From bustling urban centres to remote rural communities, concerns are mounting over political intimidation, unequal participation, monetised politics, and the systematic marginalisation of women, youth, and persons with disabilities (PWDs) ahead of general elections in 2026.
With memories of past violent elections still fresh, many Ugandans fear that unless urgent reforms are undertaken, the country risks repeating a familiar cycle of contested outcomes, human rights violations, and weakened public trust in democratic institutions.
At the heart of these concerns is what civil society leaders describe as a steadily constricted operating environment, limiting the ability of citizen-led organisations to support credible and inclusive elections.
Dr Bireete Sarah, founding partner and Executive Director of the Centre for Constitutional Governance (CCG), says Uganda’s civic space has significantly regressed over the past few years, a trend now intensifying as the 2026 elections draw closer.
“There is a squeeze on the environment and the funding base, which technically closes the work of civil society actors in the country,” Dr Bireete says.
She explains that even organisations formally accredited to work on elections face serious limitations in financing, access, and operational freedom. Bireete highlights that restrictive regulations, increased surveillance, delayed approvals, and the intimidation of activists have made it difficult for CSOs to conduct voter education, election observation, and human rights monitoring functions, which are essential to credible elections.
Uganda’s ranking on global civic space indices reinforces these fears. In 2024, the country was listed among nations experiencing regressed civic space, indicating that citizens are finding it increasingly difficult to engage freely in governance, whether through political parties, civic organisations, or individual activism.
While Uganda’s constitutional and legal frameworks provide for the representation of women, youth, and PWDs, Dr Bireete argues that much of this inclusion is largely symbolic.
“On paper, women, youth, and persons with disabilities are represented. centren practice, many, especially those outside the ruling party, struggle to access any meaningful support,” she says.
She points to the politicisation of electoral colleges, excessive use of money, and growing involvement of the security sector as key distortions of the democratic process.
Among the reforms she proposes are removing the army from partisan politics, as envisioned under Article 204 of the Constitution, regulating campaign financing to curb vote-buying, and establishing clear legal frameworks governing electoral technologies.
“We need credible reforms so that we have a genuinely free and fair election, not just one that looks peaceful on the surface,” she insists.
Not only calling for reforms, civil society leaders are also calling for stronger safeguards to protect women’s political participation and prevent gender-based barriers as Uganda approaches the 2025–2026 elections as Charity Ahimbisibwe, Executive Director of the Electoral Laws and Governance Institute, warns of potential challenges in the electoral process, cautioning that the increasing number of candidates could lead to ballot production errors, confusing voters and undermining the credibility of the polls.
Ahimbisibwe emphasises that elections must be free, fair, and credible, as provided under Article 61 of the Constitution. She explains that freedom is closely tied to freedom of expression, allowing citizens to voice opinions, exchange ideas freely, and participate in politics without fear, regardless of political affiliation.
She notes that the credibility of elections depends on transparency, particularly access to information for all participants noting that many special interest group elections, including those for youth, elders, and women, suffer from low participation due to limited public awareness, with female youth elections seeing participation rates as low as 0.2 percent, largely because of poor dissemination of information about the electoral college system, which begins at the village level and progresses upwards.
On women’s representation, Ahimbisibwe observes that although Article 78A guarantees one woman Member of Parliament per district, currently translating to about 146 women MPs, men still dominate Parliament, accounting for roughly 67 per cent compared to 33 per cent women.
While affirmative action has improved equality on paper, she says it has failed to achieve true equity, given the historical injustices women have faced over the years. She calls for deliberate reforms to enhance inclusion, transparency, and equity in Uganda’s electoral processes.
Ahimbisibwe urges the Electoral Commission to accelerate preparations, stressing that delays in ballot design and limited public information could lower voter confidence. She further highlights gaps in political party manifestos, noting that many fail to address gender equality, youth inclusion, and the rights of vulnerable groups.
Clear, inclusive manifestos, she stresses, are essential for informed voting and accountability.
