The mushrooming of unopposed candidates in parliamentary races, moreover, under a cloud of mystery, deserves to be called into the disapproving presence of Ugandans. There are fears that the system that has been willed into existence is one designed for the powerful to retain control. Those fears, lamentably, are not misplaced. While the reasons to hold the semblance of participatory democracy in Uganda as a badge of honour are very varied, it would be remiss not to acknowledge that many of those who seek election manipulate, distract and lie. The alleged dark arts, once spoken about in a hushed tone, are now dominating the language of political discourse before Ugandans head to the polls in a few weeks.
Consequently, conversations that have come to the conclusion that elected representation is not all it’s cracked up to be have gained in their amplitude. We state the obvious by holding that a lack of competition at the ballot box comes with nothing but destructive properties. For one, the complacency that it breeds makes the prospect of having an autocratic government more likely. This comes just when it was thought that doorstep campaigning-that has dominated the current electoral cycle-would have the effect of keeping politicians in touch with their constituents. Most importantly, with the 12th Parliament of Uganda set to be tasked with an oversight role when Uganda’s oil taps are duly opened, the country can ill afford a move away from the classic and formulaic separation-of-powers articulation.
The House has in recent times found itself, largely through its own making, closely related to the Executive. This has made oversight of the exercise of state power that much more difficult. And with grave consequences. Going forward, a reset button will have to be pressed to check Executive authority that could, if left to its own devices, abuse proceeds from oil resources. This is why we believe that it is vitally important for constituents to not only engage with politicians seeking to represent them but also a vast array of choices on the ballot. The mixture of contempt and fear, real or imagined, that has greeted politicians making it to the House without breaking a sweat should be treated in a careful, even cautious, manner. Such an outcome obviously puts the credibility of any electoral process under threat.
As an empirical study by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance shows, the participation score craters. And it will still do so if elections continue to come with ritualistic aspects. For the taxpayer, skewing the electoral playing field and compromising the integrity of electoral institutions strikes where it hurts most. The cost of organising general elections in Uganda has progressively increased, only to be met with voter apathy. Voter turnout is often quite low, with a growing number of Ugandans convinced that elections are simply organised to legitimise the rule of incumbents. The country is clearly stuck in a rut and is losing its direction. Wholesale changes to arrest the rot are doubtlessly needed. The Electoral Commission has its work cut out when it comes to making electoral processes it oversees scale over the transparency hurdle. The panacea for all its ills is to make it independent, among other electoral reforms.