As Uganda inches closer to its highly anticipated 2026 general elections, a trend has emerged that deserves national attention: an increasing number of National Resistance Movement (NRM) candidates are being declared unopposed, while some opponents withdraw from the race under circumstances that raise eyebrows.
Recent announcements have shown NRM flagbearers like Fred Byamukama in Bugangaizi West and Vice President Jessica Alupo in Katakwi District securing parliamentary positions without contest after their opponents either withdrew or failed procedural requirements. Similar reports continue to surface from other constituencies, pointing to a pattern that is reshaping Uganda’s competitive political landscape.
Why Are Candidates Withdrawing?
Opposition and independent candidates cite financial constraints, administrative hurdles, and political reconciliation meetings as reasons for their withdrawal. In some cases, strict nomination requirements, such as signature verifications, have disqualified potential challengers. While some withdrawals are voluntary, others appear to be influenced by the structural dominance of the ruling party, creating a sense of inevitability around NRM victories.
The Legal Angle
Constitutional lawyer Jude Byamukama has highlighted an often-overlooked legal requirement: Section 36(3) of the Parliamentary Elections Act Cap. 177 states that if a candidate sponsored by a political party wishes to withdraw, the notification must be signed and filed by the party’s Secretary General or an authorised official.
“In default of this requirement, the withdrawal is not effective,” says Byamukama.
This raises a crucial question: are some candidates being declared unopposed without meeting the formal legal procedures? If so, the legality of certain uncontested declarations may be open to challenge, pointing to a grey area in the administration of electoral rules.
Public Outcry and Political Concerns
Citizens and online commentators have expressed frustration over what they perceive as a narrowing of democratic space. Many fear that elections are becoming formalities rather than genuine contests, undermining trust in Uganda’s electoral process. Opposition parties, meanwhile, claim that administrative and procedural tactics — including stringent verification of nomination forms — are being used selectively to limit competition.
Conversely, NRM leaders frame the trend as a victory for political unity, citing reconciliation efforts with independents and internal consensus-building as part of a healthy democratic practice. This contrast in narratives — unity versus suppression of competition — is central to understanding the debate.
What This Means for Uganda’s Democracy
The rise of unopposed NRM candidates and withdrawals under ambiguous circumstances poses critical questions for Uganda’s democracy:
-
Is political competition genuinely fair if procedural and structural factors dissuade challengers?
-
Are legal frameworks like Section 36(3) being fully adhered to, or are shortcuts being taken to declare uncontested victories?
-
How does the public perceive elections that appear predetermined?
For democracy to thrive, Ugandans need not only rules on paper but also transparent and consistent enforcement. Citizens, the media, and civil society must continue scrutinising the process to ensure that elections are competitive, lawful, and reflective of the people’s will.
The upcoming elections are more than a political contest — they are a test of Uganda’s democratic resilience. How the trends of unopposed victories and candidate withdrawals are handled will have lasting implications for the credibility of the electoral process and the trust Ugandans place in it.
