The National Unity Platform (NUP) stunned supporters and critics yesterday when it held an extraordinary delegates conference at their leadership school in Kamwokya that saw the re-election of its top leadership.
Robert Kyagulanyi, popularly known as Bobi Wine, retained his position as party president, alongside David Lewis Rubongoya as secretary general and Joel Ssenyonyi as party spokesperson.
The event, shrouded in secrecy and executed with unprecedented speed, sparked heated debate across the nation.
Critics decried the lack of transparency in delegate selection and the absence of grassroots elections, while NUP supporters defended the move as a strategic necessity to safeguard the party from infiltration by the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM).
So, why did NUP opt for such a “chap chap” conference?
The major reason for the hastily organized conference, that has been given by the party, was the fear of infiltration by the NRM.
Many supporters have argued that the party’s secretive approach was a pragmatic response to “threats of security infiltration and illegal interference” by the ruling party.
Indeed, NRM has a history of employing divide-and-rule tactics to weaken opposition parties. It has sown discord in DP, UPC, and FDC, leading to various factions within the party. Therefore, it could be argued that by limiting advance notice and controlling delegate participation, NUP aimed to minimize the risk of NRM operatives disrupting the process or influencing outcomes.
Secondly, internal dynamics also played a role. The NUP has grappled with factionalism, notably the 2024 split involving former Leader of Opposition Mathias Mpuuga’s formation of the Democratic Alliance, signaling rifts within the party.
This infighting threatened NUP’s cohesion, with some insiders predicting the party’s collapse. The conference’s swift execution allowed Kyagulanyi and his allies to reassert control and present a united front, sidelining dissenting voices.
Third, the broader political context further justified NUP’s urgency. With the 2026 elections looming, the party is under pressure to strengthen its position in a landscape dominated by Museveni’s strategic maneuvers, including efforts to neutralize opposition strongholds like the Buganda kingdom.
NUP’s leadership likely viewed the conference as a preemptive strike to solidify its base and counter Museveni’s preparations for a seventh term.
However, the conference’s opaque delegate selection process drew sharp criticism, especially on social media.
Baker Batte, a journalist, claimed that even some party members were unaware of who the delegates were or how they were chosen. Batte said claims by NUP that they were trying to sidestep the NRM were hollow because Museveni will still find a way of infiltrating the Kavule-based party.
Anthony Natif, a social critic, questioned the legal foundation of the conference, citing the NUP constitution’s requirements for selecting national leaders.
Other critics argued that the absence of grassroots elections, a cornerstone of democratic party structures, undermined NUP’s claims to transparency and inclusivity.
On the balance of things, one can view NUP’s hastily organized delegates’ conference as a pragmatic response to a complex web of challenges.
Yet as the party matures and grows, critics argue that it must develop the ability to balance transparency with strategic caution.
