On Easter Sunday evening, as many people celebrated or turned up the music, I shared an article on social media about corruption, along with a video of Nakibuuka Irene, who died on 5 April after alleged torture following her abduction by armed men on election day, 15 January 2026. My post drew backlash, with some accusing me of being unpatriotic.
“Fellow citizens, let’s be patriotic to our country, because sharing such things on social media damages our government’s image,” said Jonah Katurebe (not his real name), a supporter of the National Resistance Movement and a member of the trained patriotic corps.
In response, I shared the Inspectorate of Government’s 2025 report, which indicates that Uganda loses about 10 trillion shillings (about $2.7-billion), roughly 44% of government revenue meant for service delivery and national development, to corruption.
Katurebe is one of many partisan political supporters turned “patriotic” actors who ignore public affairs that directly affect their wellbeing, livelihoods and families. These individuals often label civically aware citizens who offer constructive criticism as anti-government, opposition-aligned or even foreign agents.
Nakibuuka’s abduction followed discussions with her peers about national politics and Bobi Wine’s prospects in the 15 January elections. This was an exercise of her right to participate in public affairs, as enshrined in Articles 38(1) and 29 of Uganda’s 1995 Constitution.
In a country where leadership fears dissent and where the spoils system defends itself through intimidation and force, patronage is often mistaken for patriotism. It is therefore necessary to clarify the distinction.
Patriotism is love for one’s country; patronage is the act of supporting or endorsing an establishment, often uncritically.
Patriotism, as outlined in Article 17 of Uganda’s Constitution, calls on citizens to love and defend their country, respect national symbols, pay taxes and combat corruption. This sense of duty does not require coercion or ideological training. It is reflected in moments of unity — for example, when Ugandans rally behind their national football team, display the national flag, sing the anthem or vote, despite their ethnic, religious and political differences.
Against this backdrop, it is misguided to equate patriotism with silence — to “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” — as some supporters of the ruling party suggest.
Citizens who care about their country will question how public funds — collected through taxes and other revenues — are used. True patriotism allows for constructive criticism of the government and public officials, rather than blind praise in the face of failure or mismanagement.
Patronage, by contrast, demands loyalty to a leader or political party regardless of performance. Across many African countries, it has entrenched kleptocracy, authoritarianism and, in some cases, totalitarianism.
Under patronage systems, public offices, contracts and business opportunities are often allocated based on political loyalty rather than merit. Public servants become accountable to those who appoint them, rather than to the citizens they serve, undermining transparency and accountability.
The consequences include widespread impunity, nepotism and large-scale corruption, which erode public trust and weaken institutions.
One of the most damaging effects of patronage is its role in obstructing the peaceful transfer of power. In countries such as Cameroon, Uganda, Eritrea and Equatorial Guinea, deeply entrenched patronage networks have made democratic transitions increasingly unlikely.
Language itself has been co-opted to reinforce these systems, with terms such as “bazukulu”, cadres and revolutionary guards used to entrench loyalty to ruling establishments.
It is disingenuous to use patriotism as a tool to indoctrinate young people and recruit partisan defenders of the indefensible. Patronage systems have drawn in professionals — including academics, lawyers and journalists — turning some into apologists for corruption, electoral malpractice and human rights abuses.
Public discourse increasingly features prominent figures defending the abuse of power and the erosion of constitutional safeguards in the name of patriotism.
There is nothing patriotic about supporting perpetrators of torture, assault or abduction — whether in the case of Nakibuuka Irene, Edward Ssebufu, Sam Mugumya or others — or about endorsing laws that restrict civic space in a purported democracy.
Patriotism should not be measured by political allegiance but by a commitment to societal wellbeing and constitutionalism.
Citizens must remain vigilant. Patriotism is not loyalty to a ruling party or leader; it is an understanding of constitutional rights, civic duties and moral responsibility.
This is not a rejection of patriotism as a cornerstone of nation-building but a call to correct its distortion. Reforming institutions that have reshaped patriotism into a vehicle for political patronage is essential to restore public trust and strengthen democratic governance.
Robert Kigongo is a sustainable development analyst
In a country where leadership fears dissent and where the spoils system defends itself through intimidation and force, patronage is often mistaken for patriotism. It is therefore necessary to clarify the distinction
