With just days to go before the January 15 General Elections, the Electoral Commission (EC) is facing growing criticism over the transparency and openness of its electoral processes.
Political actors, civil society organisations and election observers say a series of recent administrative and legal decisions have raised red flags and risk undermining public confidence in the credibility of the polls.
At the centre of the concerns are the rushed introduction of election-related technology, restricted access to key judicial and administrative processes, and ongoing disputes over the management and accessibility of the National Voters Register.
According to election observers, the legitimacy of any democratic election rests on three core pillars: credibility, freedom and fairness.
Civil society actors argue that while some early stages of the electoral cycle, including candidate nominations, appeared relatively transparent, recent developments have eroded trust.
Godber Tumushabe, a veteran political analyst and civil society actor, says accountability to citizens is central to electoral credibility, particularly when it comes to the voters register and the handling of election-related violence.
“Credibility depends on accountability to the citizens,” Tumushabe said. “All stakeholders must know the register and who is on it. What we are seeing now is a lack of evidence in communication and what appears to be strategic ambiguity, especially around election violence and the sudden introduction of laws to govern election technology.”
Tumushabe pointed to Statutory Instrument No. 98 of 2025, which authorised the use of Biometric Voter Verification Kits (BVVKs), as an example of what critics describe as last-minute lawmaking.
He argued that the legal framework for deploying the technology was introduced late in the electoral calendar, even as preparations and training for election officials lagged behind.
Opposition politicians have echoed these concerns, warning that the current electoral environment does not meet the minimum standards required for a free and fair contest.
Alliance for National Transformation (ANT) presidential candidate Gen. Mugisha Muntu said key electoral processes remain insufficiently open, even to the main actors participating in the elections.
“The processes fall short of openness even to the direct actors,” Muntu said, citing what he described as the insertion of security forces into the electoral process and the opaque nature of decision-making at the Electoral Commission.
He warned that such practices risk undermining prospects for a peaceful and credible transition.
Other political actors and observers have raised additional issues they say expose weaknesses in the Commission’s management of the electoral process.
These include complaints and election petitions being handled away from the scrutiny of the media and the public, continued friction over how much information from the National Voters Register should be made accessible, and what they describe as silence or delayed communication from the EC in the face of rising incidents of election-related violence.
On the voters register, critics argue that meaningful public access is essential for transparency, while the Commission maintains that privacy concerns limit how much data can be shared.
Responding to the criticism, Electoral Commission spokesperson Julius Mucunguzi defended the integrity of the institution, questioning whether the demands being made by critics are realistic within the confines of the law.
“How much more would the public like us to do to trust the process?” Mucunguzi asked, insisting that the Commission has been as open as legally possible.
On the National Voters Register, Mucunguzi said the law allows access for verification purposes but does not permit the publication of private data belonging to millions of Ugandans. He maintained that the Commission must balance transparency with the protection of personal information.
Regarding the Biometric Voter Verification Kits, Mucunguzi said the technology is intended to strengthen, not weaken, the credibility of the elections.
He argued that biometric verification will help prevent multiple voting and ensure accurate verification of voters and results at the polling station level.
As the countdown to the January 2026 polls continues, the gap between the Electoral Commission’s assurances and the scepticism expressed by opposition figures and civil society remains wide.
For many voters, the ultimate test will be whether biometric verification and the electronic transmission of results can overcome the persistent perception of fraud that has clouded previous elections.
