Election Violence in Uganda: The case of the 2025 Kawempe North By-Election

A properly functioning democracy that pays attention to the rights of the people remains the dream quite out of reach for many countries on the African continent, Uganda inclusive. Former United States president , Abraham Lincon is quoted saying,

“Ballots are the rightful, and peaceful, successors of bullets, and that when ballots have fairly, and constitutionally, decided, there can be no successful appeal, back to bullets; that there can be no successful appeal except to ballots themselves, at succeeding elections.”

This statement from him stresses the importance of respect for peaceful and constitutional democratic ways if deciding matters in society without resort to violence more so that involving the exchange of bullets, as that is a terrible history that mankind wouldn’t want to get back to.

The past weeks have seen Uganda hold a by-election in Kawempe North, one of the electoral constituencies for Members of parliament (MP) in Uganda’s parliament and it is one of the Kampala suburbs. This by-election comes to get a replacement for the late Honourable Segirinya Muhammad, an MP who passed on at the start of this year, succumbing to illness that had had him bedridden ever since his time of incarceration on allegations of terrorism and denial of bail to get treatment out of the prison facilities in the period around 2021 to 2022.

This recent by-election in Kawempe North has highlighted a troubling trend of continuous and growing election violence in Uganda in recent times. This situation raises serious concerns of human rights violations and threatens the integrity of the country’s democratic processes. This by-election has been characterised by brutal crackdown by state security agencies, particularly the Joint Anti-Terrorism Taskforce (JATT), on opposition supporters, innocent on watchers, journalists, and political candidates. It has exposed the growing systematic use of violence as a tool for political control in Uganda and in many other African states.

Electoral violence championed by state agencies has been prominent in recent Ugandan history. In previous elections held in areas like Arua Municipality and Kayunga, opposition strongholds have become hotspots for state-orchestrated violence.

During the Kawempe North by-election, security forces, including the Uganda Police Force, Special Forces Command (SFC), JATT, and the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF), descended on the constituency armed with guns, batons, electric wires, and wooden sticks.  The first fact that raises eyebrows is the presence of the military and other specialised security forces in civilian affairs given the fact that the duty to maintain law and order is only granted to Uganda police under Articles 211 and 212 of the 1995 Uganda Constitution. More still, a good number of the JATT operatives were totally masked and clothed in such a way as to totally conceal their identities, a measure that undermines accountability (Objective XXVI of the National objectives and Directives of National Policy, 1995 Uganda constitution.) as it hinders victims of violence by these operatives from identifying the perpetrators.

This violence was particularly intense on nomination day, when an opposition candidate Erias Luyimbaazi Nalukoola was arrested with members of his mobilisation team delaying the candidate’s registration with the electoral commission for nomination.  This act is widely perceived as a deliberate attempt to frustrate the opposition’s participation. However, even after securing his nomination, Nalukoola and his supporters faced relentless assaults from JATT operatives, highlighting the state’s willingness to use brute force to undermine fair political competition, something that is in stark contrast with the principles of democracy.

Journalists covering the election too were not spared. Top TV journalist Miracle Ibra suffered severe eye injuries while covering the events during the by-election and is now grappling with the looming possibility of losing his sight, after being struck by an object suspected to be a baton or tear gas canister. Other journalists from various media groups were arrested, beaten, and, in some cases, abducted by security operatives. Some were forced to delete footage capturing the violent dispersal of crowds, a blatant attack on press freedom and the public’s right to information. (Article 41, 1995 constitution, Access to Information Act 2005, Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.) The violent targeting of journalists, especially those covering opposition events, has become a recurring pattern in Uganda, with media workers like Andrew Lwanga still living with permanent disabilities from past election violence. A free and independent press is essential for transparent elections, as it informs voters, holds power to account, and documents abuses. The forced deletion of footage capturing state violence and the brutal attack on journalists are clear attempts to control the election narrative and conceal the extent of state repression. This climate of fear created by these brutal crackdowns has a chilling effect on voter turnout and political participation by the people.

