Uganda has both global and regional obligations to ensure the political participation of its citizens, as outlined in Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and several articles of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, as well as the African Charter on Democracy, Elections, and Good Governance. Central to these obligations is the right to vote, which is crucial for political engagement.
According to Article 59 of Uganda’s Constitution, every Ugandan aged 18 and above has the right to vote. Article 59(3) mandates that the government take necessary measures to ensure all eligible citizens are registered and can exercise this right. The only limitation to voting is age; thus, there should be no barriers for those imprisoned or living abroad.
For years, Ugandans in prisons and the diaspora have been denied this fundamental right. While prisoners are afforded other rights—such as education, with many sitting for national exams—denying them the right to vote raises important questions. The Uganda Prisons Service operates over 11 schools and has exam centers, yet it does not facilitate voting. Who determines which rights Ugandans in prison can exercise?
With over 70,000 Ugandans in prison and more than 2 million in the diaspora, their potential impact is significant. Diaspora Ugandans remit over $1.4 billion annually, contributing about 3% to the country’s GDP. This economic support underscores the inconsistency of celebrating these contributions while denying them a voice in governance.
In June 2020, the High Court affirmed that Ugandans aged 18 and above in prison and the diaspora have the right to vote, declaring the Electoral Commission’s failure to ensure their inclusion on the voter register as unconstitutional. However, during the 2021 elections, the Electoral Commission cited time constraints for not implementing the court’s ruling, promising action for the 2026 elections.
As the Electoral Commission outlines its roadmap for the 2026 elections, there is a conspicuous absence of provisions for registering Ugandans in prison and the diaspora. Will the Commission again claim insufficient time to include these citizens? Failing to address their voting rights is not only a violation of court directives but also a discriminatory disenfranchisement that undermines the electoral process's integrity.
Countries like Kenya, South Africa, and Zambia have successfully implemented measures for prisoners and citizens abroad to vote. Kenya registered prisoners and diaspora voters for the 2022 elections, while South Africa allows online registration for citizens overseas. Such precedents demonstrate that Uganda can and should take similar steps.
If the current situation persists, Electoral Commission officials may face serious consequences for contempt of court. Additionally, Uganda risks breaching its international obligations and may be held accountable by global and regional human rights bodies. The disenfranchisement of thousands threatens the legitimacy of elected leaders and undermines democratic processes.
In conclusion, Uganda must take immediate action to ensure that all citizens, regardless of their circumstances, are afforded their right to vote. The integrity of the electoral process depends on it.
