Silence as Complicity: How Media Omission During 2026 Elections Undermines Justice and Accountability in Uganda

In any democratic society, the media plays a central role in documenting events, informing the public, and supporting access to justice. When credible media institutions fail to report on human rights violations, especially during elections, this omission is not neutral. It actively weakens accountability, distorts public memory, and limits victims’ pathways to justice. In contexts like Uganda’s recent elections, media silence has become a structural barrier to human rights protection.

Research on media freedom under authoritarian and semi-authoritarian governments shows a clear pattern. States rarely rely only on outright censorship. Instead, they use regulatory pressure, licensing threats, advertising control, intimidation of journalists, and selective access to information to direct narratives. The result is not always loud propaganda, but quiet omission. Violations happen, but they are not recorded by institutions that are considered credible, authoritative, or admissible in legal and policy spaces.

During Uganda’s 2026 elections, reports of arbitrary arrests, excessive use of force, internet disruptions, and restrictions on opposition activity circulated widely. However, many of these incidents were not adequately covered by established or credible media houses. For example, the government directive that barred Nation Media Group Uganda from covering presidential campaign events or activities sent a strong signal to the wider media sector. It demonstrated that reporting outside approved boundaries carried consequences. Such actions create a chilling effect, where editors and journalists choose silence over risk.

This silence has serious implications for access to justice. Courts, human rights bodies, and international mechanisms often rely on reports from recognized media outlets as supporting evidence. When credible media does not document abuses, victims struggle to substantiate claims. Violations also become harder to prove, patterns harder to establish, and accountability easier to evade. In this way, omission by media institutions indirectly protects perpetrators.

At the same time, informal media actors, citizen journalists, bloggers, and so-called unwanted witnesses have increasingly filled the information gap. They document incidents through social media posts, videos, live streams, and personal testimonies. While this content is valuable and often courageous, it is frequently dismissed as unverified, biased, or unreliable. The paradox is clear. The most visible evidence of violations exists, but it lacks the institutional legitimacy that credible media traditionally provides.

For content creators, researchers, and advocates, this creates a major challenge. Claims about human rights violations are questioned because they cannot be supported with references from endorsed media institutions. The absence of reporting is then used to cast doubt on the violations themselves. Silence becomes a tool for denial.

Scholars have long warned that controlling narratives is central to modern authoritarian governance. By muting credible media rather than shutting it down entirely, governments maintain an appearance of press freedom while ensuring that sensitive issues remain underreported. This strategy shifts the burden of truth-telling onto individuals who lack protection, resources, and institutional backing.

Media omission during elections should therefore be understood as more than an editorial choice. It is a failure of public duty with real consequences. It limits public understanding, obstructs justice, and normalizes impunity. For democracy to function, credible media must not only exist, but must also report fully, independently, and without fear, especially when rights are at risk.

Rebuilding trust and accountability requires more than praising press freedom in principle. It requires confronting silence, protecting journalists, and recognizing that omission, in moments of crisis, is a form of complicity.