The credibility of political party primaries is increasingly emerging as a decisive factor in shaping Uganda’s political landscape ahead of the 2026 general elections.
In recent months, the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) concluded its internal contests for parliamentary, Local Council V, and some lower-level leadership positions.
What could have been a testament to internal democracy has instead been overshadowed by allegations of malpractice, ranging from result tampering to outright violence in several districts.
In response to mounting pressure, President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni acting as both Head of State and NRM chairman established a tribunal to investigate grievances.
The tribunal’s weeks-long hearings culminated in judgments that have divided opinion. While the leadership insists due process was followed, many petitioners contend that the rulings simply reaffirmed decisions made by returning officers, leaving questions about impartiality unresolved.
The situation intensified when NRM Electoral Commission chairperson Dr. Tanga Odoi revealed that over a quarter of returning officers will be dismissed, with some facing legal action for alleged result manipulation.
This acknowledgment not only confirmed systemic weaknesses but also amplified calls for structural reform within the party’s electoral framework.
In districts such as Mubende, a traditional NRM bastion in Central Buganda, the effects of internal disputes are increasingly evident. While reconciliation meetings have been initiated ahead of President Museveni’s upcoming visit to commission several projects, the underlying divisions remain unresolved.
Without meaningful conflict management, these tensions could create openings for opposition forces to gain ground in areas that were once considered politically secure. The NRM’s challenges are mirrored within the main opposition party, the National Unity Platform (NUP), which is also confronting scrutiny over its internal processes.
Its candidate selection model said to allocate 40% of the decision to internal vetting and 60% to so-called “ground” consultations has drawing criticism for its lack of transparency in how these grassroots votes will be sourced, verified, or protected from interference.
Such procedural ambiguity risks fuelling internal rivalries, fostering an “opposition within the opposition,” and weakening the party’s unity at a pivotal moment ahead of the 2026 elections.
Across Africa, opaque nomination systems have repeatedly destabilized both ruling and opposition parties. In Kenya’s 2022 elections, for example, internal disputes within major coalitions over ticket allocations led to high-profile defections and independent candidacies, diluting party strength in several key constituencies.
Ghana’s two dominant parties the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC) have also faced allegations of favouritism in their primaries, occasionally sparking protests and internal boycotts that weakened their parliamentary cohesion.
These comparative experiences underscore a consistent truth: when parties fail to enshrine transparent, inclusive, and predictable nomination procedures, they not only erode grassroots trust but also create opportunities for political rivals.
In fragile or polarized political contexts, such internal weaknesses can escalate into broader legitimacy crises, affecting national stability and international perceptions.
As Uganda approaches the 2026 elections, both the NRM and opposition parties face a shared challenge rebuilding internal trust while convincing the electorate that their candidate selection processes are merit-based, transparent, and free from undue influence.
The integrity of these processes will not only determine the cohesion of their respective political bases but also influence how Uganda is viewed in regional and global governance circles. In the eyes of the international community, credible internal elections are not a procedural luxury; they are the foundation upon which democratic legitimacy rests.
If Uganda’s parties cannot rise to this challenge, they risk entering the next general election with fractured support, weakened negotiating positions, and diminished credibility. In an era when Africa’s political transitions are closely monitored by both domestic civil society and foreign partners, opaque nomination processes are more than an internal inconvenience they are a strategic liability.
Wabusimba Amiri is a communication specialist, career diplomate, Journalist, political analyst and Human Right activist. Tel: +56775103895 email: Wabusimbaa@gmail.com
English 