Introduction
The January 2026 elections in Uganda once again brought the country’s human rights situation, political freedoms, and the integrity of its electoral processes to the forefront of domestic and international attention. While the Ugandan government portrayed the elections as a continuation of the lawful processes of governance and political competition, opposition groups, civil society organizations, and human rights organizations described an environment marked by security pressure, restrictions on communications, the arrest of activists, and stringent controls over public space. The declaration of Yoweri Museveni as the winner of the presidential election for a seventh term was not fully accepted by his political rivals and was followed by a wave of protests, criticism, and human rights reports concerning violence, arrests, and enforced disappearances.
These developments demonstrated that the issue of elections in Uganda extends beyond competition between two candidates or disputes over electoral results. Rather, it is intertwined with deeper questions concerning the relationship between political power, security institutions, civil society, and the fundamental rights of citizens. The nationwide internet shutdown, restrictions on the activities of non-governmental organizations, measures taken against supporters of the opposition, and pressure on the media all pointed to an environment in which political participation entailed significant security and legal costs. From this perspective, examining the events that followed the January elections also provides insight into a broader pattern of political control, restrictions on civic space, and the erosion of public trust in Uganda.
Incidents
The developments associated with this process began in the days following the general elections held on 15 January 2026, when the announcement of the results and opposition protests ushered Uganda into a new phase of political tension. According to the official results, Yoweri Museveni, Uganda’s long-serving president, was once again declared the winner, securing a seventh presidential term. The outcome prompted opposition groups to challenge the election results, plunging the country into a renewed period of tension over the outcome of the vote. Museveni defeated his main challenger, 43-year-old Bobi Wine, who received 24.72 percent of the vote according to the official results. Bobi Wine, a singer-turned-politician whose real name is Robert Kyagulanyi, claimed on social media on election day that widespread ballot stuffing was taking place.
Museveni’s anticipated victory followed an election campaign that, according to the United Nations, had been marred by “widespread repression and intimidation,” including the suppression of opposition gatherings[1]. In the run-up to the election, Museveni warned of possible protests and unrest on polling day and stated that security forces would take action against such activities[2]. Reports also emerged ahead of the vote of security forces using tear gas, gunfire, and physical force against supporters of Bobi Wine, as well as disrupting his campaign events. According to the cited source, at least one person was killed and hundreds were arrested in the course of these incidents[3]. On 30 December 2025, two weeks before the election, prominent Ugandan human rights activist Sarah Bireete was arrested by security forces under President Museveni’s authority on charges of “unlawfully obtaining or disclosing personal data,” specifically for allegedly obtaining national voter information[4].
Another significant development occurred on 13 January 2026, when Uganda Communications Commission (UCC), the country’s communications regulator, instructed all mobile network operators and internet service providers to suspend public internet access nationwide from 6:00 p.m., two days before the general election[5]. According to CNN, chaotic scenes emerged in the run-up to the vote, with the network’s correspondent witnessing security forces using violence against Wine and his supporters at rallies. Wine described the election as a “war” and pointed to the imprisonment of hundreds of his supporters, most of them young people[6].
The voting process itself was also affected by technical and operational difficulties. One of the most significant problems was widespread malfunctioning of Biometric Voter Verification Kits (BVVKs), which delayed the start of voting in some areas, including urban polling locations. These devices had been introduced to prevent multiple voting and strengthen the integrity of the electoral process. However, their malfunction prompted the Electoral Commission to resort to manual voter registers at many polling stations, which itself became one of the opposition’s grounds for challenging the manner in which the election was conducted[7].
Against this backdrop, Museveni accused Bobi Wine’s party of seeking to destabilize the country. His government stated that seven people had been killed in Butambala, while police said that protesters had attempted to attack a polling station and a police station. The authorities therefore described the four-day internet shutdown as a security measure intended to prevent the spread of misinformation that could generate fear and disorder. Protesters, however, rejected the official account, arguing that the government had responded harshly and violently to dissenting voices, shut down the internet, and arrested protesters[8].
