A recent survey has shown that Ugandans tend to have more trust in information provided by religious leaders and politicians from the ruling party (NRM) compared to their counterparts in the opposition.
According to a mobile phone survey conducted by Twaweza called “Sauti za Wananchi,” it was found that Ugandans place a higher level of trust in religious leaders than in political leaders. The survey also highlighted that information from NRM politicians is considered more credible than that from opposition politicians.
Out of the participants surveyed, 41% expressed trust in information from members of parliament belonging to the ruling party, while only 20% had similar trust in information from legislators representing opposition parties. The data collected for this survey was gathered between January 10, 2023, and February 3, 2023, and involved 2749 Ugandans.
Key Findings:
- Eight out of ten citizens showed a high level of trust in information provided by religious leaders.
- Seven out of ten participants expressed a significant level of trust in information from their village chairperson (LC1) and the president.
- Government officials were trusted by 38% of the respondents, while 36% trusted supporters of the ruling party and only 20% trusted opposition party MPs.
- Information from supporters of opposition parties received the lowest level of trust, with only 14% of participants having confidence in it.
These findings largely align with similar surveys conducted in 2019 and 2020. Notably, trust in NRM politicians has risen from 26% in 2020 to 41% in 2023, while trust in religious leaders increased by 7%. Trust in opposition politicians only saw a slight increase of 3%, rising from 17% in 2020.
Opposition’s Perspective:
Michael Kabaziguruka, the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) EC boss, raised concerns about the survey, suggesting that Twaweza might not have selected the appropriate participants. He emphasized that many Ugandans might not trust the NRM government, given its lengthy time in power and the perceived negative aspects of its rule.
Kabaziguruka also pointed out that respondents may have answered in a way they believed would not bring them trouble, expressing fear of security operatives. He questioned the criteria used for participant selection and the locations from which they were chosen, suggesting that the data might have been influenced if participants were primarily from rural areas.
