Contemporary political thought argues that elections are core indicator of democracy especially if they under conducted under multi-party political dispensation. The practice of acquiring power through an election is assumed to make government accountable to citizens, and thereby to confer legitimacy (Collier and Vicente). However the past two elections in Uganda seem to suggest a departure from this argument. The citizens who have been participating in the elections have virtually no power to hold leaders accountable instead it seems to be the other way round. The legitimacy of elections in Uganda continued to be the subject of debate. The experiences of 2001, 2006 and 2011 are clearer manifestation of the fact that elections in Uganda are characterised by violence, bribery and fraud. Voter bribery which is the main focus of this discussion paper, manifests in form of vote-selling and vote-buying. Critics have argued that the state under the incumbent president Gen Yoweri Museveni has been reduced into a vestige of the ruling party and used to protect narrow, personal and in some cases, ethnic interests. Whatever the argument, there may be no contestation of the statement that the power of incumbency has been central to building networks of clientelism and neopatrimonialism, and it is to these two concepts that I now turn.