By Aggrey Baba
Haji Faruk Kirunda, the Special Presidential Assistant to the President on Press and Mobilization, has, through his weekly column in the New Vision explained why Uganda should introduce tougher penalties against individuals found guilty of electoral malpractice.
Kirunda laid out a detailed argument that electoral fraud is not merely a political offence but a direct threat to the country’s democratic order, proposing that anyone found culpable of manipulating election results should be barred from contesting for public office for at least 10 years.
Kirunda argued that democracy derives its legitimacy from the consent of the governed, expressed through regular and credible elections. According to Kirunda, when individuals inflate votes, bribe officials, or otherwise distort outcomes, they undermine the principle that leadership must reflect the will of the people.
Kirunda added that Uganda’s current political system is founded on structured democratic processes established after 1986 under President Yoweri Museveni, and that elections have since been held consistently at national and local levels, accompanied by an elected Parliament and functioning local councils (LCs).
He explained that the stability of this system depends on public confidence in the ballot. Where that confidence is shaken by malpractice, Kirunda said both Government and opposition politicians and supporters suffer reputational damage, and national cohesion is weakened.
He further proposed that politicians whose elections are successfully challenged in court due to proven irregularities should personally meet the financial cost of organizing by-elections, reasoning that taxpayers should not bear the burden created by one person’s misconduct.
In his explanation, distinguished between legitimate political competition and fraudulent conduct, where competitive politics according to him, is healthy and expected in any democratic country.
However, manipulating election results to secure victory outside the rules, he argued, amounts to “imposing oneself on voters” a practice incompatible with constitutional governance.
Kirunda also points out that unresolved electoral grievances often provide grounds for political tension and public dissatisfaction. Strengthening penalties, he suggested, would act as both deterrence and reassurance that the system protects choices of the voters.
