On December 22, 2023, Robert Kyagulanyi Ssentamu, popularly known as Bobi Wine and the leader of the National Unity Platform (NUP), made a significant move by replacing Mathias Mpuuga as the Leader of Opposition in Parliament.

This decision marked a pivotal shift in the previously subtle conflict between the two party figures, escalating it into an open confrontation. Mpuuga, serving as the NUP deputy president for the Buganda region, has been increasingly in the spotlight due to a widening rift with key party leaders.

Tensions within the party came to the fore about two weeks ago, particularly in the greater Masaka region. Mpuuga, backed by some local leaders, expressed opposition to a mobilization campaign named ‘Kkunga.’ This campaign, led by the party’s influential secretary for Mobilization, Fred Nyanzi Ssentamu – who is also Kyagulanyi’s brother – faced criticism for its approach and objectives.

Mpuuga has openly questioned the campaign’s goals, labeling them as convoluted. He raised concerns about the campaign’s focus, questioning why ‘Kkunga,’ if it were a beneficial project, seemed to be targeting NUP members specifically. This stance by Mpuuga reflects underlying tensions within the NUP and highlights the complexities of internal party dynamics, as well as the challenges faced by opposition parties in navigating their political and strategic objectives.

Last week, Mpuuga, while meeting National Unity Platform (NUP) leaders from his Nyendo-Mukungwe constituency, emphasized the need for unity and clear objectives within the party.

“We all need to have one goal; for you to say, you are the best at mobilization and then you go in an area and say, I’m bringing for you new leaders; what’s is that? How do you even say, you have come to mobilize people yet you are inviting only NUP supporters; isn’t that real confusion? That’s why we said that Kkunga should stop until we have guidance on how to move forward,” Mpuuga stated.

This statement reflects his stance on the current mobilization strategy, particularly the ‘Kkunga’ campaign, and underscores his concerns about its execution and focus. However, Mpuuga’s recent ouster as the leader of opposition (LoP) is tied to deeper issues within the party.

Sources close to Robert Kyagulanyi, granted anonymity for this article, revealed that Mpuuga, during his tenure as LoP, allegedly failed to support party mobilization efforts in the greater Masaka area. It was noted that he never organized an event with Kyagulanyi as the guest of honor. This lack of support is seen as part of the reason behind his removal from the LoP position.

Further, one individual involved in the ‘Kkunga’ campaign explained the usual procedure when party officials visit an area. Local leaders, including members of parliament, are expected to mobilize resources to support the campaign’s activities. However, Mpuuga reportedly resisted this practice. As LoP, he had access to considerable resources but allegedly declined to facilitate such mobilization in his area.

Moreover, he is said to have influenced other leaders in Masaka to adopt a similar stance against the mobilization efforts. These revelations paint a picture of internal discord within the NUP, highlighting conflicts over resource allocation and mobilization strategies. The situation poses challenges to the party’s cohesion and effectiveness in achieving its political goals.

Mpuuga’s actions and the reactions of party members underscore the complex dynamics of political leadership and resource management within Uganda’s opposition parties. A National Unity Platform (NUP) leader suggested that Mathias Mpuuga’s actions might be driven by a desire to diminish the influence of the party’s headquarters in his area and build a local political base.

“They basically want to remove the headquarters from having any influence in their area. I think he wants to build a local base from which to launch his political ambitions,” the leader stated. These ambitions, reportedly aiming for 2031, played a significant role in the decision to remove Mpuuga as leader of opposition (LoP).

A close associate of Robert Kyagulanyi, aka Bobi, expressed concerns over Mpuuga’s countrywide tours, ostensibly for monitoring government programs for accountability. Mpuuga’s tours, a first for a LoP, often included public rallies that drew large crowds, and were conducted without the involvement or even a briefing to the party headquarters.

This approach was seen by Kyagulanyi as an act of insubordination and an attempt by Mpuuga to create a political coalition to support his potential presidential aspirations. The relationship between Kyagulanyi and Mpuuga appears to have been further strained by Mpuuga’s perceived ingratitude.

“He was ungrateful; the guy appointed him LoP and he decided to use the position to undermine him. Kyagulanyi said he was determined to put an end to this ungratefulness by dropping him as LoP even when he got resistance from many quarters,” revealed a source close to Kyagulanyi.

This narrative indicates a complex interplay of internal party dynamics, individual political ambitions, and perceptions of loyalty and authority within the NUP. As it became evident that Mpuuga was at risk of being removed from his position, he reportedly initiated efforts to mobilize support across various quarters, including former allies in the Democratic Party and the Ssuubi 2011 pressure group, to forestall his dismissal.

