By Emma Bwayo
The announcement of LC I and LC II elections offers Uganda more than a routine political calendar event. It presents a rare opportunity to repair the foundation of grassroots governance that has weakened over time.
Uganda’s decentralisation model is well articulated. The 1995 Constitution and the Local Government Act of 1997 establish a five-tier system from LC I (village) to LC V (district), designed to devolve power, promote citizen participation and strengthen accountability. On paper, the framework is robust. In practice, however, it has remained disproportionately top-heavy.
LC I and LC II — the governance structures closest to the people — have suffered the greatest neglect. Since 1986, leaders at these levels have been elected only twice. The 2018 polls followed a 17-year gap, despite Article 181(4) of the Constitution mandating local government elections every five years.
Elections are not optional. They are a constitutional obligation.
Delays erode legitimacy, weaken accountability and diminish community trust. At the village and parish levels, these gaps directly affect dispute resolution, mobilization for government programmes, identification of beneficiaries and oversight of public services.
LC I leaders are often the first interface between citizens and the State. They mediate conflicts, authenticate documents, mobilise communities for immunisation and education campaigns, and monitor local projects. When this layer is weak, the entire governance pyramid above it becomes unstable.
Yet elections alone will not solve the problem.
Uganda has repeatedly elected LC I and LC II leaders without adequately inducting and training them. Many assume office without a clear understanding of their legal mandate, reporting lines, limits of authority or coordination with technical staff at sub-county level.
The consequences are visible: overlapping roles, jurisdictional disputes and friction between political leaders and civil servants.
An uninformed local leader is not merely ineffective; they can inadvertently undermine service delivery.
Ignorance of the Local Government Act and related regulations may lead to illegal levies, mishandled disputes, abuse of authority or interference in technical functions. Often, the problem is not malice but lack of guidance.
The Ministry responsible for Local Government must therefore be held accountable for consistent capacity building at the grassroots. Most structured trainings target LC III, IV and V levels, leaving village and parish leaders to learn through costly trial and error.
That model is unsustainable.
Decentralisation was intended to empower communities. Empowerment, however, requires knowledge, clarity of roles and continuous institutional support.
Civil society organisations and governance-focused NGOs must also reassess their priorities. For years, interventions have concentrated on districts and municipalities while overlooking LC I and LC II structures — yet it is at this level that citizens experience government most directly.
If Uganda is serious about strengthening service delivery, three urgent steps are necessary.
First, the Electoral Commission must institutionalise predictable five-year election cycles for LC I and LC II leaders without exception. Consistency builds democratic culture and public trust.
Second, induction training should be mandatory immediately after elections. Every LC I and LC II leader should undergo structured orientation covering legal mandates, ethics, financial procedures, conflict resolution, community mobilisation and coordination with technical officers. Refresher trainings must follow periodically.
Third, development partners and NGOs should deliberately invest in grassroots governance capacity. A coordinated national induction and mentorship framework would significantly reduce operational confusion and strengthen accountability from the bottom up.
Decentralisation can only succeed if its base is stable. Without strengthening the village and parish structures, reforms at higher levels will continue to struggle with implementation gaps.
The forthcoming LC I and LC II elections must therefore signal more than political renewal. They should mark a deliberate effort to rebuild Uganda’s governance pyramid from the foundation upward.
Strong villages build strong sub-counties. Strong sub-counties build strong districts. And strong districts build a stable nation. Effective service delivery in Uganda begins at LC I.
The writer is LCV Chairman-elect, Namisindwa District, Youth Councillor and Journalist.
If you would like your article/opinion to be published on Uganda’s most authoritative news platform, send your submission on: [email protected]. You can also follow DailyExpress on WhatsApp and on Twitter (X) for realtime updates.
