Op-ed : EC Nomination Loopholes Threatening  2026 Election Integrity

There is growing concern that the Electoral Commission may have unintentionally opened a dangerous loophole in the nomination process one that can easily be exploited by candidates who prefer political shortcuts to genuine competition.

Under current practice, a candidate can be disqualified if even one of the people who signed their nomination papers returns to the Electoral Commission and denies ever endorsing them.

What was originally introduced as a safeguard against forgery has now evolved into a political weapon. If a candidate manages to convince or worse, bribe just one of their opponent’s nominators to disown their signature, the Commission can simply strike the opponent off the ballot. Suddenly, the contest ends before it begins and one is left running unopposed.

This is not democracy. It is a technical knockout delivered in the backrooms rather than at the ballot box.

The nomination system is supposed to demonstrate that a candidate enjoys real support from within their constituency. Yet the current enforcement mechanism seems to place more weight on the withdrawal of support than on the granting of it.

A single recantation whether driven by fear, intimidation, confusion or inducement can cancel the democratic expectations of thousands of voters who believed they were heading into a fair contest.

The result is a system that is far too fragile. When disqualification becomes easier than campaigning, the temptation to exploit nominators becomes irresistible.

The political field is no longer shaped by ideas, manifestos or the strength of one’s support, but by tactical ambushes designed to eliminate opponents before they ever reach the starting line.

This loophole also undermines public trust in the Electoral Commission. The EC has the means to conduct more rigorous checks when such disputes arise. Handwriting verification, cross-checking of national IDs, sworn statements and proper investigation are all within reach.

Instead, the Commission often relies on abrupt verbal denials without probing deeper into the circumstances. Why would someone who freely endorsed a candidate days earlier suddenly withdraw their signature? Was there pressure? Was there inducement? Was the person acting independently? Without such questions, the system becomes a playground for manipulation.

A democracy should not hinge on the vulnerability of a single citizen. Nominators are ordinary Ugandans farmers, boda boda riders, teachers, market vendors people who have no protection against the pressures that swirl around high-stakes political contests.

Expecting them to withstand intimidation or the lure of quick money is unrealistic. Yet their change of heart, genuine or coerced, can instantly erase an entire candidacy.

For the sake of electoral credibility, the EC must rethink this practice. There is need for stronger verification processes, proper scrutiny, and reasonable safeguards that prevent nominations from being weaponised. The Commission must ensure that recantations are not simply accepted at face value but examined with the seriousness they deserve.

Elections must be decided by voters not by backdoor maneuvers or the manipulation of unsuspecting nominators. If Uganda is committed to conducting credible elections, then it must close the loopholes that reward shortcuts and punish genuine competition.

If things continue going this way, we might see no opposition remaining on the ballot by January next year since they are the main target by the ruling party money bags and government officials.

Democracy demands a level playing field. The Electoral Commission must ensure that its rules do not become tools for denying the electorate the right to choose their leaders.