The cost of staging an election is unquestionably expensive. It comes with a dizzying range of administrative needs, additional security, national advertising, and dispute resolution mechanisms. Then there are the finances around political campaigns.
Henry Muguzi, the Executive Director of the Alliance for Finance Monitoring (ACFIM), says on average, each Parliamentary candidate spend ranges between Shs550m and Shs700m. ‘But there are many outliers who have spent in excess of Shs1b.’
Per ACFIM, the amount of money that was sunk into the 2021 General Election totalled to Shs3.983 trillion. This was a significant spike from the Shs2.4 trillion spent during the 2016 cycle. Muguzi says the 2026 cycle could be the most expensive yet, with an estimate of Shs7 trillion proffered.
‘Many of the candidates [figuring in] parliamentary [races] in the current campaigns are already broke. The demands and expectations from the electorate are simply too much,’ Muguzi says.
President Museveni, who is chasing a seventh elective term, had a first-hand experience of such demands from the electorate last weekend when he met so-called digital influencers during the Jazz with Jajja conversation at State Lodge, Nakasero, Kampala. The engagement was hosted by Mr Museveni’s daughter, Natasha Karugire. One of the influencers, Isaac Katende, alias Kasuku, asked Mr Museveni to give the group a take-home ‘package’ as a grandparent.
‘People told me don’t forget to tell Jajja [grandparent] to give us something that we enjoy,’ Kasuku said.
Although Kasuku tried to disguise what he meant, many, including Mr Museveni, interpreted this to mean he wanted money. The Ugandan strongman said he couldn’t give Kasuku’s group money because it could be interpreted as a bribe during this election time.
‘I don’t want to go to prison because I’m a candidate. If I give people gifts, I will be arrested for bribing. I think we shall have to wait after the election,’ Museveni said.
What is a bribe?
What Museveni was alluding to was Section 64 (1) of the Presidential Elections Act. It stipulates: ‘A person who either before or during an election, with intent either directly or indirectly to influence another person to vote or to refrain from voting for any candidate, gives or provides or causes to be given or provides any money, gift or other consideration to that other person, commits the offence of bribery and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding 72 currency points or imprisonment not exceeding three years or both.’
The interpretation of Section 64 (1) is to the effect that for the court to annul an election on the basis that a bribe was given, the intention of influencing the voting choice of a voter or voters must be proven.
Another ingredient is that the prohibited act must have been personally committed by the candidate declared the winner or by another person with the consent or approval of the candidate.
After Museveni said he couldn’t give out bribes, there was a spectacle when women who attended a rally at Kololo in Kampala organised by the President’s wife, Janet Museveni, ostensibly to solicit for votes, reportedly got stranded in Mukono after the NRM leaders reneged on their promise to give them ‘transport’ and ‘allowances.’
‘We are the ones who look for votes but they forget about us. We want to convey our grievances to Maama Janet that the people you gave our allowances to take us home, they disappeared in thin air. We are now stranded at the NRM offices, we can’t go home,’ one of the women explained.
This came after Museveni accused his rival in the presidential race, National Unity Platform (NUP) party flagbearer Robert Kyagulanyi, alias Bobi Wine, of ferrying supporters.
‘Supporters of Mr Kyagulanyi who were arrested at Mile 4 in Mbarara confessed that they had a fleet of 200 vehicles that transported nomadic audiences to create the image of big crowds at the venue,’ Museveni said.
Hoes saga
However, the government is distributing over seven million hoes to all districts across the country. An initial allocation of 2.4 million hoes was already sent to districts, starting with the eastern region last December. Although State actors have insisted that this isn’t a bribe because it’s part of a government programme under the Agriculture ministry aimed at eliminating poverty, the distribution of the hoes has been dominated by Museveni’s party, the National Resistance Movement (NRM).
For instance, in Kalungu District, which in the 2021 elections threw its weight behind Bobi Wine, NRM stalwarts nearly exchanged blows after they disagreed on how the hoes should be distributed. NRM’s Muhammad Muyanja Ssentaayi, who is the current MP for Bukoto West, nearly exchanged punches with his rival Ibrahim Kitatta, the outgoing chairperson for Lwengo District, as they struggled to project authority in the distribution of the hoes. Both Ssentaayi and Kitatta are NRM members contesting for the Bukoto West parliamentary seat. Ssentaayi is the NRM flag bearer for Bukoto West, while Kitatta opted to run on the Independent ticket.
In Kayunga District, still in Buganda, Ntenjeru North, which is represented by NRM’s Amos Lugoloobi, also junior Finance minister, got the lion’s share of 20,000 hoes. Elsewhere, Ntenjeru South, represented by Patrick Nsanja of NUP, was apportioned 15,000 hoes. Baale County, which is represented by Charles Tebandeke, also a NUP member, was apportioned just 5,000 hoes.
Although the guidelines from the Agriculture ministry stipulate that the hoes must be distributed by technical officers, in practice, the ruling party’s politicians took over the process. ‘NRM politicians sat in the meeting in which they locked out the Opposition, and they agreed on how to distribute the hoes. They didn’t invite us, yet we are supposed to be part of this process as MPs,’ Mr Tebandeke said.
Mbabazi petition
It’s not the first time the regime has distributed hoes during elections. The same scenario played out in the lead-up to the 2016 elections. This prompted former Prime Minister John Patrick Amama Mbabazi, who had faced-off with his former boss Museveni in the presidential poll, to file a presidential petition at the Supreme Court. One of the grounds Mr Mbabazi included when he asked the Supreme Court to annul Museveni’s victory was the distribution of hoes, which he construed as bribery.
In his defence, Museveni said he wrote a letter dated November, 20, 2015, which was during the campaign time, to then Prime Minister Ruhakana Rugunda, in which he directed that the purchase of 18 million hoes be included in the 2016/2017 financial year Budget.
‘We carefully considered the said affidavits, and concluded that the affidavits of the three witnesses do not amount to an admission of the offence of bribery. To be specific, the 1st respondent [Mr Museveni] denied the allegations, stating that he did not personally, or through his agents with his knowledge and consent or approval, give hoes to the voters of West Nile or any other place with the intent that they should vote for him and refrain from voting for the petitioner or other presidential candidates. On the contrary, the evidence adduced by the first respondent [Mr Museveni] brought out the fact that the distribution of hoes was an ongoing government programme, which commenced in 2013-2014,’ the nine Supreme Court Justices ruled in 2016.
Power of the incumbency
Although Mr Mbabazi’s lawyers stressed the conflation of the ruling party with the State as a significant issue in many African countries, where the incumbent party often uses State resources and institutions for its own political advantage, thereby undermining democratic processes and accountability, the Supreme Court turned a deaf ear.
‘…the evidence of the first respondent [Museveni] to the effect that the distribution of hoes was part of an ongoing government programme, as already stated in this judgment, remained unchallenged. The first respondent was elected President of the Republic of Uganda in 2011, and his term of five years was still running at the time of the alleged offence. There is no provision in the Constitution providing for stepping aside during the election period of the sitting President if he or she decides to contest in the elections,’ the court ruled.
During the now concluding campaigns, Mr Museveni has used State programmes to make a case for his re-election. In late October, as Mr Museveni was criss-crossing the country, Jessica Alupo, the Vice President, said the government had allocated Shs80b to implement a cattle compensation programme in the Teso, Lango, and Acholi sub-regions for livestock lost during past insurgencies and cattle raids.
When Museveni was on the campaign trail in Kole District, in Lango Sub-region, he said : ‘The Cabinet met and advised me that instead of giving cows, we should give money to the communities affected by cattle rustling. The money is now in their accounts.’