Alongside the opposition’s allegations, independent media and human rights reports also documented cases of arrest, use of force, and restrictions imposed on opposition figures and their supporters during the election period. These concerns have also been raised in light of the authorities’ previous treatment of prominent opposition figures. Kizza Besigye, a leading opposition figure who had contested the presidential election against Museveni four times, was arrested in Kenya in November 2024 and transferred to Uganda. He initially faced security-related charges before a military court. However, following a Supreme Court of Uganda ruling on 31 January 2025 that the trial of civilians before military courts was unconstitutional, his case was transferred to the ordinary civilian justice system, and in February 2025 he was charged with treason. Proceedings in the case remained ongoing in 2026[9].
Challenges and Responses
- Persistence of the Pattern of Domestic Repression
One of the principal challenges in assessing the human rights situation in Uganda is that the crisis following the January 2026 elections was not confined to polling day and the ensuing electoral protests. Although the country has moved beyond the immediate electoral period, signs of continuing security pressure, restrictions on civic freedoms, and measures targeting critics remain evident across various dimensions of political and social life. In Uganda, coercive measures, rather than being reserved for exceptional circumstances, have become embedded in routine political management. Security interventions, administrative restrictions, and regulatory actions are increasingly used to structure the political environment itself. These measures function less as responses to immediate threats and more as instruments for the pre-emptive management of political uncertainty. Public gatherings are tightly regulated, political mobilization is monitored, and organizational activity is subject to administrative intervention. The cumulative effect is a political environment in which participation carries higher perceived costs and lower perceived returns. This alters political behaviour across society, not necessarily by eliminating dissent, but by reshaping the incentives and risks associated with expressing it[10].
This situation indicates that repression in Uganda is not merely a temporary response to electoral protests, but rather forms part of a broader mechanism for controlling public space, constraining civil society, and limiting citizens’ political participation. The continuation of arrests, pressure on activists, restrictions on the media, and the use of legal and security measures against opposition figures have further eroded public trust in official institutions. Some analysts have interpreted the situation surrounding Uganda’s 2026 elections within the broader context of the militarization of politics and the narrowing of electoral competition in the country. For example, an analysis published on the website of the Centre for Human Rights at the University of Pretoria argued that the continuing cycle of political competition, violence, and repression could undermine the function of elections as a mechanism for free political competition and political accountability[11].
- Domestic Responses
At the domestic level, the National Unity Platform (NUP), the principal opposition party, responded to the arrest of its supporters during Bobi Wine’s election campaign. David Lewis Rubongoya, the party’s Secretary-General, told Uganda Radio Network that more than 120 party supporters had been arrested during the campaign activities of Robert Kyagulanyi, better known as Bobi Wine, in the Ankole sub-region. He emphasized that, despite repeated efforts, the party had been unable to gain access to these individuals, further heightening concerns about the situation of those detained. Rubongoya also stated that more than 130 party supporters had been arrested since the election campaign began in late September, describing the arrests as part of an effort by security forces to intimidate opposition supporters and reduce their attendance at campaign rallies. By contrast, a spokesperson for the Uganda Police Force stated that some of the party’s supporters had been arrested for actions that, according to the police, posed a threat to the safety of police officers[12].
Within domestic civil society, two Ugandan organizations, Unwanted Witness and the Women of Uganda Network (WOUGNET), examined the dimensions of the internet shutdown during the 2026 elections in a joint report entitled No Signal, No Voice: How Internet Shutdowns Undermined Uganda’s 2026 Elections. The report characterized the shutdown not as a technical disruption, but as a deliberate, phased, coordinated, and nationwide intervention in the country’s digital infrastructure. It stated that from 6:00 p.m. on 13 January, as polling day approached, public internet connectivity collapsed across Uganda, causing serious disruption for journalists, election observers, voters, small businesses, and users of digital financial services. According to the organizations, the shutdown prevented journalists from publishing their reports, election observers from transmitting electoral data, and citizens from accessing essential information. The report further emphasized that, in addition to restricting freedom of expression and political participation, the digital blackout reduced the ability to document electoral irregularities and human rights violations in real time. The organizations warned that the recurrence of such measures could normalize internet shutdowns during election periods as a routine practice of governance. In their view, the January 2026 blackout was not merely a communications problem, but a democratic crisis that affected public trust, electoral integrity, and the future of digital rights in Uganda[13].
