A Time for Reflection: Opposition’s Self-Inflicted Wounds in Uganda’s Electoral Landscape
As the dust settles on another election cycle in Uganda, a period of quiet introspection yields candid, if painful, observations. The outcome, characterized by a decisive victory for the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM), was not merely a result of the incumbent’s strength but, critically, a testament to the profound failures of the opposition. From a vantage point of recent and lengthy engagement with the Ugandan political scene, it is clear the opposition’s downfall was significantly self-engineered.
At the heart of the collapse was a catastrophic failure to present a competent, unified front. The National Unity Platform (NUP), as the leading opposition force, exhibited poor leadership and ineffective internal electoral selection processes. There was an aura of excessive excitement and complacency—a dangerous expectation that victory in 2021 would automatically translate to future gains. This bred a crippling lack of effort. The opposition operated under the illusion that the world rotates around them, awaiting their ascent, rather than recognizing that power must be relentlessly and strategically earned.
While the opposition rested on its laurels, the NRM machinery, regardless of one’s views on electoral integrity, worked tirelessly. They campaigned with purpose and cohesion, capitalizing on every opening. The opposition, meanwhile, was fractured. The NUP leadership made the critical error of running candidates against genuine, established political figures from other opposition groups. This resulted in needless fratricide, splitting the anti-incumbent vote and gifting seats to the NRM on a silver platter. It was a loophole the ruling party was all too eager to exploit.
Recommendations and a Hard Truth
If there is to be any hope for a credible democratic challenge in the future, the opposition must undertake a brutal, honest audit. Failure to learn from this debacle will guarantee its repetition.
The movement must urgently address its crippling divisiveness and move beyond attacking voluntary advisors and displaying indisciplined behaviour. Candidate selection must be reformed; it cannot be based solely on financial contribution, which elevates inadequate leaders. Competence, integrity, and electoral viability must be the paramount criteria.
The painful reality, however, is that the opposition as currently constituted is over. It will take stronger, more strategic intellectuals to resurrect a viable alternative. Tragically, many of the thinkers who could have steered this course have been sidelined, attacked, or destroyed by the very people they sought to guide. The path to resurrection is steep, and it begins with the humility to acknowledge that this defeat was not just delivered by the opponent, but orchestrated from within.
Mukungu Fredrick Albert
About The Author
