NUP Seeks to Join IPOD Amid Legal Challenge and Accusations of Financial Motives
KAMPALA – The National Unity Platform (NUP) has formally applied to join the Inter-Party Organisation for Dialogue (IPOD), a move that has ignited a political debate over the party’s motivations.
In a letter dated October 7, 2025, addressed to the Secretary of the IPOD Council, NUP Secretary General David Lewis Rubakovaya stated that while the party is challenging the recent amendment to the Political Parties and Organisations Act in the Constitutional Court, it is “cognizant that it is the current and binding law.”
The amendment mandates that all parties in the National Consultative Forum must be members of either IPOD or the Forum for Non-Represented Political Parties. Citing this legal obligation, the NUP has expressed its intention to “sign the MOU” with IPOD as it awaits the court’s decision.
This procedural move, however, has been met with sharp criticism from government supporters. In a social media post, commentator Faruk Kirunda accused the opposition party of being driven by financial incentives rather than principle.
“The Bible says: ‘For the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil’,” Kirunda posted. “NUP realized the folly of defying established legal provisions and IPOD programs after seeing a huge cheque issued by the Government to compliant parties, hence this change of heart. It’s a struggle for money, less of the principle of dialogue.”
This accusation references government funding that is disbursed to political parties which comply with the IPOD framework.
The development places the NUP in a complex position. By joining IPOD under legal protest, the party aims to comply with the current law while simultaneously fighting it in court. Nonetheless, the move has provided ammunition for its critics, who frame it as a capitulation motivated by financial gain, potentially creating a perception challenge for the opposition party among its base.
As of now, the NUP has not publicly responded to the allegations regarding its financial motivations. The focus remains on the party’s official stance: adhering to the law as it exists today while seeking to overturn it tomorrow.
