Poor turnout: What is keeping     voters away?

On Thursday, the Electoral Commission (EC) released the final results that revealed that only 10,744,319 people out of the 17,658,527 registered voters participated in the January 14 presidential and parliamentary elections.

This signifies 59.35 per cent of the registered voters.
In discussing the outcome of the elections and trying to explain the voting patterns, Dr Julius Kizza, a lecturer of Political Science at Makerere University, says the patterns appear to have been informed by the level of political awareness.

“Rural voters who are predominantly poverty-stricken peasants voted for a presidential monarchy. By contrast, the urban-based voters, who are more politically conscious, predominantly voted the Opposition. They voted for change,” Dr Kizza argues.

This would suggest that voters in areas such as Kampala, Wakiso and the new cities would have turned out in bigger numbers, but that was not the case.

Low turnout in Opposition areas
The results show that voters in districts where the National Resistance Movement (NRM) party candidate, Mr Museveni, won turned up in big numbers while those in areas where National Unity Platform (NUP) presidential candidate Robert Kyagulanyi, alias Bobi Wine, won turned up in small numbers yet one would have believed that the people in those areas had more of a motivation to show up at the polling stations.

For example, voter turnout in Jinja, Iganga, Kampala and Wakiso districts, where Mr Kyagulanyi won, stands at 54.44 per cent, 52.18 per cent, 43 per cent and 49.70 per cent respectively. Call it an average of 50 per cent.

On the other hand, voter turnout in Mbarara, Rukungiri, Kamwengye and Kaabong where Mr Museveni won, was at 68.94 per cent, 60.74 per cent, 78.11 per cent and 80 per cent respectively. Call it an average of 72 per cent.

What was it that caused voters in Opposition strongholds to keep away? Was there voter suppression or intimidation? 
Prof Sabiiti Makara, a lecturer of Political Science at Makerere University, argues that the turnout was good given the circumstances under which the elections were held.

“The turnout that we experienced was largely facilitated by NUP. It would have been lower, but Mr Kyagulanyi mobilised a huge number of youthful voters to participate in the elections,” Prof Makara says.

Ugandan voters could be excused for having not turned up to vote. The recently concluded election was after all affected by the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic and the introduction by the EC and the Ministry of Health of several restrictions aimed at curbing the spread of the pandemic. 
The scientific campaigns that meant that most of the campaigns would be media-driven, meant that there were no public rallies or voter mobilisation drives.

Mr Crispin Kaheru, a former coordinator of the Citizens’ Coalition for Electoral Democracy in Uganda (CCEDU) turned independent election expert, who observed the just concluded election, blamed it on lack of voter mobilisation.

“This time round, there were no voter mobilisation campaigns like we had prior to the 2016 General Election. Voters always need to be whipped up all the time. They need to always get a spur that drives them to the polling stations. If that is not there, it should not come as a surprising that the numbers remain low,” Mr Kaheru argues.

Chronic problem
The problem, though, is that low voter turnout seem to have become chronic. 

All elections that have been held since the NRM took power have suffered a similar fate, which Mr Kaheru brings down to the government’s failure to give priority to civic and voter education.

The highest turnout was 72.6 per cent registered in the 1996 General Election, but it dropped to 70.3 per cent in 2001. 
In 2006, only 7,230,456 (69.18 per cent) of the 10,450,788 registered voters turned out. 

It dropped by a whopping 10 percentage points in 2011 to 59.3 per cent as only 8,272,760 out of the 13,954,129 registered voters turned out to cast their ballots. 

There was some kind of recovery in 2016 as the percentage rose to 67.61 per cent, when 10,329,131 out of the 15,277,198 registered voters turned out.

Minority president
That poor turnout has meant that the President is elected by a fraction of the total number of voters, a scenario which has led some quarters into an argument, tongue in cheek, that Mr Museveni is actually a “minority president”. 

The number of people who have always voted for him has never been more than 50 per cent of the total number of registered voters.

In 2006, Mr Museveni got 4,109,449 votes, which accounted for only 39.32 per cent of the 10,450,788 registered voters.
In 2011, when he got 5,428,369 votes, he was elected by only 38.9 per cent of the 13,954,129 registered voters.

The 5,971,872 votes that he got in 2016 and the 5,851,037 votes he garnered in the recently concluded elections, respectively, represent 39 and 33.1 per cent of the 15,277,198 and 17,658,529 registered voters.

Who is staying away?
It is argued that some of those who stay away from the polls are Ugandans living in the diaspora, those incarcerated in the prisons, journalists on duty, those on local elections’ observer teams, EC employees and security personnel deployed to maintain law and order.

The absence of the prisoners and Ugandans living in the diaspora from the polling booths is understandable.

It was not until June 18 last year that the 25-year moratorium that had been slapped on the voting rights of prisoners and Ugandans living in the diaspora was lifted. 

