Ugandans losing faith in electoral system as apathy and scepticism prevail

On a Tuesday morning, the rally on the streets of Uganda’s capital, Kampala, is full of verve. Its diversity – religious leaders, civil society groups, donors, musicians, comedians and ordinary Ugandans are all represented – only adds to the appeal.

The procession is led by the Citizens’ Coalition for Electoral Democracy in Uganda, an umbrella group of more than 600 NGOs working to encourage the populace to vote.

There is concern that many people will shun February’s presidential elections. They cite myriad issues. Some think voting won’t lead to leadership change, some that the elections are rigged. Others argue that the country’s leadership has failed to improve their lives.

Eunice Namara, a social worker in Kampala, did not vote in the previous election and won’t do so this time. “There is no need,” she says. “Ugandans remain poor, and every time we vote nothing changes.”

Miriam Ahumuza, an MBA student at Makerere University, says: “Even if you vote, they will rig [the elections] and the same people will return.”

This frustration is shared by millions of Ugandans. In 2011, more than 5 million registered voters failed to turn out for the presidential elections.

In 1996 and 2001, when President Yoweri Museveni was still popular, voter turnout was 72.6% and 70.3% respectively. In 2006, it dropped to 69.7%, and in 2011 it fell to 59.3%. The number of eligible voters (those aged 18 and above) has been growing, and now stands at 15 million, up from 13 million in 2011.

In 2016, voter turnout is expected to be even lower according to some analysts. A fifth term for Museveni, extending his 30-year rule, is seen as almost inevitable.

Dr Livingstone Sewanyana, a citizen’s coalition member and director of the Foundation for Human Rights Initiative, stresses that some Ugandans think elections “have not had an impact on the quality of life they need”.

“There is still no adequate healthcare, people’s incomes have not improved and unemployment is still problematic, but then elections always retain the same old leadership and this has made some Ugandans see voting as a waste of time,” said Sewanyana.

In next year’s polls, Museveni will face his long-time ally Amama Mbabazi, a lawyer whom he fired from his post as prime minister after Mbabazi declared he would stand against him.

Mbabazi, 66, was once Museveni’s main strategist. He orchestrated the removal of presidential term limits in Uganda’s constitution in 2005. His fallout with Museveni has been seen by many as a chance to end the current regime.

Mbabazi will stand alongside Kizza Besigye, the country’s main opposition figure, who has been the thorn in Museveni’s side for years. He was recently released from house arrest. Some pundits think Besigye’s presence could help push the election into a rerun if the process is fair.

A poll published in August by Research World International showed that 45% of Ugandans do not believe the electoral process can lead to power changing hands, while 32% don’t believe the elections will be free and fair.

The leaders of the electoral commission are appointed by Museveni. Despite numerous opposition calls for the officials to be appointed by an independent arm of government, such as the judiciary, nothing has changed.

There is also public concern about intimidation of Museveni’s opponents. Although Besigye has been released, soldiers remain outside his Kampala home. Both he and Mbabazi have been prevented from addressing rallies. Mbabazi has been arrested at least once in the past three months.

On 10 October, Ugandan police appeared to strip Zainab Fatuma Naigaga of the Forum for Democratic Change – Besigye’s party – when she tried to attend a rally with Besigye in the south-western district of Rukungiri. The party official’s arrest was condemned by human rights activists as “dehumanising”.

A statement published by Human Rights Watch last Sunday said teargas and police brutality threatened free assembly ahead of the elections. “Ugandans have the right to gather and hear information, never more so than when an election is coming up,” said Maria Burnett, the organisation’s senior Africa researcher. “The reckless use of teargas is injuring people and jeopardising a free and fair democratic atmosphere for campaigns.”

Almost 7 million Ugandans (roughly 20% of the population) live below the poverty line and close to 60% are thought to hover at the cliff edge, occasionally falling below the $1.25 World Bank measure of extreme poverty (the bank has recently changed the poverty line to $1.90).

More pupils drop out than finish the seven years of primary school. Teachers strike regularly over pay, and doctors prefer to work privately rather than for public hospitals.

Most of the voters next year will be first-timers. The biggest challenge they face is unemployment, yet there is nothing on the table to address this problem adequately.

Nicholas Opiyo, a human rights lawyer and director of the civil liberties organisation Chapter Four Uganda, said: “Some people don’t look at Uganda’s elections as based on issues that can impact their lives for better. That’s why they are indifferent.”

Poverty has made voters susceptible to bribery, according to the Research World International poll, with money or small gifts such as salt and soap distributed by candidates in exchange for votes. People in rural areas are particularly susceptible.

“We are telling Ugandans that the stakes are high,” said Sewanyana. “All of us have a stake in transforming the country. That vote is the power you have to change something. Let them be part of change and execute their right to vote.” 

Source: The Gaurdian