- International Responses
In one of the earliest international responses, United Nations independent experts issued a press statement on 7 January 2026, eight days before Uganda’s general elections, warning about the human rights situation in the run-up to the vote. They stated that a pervasive climate of fear, reports of enforced disappearances, the disproportionate use of force against supporters of the political opposition, and mounting pressure on civil society and independent media were not conducive to the holding of peaceful and free elections. Drawing attention to similarities between patterns of repression surrounding the 2026 elections and those observed during the 2021 elections, the experts expressed concern over the arrest of hundreds of members and supporters of the opposition National Unity Platform (NUP) and reports of individuals being abducted in unmarked vehicles. They also identified restrictions on journalists, the suspension of radio programmes, pressure on civil society organizations, digital surveillance, and the possibility of internet or social media shutdowns as elements of the broader constriction of electoral space. The UN experts called on the Government of Uganda to immediately halt the violence, clarify the fate and whereabouts of those who had disappeared, and refrain from the disproportionate use of force and measures restricting digital communications. They emphasized that elections could be considered free and fair only when the freedoms of expression, assembly, and association were fully guaranteed[14].
Several days after the elections, amid the ensuing crackdown on those protesting the results, Human Rights Watch (HRW) also published a report on the situation, documenting an intensification of attacks by Ugandan authorities against the country’s main opposition party, the National Unity Platform (NUP). The organization stated that following the 15 January 2026 elections, security forces carried out mass arrests of party supporters and forcibly disappeared two of its senior leaders, whose fate and whereabouts, according to the report, remained unknown. Human Rights Watch also referred to the siege of the home of Robert Kyagulanyi, better known as Bobi Wine, the opposition leader and Yoweri Museveni’s closest electoral rival, describing restrictions on movement, assaults against his wife and staff, and destruction of property as part of an escalating pattern of pressure on the opposition. The human rights organization emphasized that the conduct of the Ugandan government represented a continuation of a longstanding pattern of action against opposition forces, one that had reached an alarming level following the latest elections. In this context, Human Rights Watch called on the Government of Uganda to end its crackdown on critics and political opponents, ensure the safety of individuals holding opposing views, and investigate and hold accountable those responsible for arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, and other human rights violations[15].
The European External Action Service (EEAS) in Brussels also issued a statement concerning the situation in Uganda following the January elections. The statement noted that the European Union (EU) took note of the official results announced by the Electoral Commission, according to which President Yoweri Museveni had been re-elected. The European Union also took note of the concerns raised in the preliminary statement of the joint African Union–COMESA–IGAD Election Observation Mission of 17 January 2026, particularly those relating to the uneven playing field in the run-up to the elections, the arbitrary arrest of civil society actors, and the internet shutdown. The statement further expressed regret over violence and threats before and after the elections, particularly those directed against opposition leader Robert Kyagulanyi, also known as Bobi Wine, and called on all parties to exercise restraint. It also called on the authorities to ensure the safety of all political actors. The European Union emphasized that it valued its longstanding partnership with Uganda and looked forward to continuing its engagement with the Ugandan government, civil society, and the private sector on the basis of shared interests and mutual respect[16].
In another development, an analytical commentary published on the Africa at LSE blog examined Uganda’s 2026 elections through the lens of “digital strangulation.” Its authors, Mwai Daka and Kakwenza Rukirabashaija, argued that, unlike the 2021 elections, the 2026 elections took place in a subdued, silent, and tightly controlled environment. They attributed this situation to factors including the judicial harassment of opposition figures, the absence of meaningful electoral reforms, and the militarization of a process that, in their view, should have remained civilian in nature. The commentary identified the nationwide internet shutdown from 13 to 18 January as one of the principal means of constraining political participation, noting that more than 45 million people were effectively deprived of free access to communications and information in the run-up to the vote. The authors also interpreted the decline in voter turnout to approximately 52.5 percent as an indication of widespread disengagement by citizens from a process in which they no longer had confidence. In this analysis, the internet shutdown was presented not merely as a technical or security measure, but as part of a political mechanism aimed at weakening opposition coordination, restricting independent monitoring, and obscuring human rights violations. The authors ultimately argued that the restoration of internet access after the elections brought into sharper view the extent to which, in their assessment, the electoral process had been undermined under conditions of severe restrictions on digital communications[17].
The Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom, based in Germany, also examined Uganda’s 2026 elections in an analysis entitled The price of the ballot and the politics of power. The author described the electoral contest as ostensibly a battle between continuity and change, while emphasizing that the campaign was accompanied by widespread allegations of repression of the opposition, disruption of campaign rallies, arrests of activists, and violent dispersal of crowds. The analysis also raised questions about the role of the Electoral Commission and the extent of its independence, particularly after remarks by an individual close to the President suggesting that Museveni would not leave power through the ballot box heightened concerns over the impartiality of the electoral process. The report further referred to technical problems on polling day, including failures of biometric voter-verification systems, delays in the delivery of electoral materials, and restrictions on the activities of observers and representatives of opposition parties. It identified the nationwide internet shutdown, the heavy presence of security forces, reports concerning an attack on Bobi Wine’s residence, and opposition allegations of electoral fraud as factors that undermined public confidence. Ultimately, the analysis concluded that Uganda’s 2026 elections, while securing the continuation of Museveni’s presidency for a seventh term, constituted an important test of the country’s democratic credibility—one that continues to be the subject of debate and uncertainty within Uganda, internationally, and among the Ugandan diaspora[18].
Finally, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR), based in The Gambia, published on 16 January 2026 a press statement dated 14 January 2026, expressing concern over the suspension of public internet access, restrictions on certain mobile services, and the suspension of the operating permits of several civil society organizations during the electoral period. The Commission considered the directive issued by the Uganda Communications Commission (UCC) to suspend public internet access, halt the sale and registration of new SIM cards, and restrict data roaming services to be inconsistent with citizens’ fundamental rights.
The statement also referred to the suspension of the operating permits of organizations including the National Coalition of Human Rights Defenders-Uganda (NCHRD-U), the Uganda National NGO Forum, and the Human Rights Network for Journalists-Uganda (HRNJ-Uganda). The African Commission emphasized that these measures restricted the rights to freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom of assembly, and participation in public affairs, as guaranteed under Articles 9, 10, 11, and 13 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The regional human rights body called on the Government of Uganda to immediately reinstate the permits of the suspended civil society organizations and bring an end to restrictions imposed on civic space. The Commission also stressed the need to protect journalists, human rights defenders, civil society actors, and the general public during the electoral period[19].
Conclusion
Developments surrounding Uganda’s January 2026 elections once again brought concerns over the state of political competition, civil liberties, and the conduct of security institutions in the country into sharp focus. Reports of violence, the arrest of opposition supporters, the disappearance of certain political figures, the internet shutdown, and restrictions on civil society activities have raised serious questions about the extent to which citizens are able to exercise their rights to freedom of expression, assembly, association, and political participation. The controversy is not limited to allegations of electoral fraud or disputes over the election results; rather, it concerns a broader environment in which opposition political activity is accompanied by significant restrictions and risks. The continuation of such conditions may further erode public confidence in electoral institutions and formal mechanisms of accountability, while deepening the divide between the government and sections of society critical of it.
At the same time, domestic and international reactions demonstrated that the crisis in Uganda cannot be understood solely in terms of street violence or the conduct of security forces. It must also be examined in connection with a more structural process of constricting civic space, controlling digital communications, and restricting political organization. The internet shutdown was particularly significant in this regard, as it demonstrated that restrictions on communications and digital infrastructure, alongside measures such as arrests, the dispersal of gatherings, and judicial pressure, can also become instruments for limiting civic space and political participation. Accordingly, the principal challenge facing Uganda in the aftermath of the 2026 elections is not merely to address individual cases of human rights violations, but to restore minimum levels of public trust, ensure the security of political and civil society actors, and establish genuine mechanisms of accountability for abuses of power. Without such reforms, future elections may likewise reproduce the same cycle of violence, fear, and mistrust rather than reduce political tensions.