More still, the direct involvement of JATT in confrontations with civilians supporting or belonging to the opposition is a cause for alarm. Originally established under the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2002 to combat rebel groups like the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), JATT’s mandate has increasingly blurred, with the unit now being deployed to suppress political opposition. Masked and heavily armed, JATT operatives carried out wanton and indiscriminate arbitrary arrests, brutal beatings, and violent raids on opposition gatherings. Their tactics, more suited for combating insurgency than managing elections included the use of military-grade firearms like the CZ Scorpion Evo 3 and IWI Galil Ace, along with AK-47s, M16 rifles, and other weapons like batons and electric wires. The militarization of the electoral process not only heightens the risk of civilian casualties but also creates an atmosphere of fear that discourages political participation. It suggests an election engineered through intimidation as opposed to democratic engagement.

These actions stand in stark violation of international human rights standards. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Uganda is a party, guarantees the right to participate in public affairs, freedom of expression, and peaceful assembly (Article 25). The United Nations Handbook on Human Rights and Elections emphasizes that security forces must protect, not repress, these rights, and that electoral processes must be free from violence and intimidation. (Centre for human rights, Geneva (1994). Human Rights and Elections. A handbook on the Legal, Technical and Human Rights aspects of elections. Professional Training series No. 2.) Clearly, the events in Kawempe North paint a stern picture of a state willing to trample on these protected rights to maintain political dominance by undermining the very essence of democratic elections, the free expression of the people’s will.

The consequences of this violence extend beyond the immediate physical harm inflicted on civilians and journalists; many people might not vote.  At such a point where people lost trust in the democratic systems, the worlds of Abrahm Lincoln above might be imminent. A return to the way of bullets in deciding human affairs. This is dangerous for both the human rights of the people and the development of the country. Uganda’s obligations under international law are clear: it must protect the rights to free expression, assembly, and political participation. It is therefore important that the government revises its policies on deployment of security agencies, cautions the security operatives on the unlawful and uncalled for use of force during election periods and holds the responsible individuals to account on top of providing compensation and assistance to the victims of this brutality.

Also, the international community cannot afford to turn a blind eye to the deteriorating situation in Uganda and Africa at large. There is a need for human rights organizations, regional bodies like the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and global institutions like the United Nations Human Rights Council to amplify the voices of Ugandans and demand an end to state-sponsored violence. Elections are meant to be a celebration of democracy, a moment where citizens freely choose their leaders, not the period of living in the ugly shadows of violence and fear.

Mahad Kisuze Mugaya
Programs Officer, Lex Amica and 2025 Ambassador, International Society of Human Rights

References

[1]

[2] Abraham Lincoln. Available via https://www.maine.gov/sos/kids/government/path/student/quotes

[3] https://www.independent.co.ug/ssegirinya-state-tortured-mp-dies-at-37/

[4] Women’s International Peace Centre, (2019). Election-Related Conflict and Violence in Uganda – Research Report. Pp. 41-43. Available via https://wipc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Election-Related-Conflict-and-Violence-in-Uganda.pdf

[5] Objective XXVI of the National objectives and Directives of National Policy, 1995 Uganda constitution.

[6]https://mulengeranews.com/breaking-news-nup-candidate-erias-nalukoola-arrested-ahead-of-kawempe-north-by-election-nomination/

[7]Diamond, L. (2024). Power, Performance, and Legitimacy. Journal of Democracy 35(2), 5-22. https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jod.2024.a922830 .

[8] https://cpj.org/2025/03/ugandan-anti-terrorism-officers-brutally-assault-journalist/

[9] Article 41, 1995 constitution, Access to Information Act 2005, Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

[10] Supra, note 3.

[11] https://observer.ug/news/tools-of-coercion-used-in-kawempe/

[12] Mathias, Alioune (2010). The role of Security Forces in the electoral process: the case of six West African countries. Available via https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/nigeria/07532.pdf

[13] Article 25

[14] Centre for human rights, Geneva (1994). Human Rights and Elections. A handbook on the Legal, Technical and Human Rights aspects of elections. Professional Training series No.2.