She also raises concerns about the accreditation of election observer groups, calling for transparent and timely processes to ensure effective monitoring. Her warnings underscore the need for accuracy, transparency, and inclusivity as Uganda heads toward high-stakes elections.
Furthermore, in a recent dialogue on electoral integrity and gender inclusion with Women Lens Africa, Ahimbisibwe highlighted persistent challenges women face in political participation and the need to integrate gender-responsive measures into election observation and voter education initiatives.
She underscores concerns over gender sensitivity in electoral processes, including threats, intimidation, and barriers that disproportionately affect women candidates and voters, stressing that election observers and stakeholders must adopt frameworks that centre women’s experiences to deter gender-based violence and discrimination.
“Women bring critical perspectives to democratic governance. Ensuring their full participation is not only a matter of fairness, but it is also essential to the credibility and legitimacy of our elections,” she notes.
She further emphasises that civil society organisations have a vital role to play in civic education, empowering women voters, and monitoring compliance with Uganda’s electoral laws and gender equality commitments.
Ahimbisibwe points to the need for broader representation of women-led and gender-focused organisations in planning and monitoring roles.
The call from civil society leaders is clear: protecting and promoting women’s political participation demands targeted strategies that confront discrimination, intimidation, and gender-based electoral barriers.
James Acar of the Lango Civil Society Network highlights the exclusion of PWDs, noting that the failure to produce braille voter materials and tailored civic education reflects deep institutional neglect.
“Inclusion is not an afterthought. It must be planned from the beginning. Without braille ballots and accessible education, blind voters are effectively disenfranchised,” he says.
He warns that the exclusion of PWDs undermines the legitimacy of election outcomes, stressing that electoral stakeholders, including the Electoral Commission and partnering civil society groups, must collaborate more inclusively to ensure a level playing field.
Patricia Acheng, Executive Director of Wanacel Foundation and a former aspirant for Lira City Woman Member of Parliament, says fear remains widespread among voters and political actors alike.
“About 60 per cent of respondents in a recent engagement expressed fear of political intimidation and violence. People are afraid to speak openly, to mobilise, or even to attend political meetings,” she notes.
Acheng identifies Lira City as an emerging flashpoint, driven by intense competition involving politically powerful figures, including sitting ministers and incumbents with access to state resources.
“The stakes are extremely high. When power, money, and influence collide, ordinary citizens become the victims,” she warns.
Although civil society organisations are conducting voter education, Acheng says rural communities remain largely under-informed, with many citizens unaware of polling dates, voting procedures, or their rights.
Vulnerable groups, particularly the visually impaired, elderly voters, and first-time voters, are especially exposed to manipulation.
“Some people are completely green about these things, and political actors exploit that ignorance through misinformation, inducements, and threats,” Acheng observes.
The gaps in voter awareness are compounded by the absence of a national civic education policy, according to Nicholas Ogwang of the Uganda Human Rights Commission (UHRC) Lango sub-region.
“Different organisations do civic education in their own way. There is no central coordination, no sustained funding, and no national standard,” he explained.
This fragmented approach, he argues, weakens the quality, reach, and consistency of voter education, especially in rural and hard-to-reach communities.
Ogwang urges the government to anchor civic education in a national framework aligned with international human rights standards and supported through the national budget.
He further reveals that a study by the Netherlands Institute for Multiparty Democracy identifiediediediediediedied Lira City, Oyam, Dokolo, and Apac as potential hotspots for election-related violence.
“These are areas where political competition intersects with poverty, historical grievances, and weak institutions,” he notes.
From Gulu, UHRC Regional Human Rights Officer Fionah Opoka says multi-stakeholder forums have been established to mitigate election-related risks.
“These forums bring together civil society, security agencies, cultural leaders, religious institutions, and political actors. They are meant to promote early warning, dialogue, and non-violent dispute resolution,” Opoka explains.
Read the full article here.
