A zero-tolerance policy would restore confidence in the process.

The independent candidate phenomenon is a big crisis in the political dispensation of the country. Losers, barred from official NRM tickets, often run as independents to retain political relevance. This fractures the party’s unity and dilutes its electoral strength, as seen in past elections. Independents should think twice before running against the party’s official candidate.

This only minimises the chances of victory for the party in the respective constituencies. There is still room to reform the internal electoral process for the party, to avoid similar incidents in future. One of them is to strengthen oversight during primaries to minimise irregularities. The other option is to expand the tribunal’s mandate to investigate substantive claims, not just technical adherence. Public hearings could enhance perceived fairness.

The party should also come up with post-primary reconciliation. This is intended to establish mediation committees to address grievances before candidates defect. There is no harm to offer concessions like appointments, future endorsements to placate strong contenders. In cases where members who have lost in a free and fair primaries insist and become rebels, strict consequences for independents, such as expulsion or loss of party privileges, to deter defections can be considered.

Going forward, the party must look at long-term institutional reforms to find a lasting solution. You can draw lessons from some of the other old political parties that have maintained cohesion, like the CCM in Tanzania. The party has, over the years, ensured cohesion, leading to dominance in Tanzania over the last 40 decades. It decentralised candidate selection to involve local structures, reducing top-down impositions that spark dissent.

The NRM’s independent candidate crisis is symptomatic of unresolved internal democratic deficits. While the tribunal’s rulings aim to project stability, lasting solutions require systemic reforms to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability. Without these changes, the cycle of defections and electoral fragmentation will persist, undermining the party’s long-term dominance.

The recent NRM tribunal’s rulings may have settled legal disputes, but the political discontent remains a ticking time bomb. The NRM must choose: reform or risk erosion from within. The NRM’s ability to adapt will determine its resilience in Uganda’s evolving political landscape.

The writer is a student of political science and economics