An MP close to Mpuuga shared that this mobilization aimed at getting these allies to reject any new appointments in a bid to make it difficult for Robert Kyagulanyi, aka Bobi, to restructure the parliamentary leadership.

“They said we should decline the appointments to make it hard for him [Kyagulanyi] to constitute parliamentary leadership,” the source revealed.

However, this strategy faltered when some, including Mpuuga himself, accepted new roles such as parliamentary commissioner, thus weakening the boycott. There are indications that Mpuuga may be using his new position as a commissioner to further his political interests and potentially undermine the new leader of opposition, Joel Ssenyonyi.

According to discussions with parliamentary members and Ssenyonyi’s leadership team, there is a sense that Mpuuga is already having a counterproductive influence.

One MP noted, “Joel hasn’t been able to hire anybody to work for him, all the people Mpuuga brought were confirmed as permanent employees of parliament.”

This situation occurred before Ssenyonyi’s appointment, but it’s believed that political considerations played a role, given the long-standing belief that Mpuuga would not be reappointed. Additionally, there are perceptions that Ssenyonyi was appointed to fight Anita Among, the speaker of parliament.

“Of course, she is also ready for the fight with them and all this plays right in the hands of Mpuuga,” an MP commented.

In his third term as MP, Mpuuga reportedly sees the current situation as an opportunity to reorganize. A close associate of Mpuuga shared his perspective: “He said we need to reorganize our forces because for now, we have no leadership not only in NUP but in the opposition generally. That as the NRM gets ready to front Museveni’s son Muhoozi Kainerugaba, NUP, the largest opposition party is preoccupied with small fantasies of its top leaders.”

This statement highlights Mpuuga’s view of the need for strategic reorientation within the opposition, especially in the face of emerging challenges and political dynamics in Uganda.

MASAKA PROVIDES PLATFORM

The removal of Mpuuga as leader of opposition (LoP) has intensified the political dynamics in Masaka, providing an advantage to his opponents who see him as more vulnerable. Mpuuga has been embroiled in a dispute with the Masaka City leadership, led by Florence Namayanja, over alleged mismanagement of city properties.

Namayanja and her allies have aligned with Fred Nyanzi, possibly acting on instructions from his brother, Robert Kyagulanyi, aka Bobi. The Nyanzis have long sought to establish a foothold in Masaka but have consistently encountered resistance from Mpuuga. With local allies now on their side, the struggle for influence in Masaka has gained momentum.

Nyanzi has declared that his ‘Kkunga’ mobilization campaigns are nationwide, and Masaka cannot be an exception. An associate of Nyanzi expressed concern about the lack of ‘foot soldiers,’ the term used for NUP mobilizers, in the area. Unlike other regions, Masaka’s shift from the Democratic Party (DP) to NUP was accompanied by the transfer of intact DP structures to NUP, still firmly under Mpuuga’s control.

Mpuuga also enjoys strong support from influential institutions in the region, namely the Catholic Church and the Buganda kingdom. Mpuuga, countering Nyanzi’s efforts, asserts that Masaka is already a liberated area that doesn’t require further mobilisation. Instead, he suggests that such efforts be focused on regions where NUP is yet to gain a strong foothold.

“People are very annoyed with people who waste their time; people who know that Masaka is quarter guard…we have built interest in politics in Masaka and this is what we want to export to other areas where there are still weaknesses. To be able to do that, we have to reduce conflicts and selfishness. Ours is not a politics of eating; we are involved in serious politics…As a leader, I can’t wait to see bloodshed among our supporters… I know what I’m doing because I know that is the right thing to do,” Mpuuga stated in a recent meeting with local leaders from his constituency.

This situation highlights the intricate power struggles within NUP and the broader political landscape of Uganda. Mpuuga’s strong local backing and assertive stance present a significant challenge to Nyanzi’s ambitions and, by extension, to Kyagulanyi’s influence in the Masaka sub-region.

Mathias Mpuuga, the ousted leader of opposition and vice president of the National Unity Platform (NUP), enjoys solid backing from Dr Abed Bwanika, the member of parliament for Kimanya-Kabonera. Bwanika stands out among NUP MPs for his willingness to openly challenge Robert Kyagulanyi, aka Bobi, and other high-ranking party officials. He has been a vocal supporter of Mpuuga, pledging to confront anyone who opposes them. Bwanika emphasized the significant effort invested in building Mpuuga’s political career, expressing determination to protect it from those he perceives as less contributive to the party.