Justice Lydia Mugambe directed the EC to consider the two categories in this year’s elections.

The judge’s orders were, however, revisited after the EC submitted that it would be practically impossible to reopen registration and update and display registers in order to allow them participate in the 2021 elections, but even if they had participated, it is highly doubted that they would constitute 10 per cent of the total number of registered voters.

Who then is not participating? Would the remaining group, the journalists on duty, those on local elections’ observer teams, EC employees and security personnel deployed to maintain law and order constitute the other 30.65 per cent? Impossible.

Why stay away?
Why would people quick to register or update their details during a voter registration or update exercise at the end of the day decide not to participate in the election that would follow?

There is something to do with lack of confidence in the electoral process. 
At the end of September 2017, Afrobarometer released the findings of a survey that revealed that only 22 per cent of the Uganda populace believe that their country is either a full democracy or democracy with minor problems. 

Mr Kaheru argues that this is a global phenomenon.
“There is generally reducing confidence in public processes, especially political ones such as elections. There is a fatigue around elections, but also growing perceptions that elections may not necessarily make a difference. There is bound to be a lethargic effect when such a loss of faith in elections meets with a voter mobilisation vacuum,” Mr Kaheru argues.

Militant politics
It was at some point argued that the numbers at the polling booths have been low because of the emergence of a militaristic and radical streak in the Opposition, especially in the FDC.

It was argued that the founder president of the party, Col Dr Kizza Besigye, represented a radical extremist brand of politics which was scaring off potential supporters of the party. A good number of people inside the NRM, it was said, were desirous of change, but were scared of FDC’s militancy. 

Under the circumstances, it was argued, it was not possible for the Opposition to even tap into undecided and new voters.
Gen Muntu’s election on November 25, 2012 to succeed Dr Besigye as the party’s president, was welcomed as a chance to give the party and the Opposition a new face. 

“Gen Muntu, like you have seen, has the ability to attract a wide spectrum of supporters even from other parties. He is firm but calm and I think he is a better alternative to Dr Besigye and will give FDC a fresh look,” Mr Aaron Mukwaya, who teaches Political Science at Makerere University, argued then.

When Gen Muntu was defeated by Mr Patrick Oboi Amuriat in the race for the party presidency on November 24, 2017, it was quickly interpreted as a triumph for the so called militant radicals over the so called moderates and liberals and the end of “decent politics” in FDC. The argument that the party would not attract new supporters returned to the fore.

Centrism
On September 25, 2018, Gen Muntu quit FDC and unveiled the Alliance for National Transformation (ANT) party in March the following year.

The former army commander had at the time of leaving FDC suggested that the rising number of Independent MPs nationwide calls for the formation of a “third force” along the presence of many youth who are critical of the NRM, but skeptical of the Opposition.  

“Our reading of the current political situation in the country is that there is a political void that is not being filled by the party’s (FDC) current strategy. We believe this vacuum needs to be filled as soon as possible by approaching our leadership problem from a different perspective,” Gen Muntu announced.

Gen Muntu went into the campaign as a centrist candidate leading a centrist party, but final results released by the EC put the army general in position Number Four, having garnered 67,574 votes, representing a paltry 0.65 per cent of the total votes cast.

His candidature did not result into huge numbers at the polling booths, neither did it cause ripples. 

All ANT’s parliamentary candidates, including Ms Alice Alaso (Serere Woman), Mr Paul Mwiru (Jinja East), Gerald Karuhanga (Ntungamo Municipality) and Mr Kassiano Wadri (Arua Municipality) suffered crushing defeats.

Prof Makara says the Ugandan electorate will not go for a centrist candidate and party at this point in time.
“The State uses militancy against its opponents. The voters will, therefore, always go for someone who is seen to be standing up to the militancy of the State and not someone who will stand in the middle,” Prof Makara argues.

How can they be brought back?

The biggest question now is how to once again get the registered voters back to the polling stations on polling day. 
Mr Kaheru calls for deliberate actions aimed at creating political awareness of the population.

“We have to invest in a permanent mechanism that delivers ongoing civic and voter education, and also one that can quickly be adopted to mobilise and organise voters. Civic and voter education always fall at the lowest of the ladder in the EC’s priorities,” Mr Kaheru says.

A post-election evaluation undertaken between April and July 2016 by a consultancy firm, Acacia, in collaboration with the EC, attributed the 67.61 per cent turnout of voters registered in 2016, the highest since 2006, to strong voter mobilisation.

Acacia recommended that low voter turnout would be best addressed through continuous voter education during periods of less or no electoral activity. 

It proposed that the EC should revise the job descriptions of its district registrars to make voter education one of the core responsibilities. 
The recommendation was never acted on, but might it just be the best way to get those voters to the polling booths?