As Uganda’s political landscape evolves, debate has increased over the succession of leadership within the opposition.
These parties have frequently criticised the ruling state resistance movement (NRM) and President Museveni for over 40 years, but questions have been raised about whether opposition leaders are different.
A closer look at the major opposition parties reveals that many of their leaders have been at the helm for a long time.
Democratic President Norbert Mao has led for 15 years, while Jimmy Akena has served as President of the Ugandan People’s Parliament (UPC) for 10 years.
Patrick Ovoy Amliath, leader of the Forum Democrat Change (FDC), has been in office for seven years, while Robert Kyagulanyi, president of National Unity Platform (NUP), has been in charge for five years. Conservative Party (CP) President John Ken Lukiamzi has been in charge for over 20 years, and Superintendent Asmann has led the Judicial Forum (Jeema) for over 15 years.
Despite defending democracy and good governance, these long tenures have sparked concerns about whether the opposition is truly committed to internal democracy, or simply replicating the power retention they are criticizing.
Calling for internal reform
Political analysts argue that internal reform is necessary to ensure a smooth leadership transition.
Dr. Lawrence Zelwanborough, executive director of Interdialogue Interdisciplinary Agency (iPod), believes weak internal structures, rather than individual leaders, are the root of the problem.
Sign up for the AllAfrica newsletter for free
Get the latest African news
success!
Almost finished…
You need to check your email address.
Follow the instructions in the email you sent to complete the process.
error!
There was a problem processing the submission. Please try again later.
“The issue lies in the party constitution, which is not necessarily the leader,” he said.
Professor Rogers Barigayomwe argues that in favor of the parties’ constitutional amendments, introducing period restrictions, and that many opposition leaders have become “career politicians” who prioritize survival over party growth.
“These leaders simply justify their long-term stay of power. If the opposition wants to set an example, they must first practice their sermons by limiting the conditions to their stakeholders,” he said.
However, some within the opposition reject the idea of a time limit. DP Henry Casacca argues that leadership changes can change for themselves.
“Parties need experienced leadership to build strong institutions. Duration restrictions don’t necessarily help,” he explained.
Within the opposition, the NUP took a step towards reform by amending the constitution and introducing period restrictions, but this provision has not yet been officially implemented. The move highlights the ongoing internal struggle between maintaining continuity and ensuring fresh leadership.
As the debate intensifies, important questions remain. Are the Ugandan opposition really committed to democratic ideals, or are they following the same indefinite leadership path as the ruling party? Time tells them whether they accept change or keep holding power indefinitely.
