By Charles Birungi
Nine days after the announcement of the results of Uganda’s general elections of January 15, 2026, the National Unity Platform (NUP) opposition presidential candidate Robert Kyagulanyi Ssentamu crept out of the country and travelled to the United States of America (USA), where he remains holed up to date. This was on January 26, 2026 (NRM Liberation Day). On January 17, 2026, the country’s independent electoral commission had announced the outcome of the elections in which the NUP leader had come a distant second with 24.72% (2,741,238) against the incumbent Yoweri Kaguta Museveni’s decisive majority of 71.65% (7,946,772) of the eligible votes cast. What is more, the opposition party’s overall electoral performance had declined from its unprecedented highs in 2021, registering far fewer victories in the parliamentary and district local council elections, including in their favoured regional bastion of Buganda.
Therefore, Mr. Kyagulanyi’s travel to the US in the immediate aftermath of the elections is not without context. For close to two months until March 18, 2026, when he eventually announced himself in the US, Mr Kyagulanyi had pretended to be inside the country, regularly posting dramatic scenes on X of an allegedly intense cat and mouse chase involving government security agencies. In reality, no government security apparatus was actively looking for him, as indeed, there were never any formal criminal charges pressed against him by the police. However, the bad man’s theatrics (as he often calls himself) served at least two purposes for the NUP leader: (1) to placate the demands of his ardent supporters who demanded that he personally leads them on the streets to reclaim their ‘stolen’ victory as he had promised throughout the campaign period, and (2), to attract sympathy and additional funding and support from his foreign backers. The build-up had involved the NUP leader, alongside some of his leading lieutenants in the party repeatedly inciting violence by his followers against the security forces, claiming the behemoth of radical supporters behind him far outnumbered the entire security machinery of Uganda combined. He also called for a 1-million man march of supporters to invade Kampala on election day, which fortunately never happened. NUP’s Ms. Betty Nambooze (Mukono Municipality MP) went a notch higher, urging supporters not to be afraid of the soldiers and policemen with the horrendous claim that the security forces carried empty guns because the state did not trust them with live ammunition. In a sense, the failure by NUP supporters to follow the blueprint set by their leader meant Mr. Kyagulanyi had to find a way out, which he did by fleeing to San Francisco, California, USA.
Under the tutelage of his diaspora masters in Jeffrey Smith of Vanguard Africa and Dutch based lawyer Robert Amsterdam, the NUP leader in early April this year petitioned the US Senate through the Foreign Relations Committee, seeking the US government’s sanction and by the international community of government of Uganda officials and institutions deemed responsible for “undermining democracy and enabling violence in Uganda.” They specifically sought to advocate for the designation of Ugandan officials allegedly implicated in electoral fraud and human rights violations under the Global Magnitsky Act (2016), a US federal law that authorises the President of the United States to block financial transactions, impose asset freezes and visa bans on foreign individuals and entities involved in corruption and gross human rights abuses.
That notwithstanding, it is a folly that neither NUP nor its leader ever filed a formal complaint in the sovereign courts of Uganda, even for record purposes, to register and seek redress against the gross injustices they believe can only be resolved by the US. They did not file a formal complaint to the East African court of Justice, or to the African Union. Only the US, and its satellites in Europe are in the eyes of Mr. Kyagulanyi the only capable ones to deliver his dream of the Ugandan presidency and obtain justice for his assumed grievances. Shallow and absurd.
According to Mr.Kyagulanyi and his backers, those in Uganda who should be sanctioned by the US include the entire seven-member electoral body led by the chairperson of the commission, Justice Simon Mugenyi Byabakama, deputy chairperson Ms. Aisha Lubega, commission members Peter Emoru, Steven Tashobya, Dr. Kayunga Sallie Simba, Okello Anthony, and Ms. Beinemaryo Caroline. The electoral commission officials are accused of announcing falsified presidential results which Mr. Kyagulanyi claims deviated from independent tallies and polling data. No evidence contradicting the electoral commission official tally of the results is provided. Others that must be sanctioned include the Chief of Defence Forces and Senior Presidential Advisor for Special Operations, General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, the Inspector General of Police Abbas Byakagaba, the commander of the Special Forces Command Major General David Mugisha, the Chief of Defence Intelligence and Security Major General Richard Otto, the Director of Operations Uganda Police Frank Mwesigwa, and the Director Crime Intelligence Uganda Police Major General Christopher Ddamulira. The Director General of the Internal Security Organisation (ISO) Arthur Mugyenyi, the Executive Director of Financial Intelligence Authority Samuel Were Wandera, former Chief Justice Alfonse Owiny Dollo, the Principal Judge Jane Francis Abodo, the Director Public of Prosecutions (DPP) Lino Anguzu, and Maj Emma Kutesa, ‘Presidential Coordinator for Ghetto Affairs, are also mentioned.
Here are three key takeaways: The NUP deserves a more viable and focused leader, not an ill-informed dramatist who treats leadership on the national stage like political theatre, always playing to the gallery. Whereas Mr. Kyagulanyi was successful as a singer and stage performer, he is clearly bereft of basic leadership credentials. The earlier NUP followers recognise the achilles-heel in their party leadership, the better it will be for their overall health and survival. No party deserves a leader who incites lawlessness among the group and then spirits away at the critical moment when they are arrested, straddling capitals in faraway lands eating sausages while swimming at exclusive resorts and beaches.
The second element is that by consenting and assuming their leadership positions in parliament and other elected positions in the country from the outcome of the January elections, NUP essentially ratified and legitimised the electoral process. The logical response if they are dissatisfied with their performance is to mobilise politically, improve their messaging, and avoid misleading the unsuspecting youth into reckless misadventures. That way, a better electoral outcome could materialise for the party in 5-years’ time in 2031.
The last point is that Uganda is a sovereign and independent country with a unique history, social values, and processes in their form and content. This includes democratic contestations, in which there are inbuilt mechanisms to regulate and mitigate that process. Even if as a country we come short or make mistakes in our stated aspirations, it is not the business of foreigners to come and right our wrongs. It is not possible to transplant foreign systems in Uganda. It is the exclusive business of Ugandans to resolve any social, legal, and structural contradictions in their society. These interventions predate colonialism in Uganda, and have been more profound since independence, especially the period 1966 – 1986 when Ugandans endured long periods of state capture, wanton abuse of human rights, and a lack of basic decency and security. Any leader who does not understand this does not deserve to be a leader.
The writer is a Ugandan social and political commentator