References
[1] Al Jazeera. (2026, January 17). Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni wins seventh term: Electoral Commission. Al Jazeera. From: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/1/17/ugandas-president-yoweri-museveni-wins-seventh-term-electoral-commission
[2] Kannampilly, A. (2026, January 15). Uganda votes in tense election seen as test of President Museveni’s strength. Reuters. From: https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/uganda-vote-tense-election-clouded-by-succession-questions-2026-01-15/
[3] Mureithi, C. (2026, January 15). Opposition candidate Bobi Wine claims ‘massive ballot stuffing’ as Uganda goes to polls. The Guardian. From: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/15/uganda-vote-election-yoweri-museveni-bobi-wine
[4] Budoo-Scholtz, A. (2026, January 8). Arrest of Ugandan Activist Ahead of Elections Spells Trouble. HRW. From: https://www.hrw.org/news/2026/01/08/arrest-of-ugandan-activist-ahead-of-elections-spells-trouble
[5] HRW. (2026, January 15). Uganda: Blanket Internet Shutdown Violates Rights. HRW. From: https://www.hrw.org/news/2026/01/15/uganda-blanket-internet-shutdown-violates-rights
[6] Princewill, N. (2026, January 15). A pop star, an aging autocrat and a crackdown: What to expect from Uganda’s election. CNN. From: https://edition.cnn.com/2026/01/14/africa/uganda-elections-bobi-wine-museveni-explainer-intl-cmd
[7] Christou, W. (2026, January 17). Yoweri Museveni wins Ugandan election as opponent condemns ‘fake result’. The Guardian. From: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/17/yoweri-museveni-wins-ugandan-election-as-opponent-condemns-fake-result
[8] Wambua-Soi, C. (2026, January 20). Uganda’s Bobi Wine: ‘We have evidence’ of election fraud in Museveni win. Al Jazeera. From: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/1/20/ugandas-bobi-wine-we-have-evidence-of-election-fraud-in-museveni-win
[9] Agence France-Presse. (2026, January 18). Uganda’s president calls opponents ‘terrorists’ in victory speech. The Guardian. From: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/18/ugandas-president-calls-opponents-terrorists-in-victory-speech
[10] ASA. (2026, January 14). Uganda Elections 2026: Power, Fear, and the Crisis of Political Legitimacy. ASA. From: https://www.africansecurityanalysis.com/reports/uganda-elections-2026-power-fear-and-the-crisis-of-political-legitimacy
[11] Mbanje, T. (2026, January 13). Op-Ed: What the world needs to know about Uganda’s 2026 Elections. Centre for Human Rights. From: https://www.chr.up.ac.za/opinion-pieces/4254-op-ed-what-the-world-needs-to-know-about-uganda-s-2026-elections
[12] Batte, B. (2025, November 11). NUP Demands Access to Supporters Arrested On Kyagulanyi’s Campaign Trail. Uganda Radio Network. From: https://ugandaradionetwork.net/a/story/nup-demands-access-to-supporters-arrested-on-kyagulanyis-campaign-trail-
[13] Unwanted Witness, & Women of Uganda Network (WOUGNET). (2026, February 23). No Signal, No Voice: How Internet Shutdowns Undermined Uganda’s 2026 Elections. From: https://www.unwantedwitness.org/no-signal-no-voice-new-report-documents-election-period-internet-shutdown-in-uganda/
[14] OHCHR. (2026, January 7). Uganda: UN experts urge stronger human rights safeguards ahead of 2026 elections. OHCHR. From: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2026/01/uganda-un-experts-urge-stronger-human-rights-safeguards-ahead-2026-elections
[15] HRW. (2026, January 28). Uganda: Post Election Assault on Political Opposition. HRW. From: https://www.hrw.org/news/2026/01/28/uganda-post-election-assault-on-political-opposition
[16] EEAS Press Team. (2026, January 23). Uganda: Statement by the Spokesperson on the general elections. EEAS. From: https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/uganda-statement-spokesperson-general-elections_en
[17] Daka, M., & Rukirabashaija, K. (2026, February 20). The 2026 Ugandan election was marked by digital strangulation rather than hope. London School of Economics and Political Science. From: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2026/02/20/the-2026-ugandan-election-was-marked-by-digital-strangulation-rather-than-hope/
[18] Mdaka, M. (2026, January 19). Uganda Election: The price of the ballot and the politics of power. Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom. From: https://www.freiheit.org/sub-saharan-africa/price-ballot-and-politics-power
[19] ACHPR. (2026, January 16). Press Release on the Suspension of Public Internet Access, Selected Mobile Services and Civil Society Organizations’ Permits during the Election Period in Uganda. ACHPR. From: https://achpr.au.int/en/news/press-releases/2026-01-16/press-release-suspension-public-internet-access-uganda