“They have spent a lot of time building the political career of Mpuuga and they can’t afford to see it be antagonized by people who have very little to offer,” Bwanika asserted.

At a recent meeting in Masaka, Baker Byayi, a leader from Sembabule district, supported this sentiment. He questioned the legitimacy of criticism against Mpuuga from party headquarters, implying that such actions must have Kyagulanyi’s approval. Byayi challenged the contributions of those criticizing Mpuuga, asking, “There was a campaign time and each region did its work, those who are making noise now, what did they do?”

He further suggested that any insults directed at Mpuuga likely have the implicit endorsement of the party’s president. Byayi called for Kyagulanyi to publicly denounce those undermining Mpuuga and other party leaders. He warned of potential consequences for the party in Masaka if the issue remains unaddressed: “Why must Mpuuga become a subject of ridicule in NUP, why; if the president doesn’t address this matter, he should never ask himself what happened to Masaka,” Byayi stated.

This situation highlights internal tensions within the NUP, showcasing the intricate power dynamics and differing perspectives among party members. The strong support for Mpuuga from influential figures such as Bwanika and Byayi indicates a significant faction within the party that challenges the leadership’s decisions and strategies,

potentially shaping the party’s future direction and cohesion. Robert Kyagulanyi, leader of the National Unity Platform (NUP), has not publicly addressed the ongoing internal disputes within the party, particularly those centered in Masaka. However, the party’s secretary general, David Lewis Rubongoya, in an interview with The Observer, downplayed the significance of these issues. He suggested that the media is exaggerating a minor internal matter.

“There is no major problem in the party; the said big rift is a creation of the media. We are together as a party and whenever we get problems, we sit down and talk,” Rubongoya stated.

Rubongoya acknowledged the efforts by external forces, presumably the regime, to sow discord within the NUP, similar to what has been observed in other opposition parties like FDC and DP. He emphasized that the NUP is committed to resolving differences amicably and maintaining unity.

“You know the regime has invested heavily in trying to cause the rift in the party, they want to project disunity among the forces of change,” he explained. Rubongoya also mentioned that the party leadership is actively engaging with leaders from the Masaka area to address any misunderstandings.

He indicated that part of their approach involves assessing the credibility of the media reports about the disagreements. “One of those things we have been talking about is to try and understand the cause of this disagreement and asking; is there any credibility in these things the media has been putting out, that will help us understand better how to deal with it?, he asked.

Concluding his remarks, Rubongoya reassured party members that there is no cause for concern, and urged them to remain focused on the party’s founding objectives.

“I can assure our members that they have nothing to worry about; they should not lose focus on our objectives for which this party was started,” Rubongoya added.

This response from the party’s secretary general highlights an attempt to present a united front amidst reports of internal disputes and challenges within the NUP. It reflects the party’s strategy to maintain cohesion and focus on its broader political goals in the face of challenges, both internal and external.

Interviewed for this story, Dr Yusuf Serunkuma said the National Unity Platform (NUP) is a complex mixture of diverse interests, experiences and expectations. “On one side, there are seasoned members in parliament, and on the other, influential members based at the headquarters who make decisions without parliamentary input.”

“A conflict of opinions exists between parliament and Makerere Kavule (previously Kamwokya) on the approach to politics. Kavule advocates for a more aggressive ‘Delta Force’ style, while the parliamentary faction, having experienced the intricacies and lucrative nature of parliamentary politics, views things differently,” he said.

He said that within parliament, there’s a noticeable division. “The senior, experienced group, mostly comprising former Democratic Party (DP) members, contrasts with the junior, inexperienced newcomers. The former DP members joined NUP to leverage their parliamentary experience under the current regime, having already navigated the challenges posed by Museveni’s political tactics. The newcomers, on the other hand, entered politics with the expectation of serving under a Kyagulanyi presidency, or with strong commitments made to their constituents. Currently, they are adjusting to the reality of operating under Museveni’s administration, grappling with its nuances and complexities.”

“The recent demotion of Mpuuga from the leader of opposition (LoP) role, replaced by a less experienced member deemed more manageable by the party headquarters, has accentuated these rifts. The former DP faction, realizing their significant contribution to NUP’s current political visibility and influence, expects greater respect from the party’s central leadership. Additionally, there’s growing speculation about the 2026 elections: questions loom regarding Bobi Wine’s political stance, his decision to run again, the promises he might make, and whether voters will be convinced of the possibility of unseating Museveni through the electoral process,” he added.