A fresh political storm is brewing online after activist and academic Dr. Stella Nyanzi launched a scathing attack on the National Unity Platform (NUP) over its recent decision to rejoin the Inter-Party Organisation for Dialogue (IPOD), a move she branded a “humiliating U-turn.”
In a characteristically blunt post on X (formerly Twitter), Nyanzi accused the leading opposition party of hypocrisy, claiming they had swallowed their cold vomit.
“After years of posturing as being too clean to take any dirty money, @NUP_Ug swallowed its cold vomit, got onto its knees & paws and crawled back to IPOD to beg to sign an MoU for a cut of money,” she posted. Directing her jab at NUP’s Secretary-General David Lewis Rubongoya, she added: “What does chewing your cold stinking vomit taste like? NUP, wagwan?”
Nyanzi’s comments set off a flurry of furious reactions from NUP supporters, many of whom rushed to defend their party and counter her accusations.
The party, which had previously distanced itself from IPOD, often criticizing it as a compromised platform favoring the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM), quietly signaled its intention to engage with the dialogue framework earlier this month, drawing both surprise and scrutiny.
One user, @UgandanLawyer, dismissed Nyanzi’s criticism as politically motivated, pointing to her loss in the 2021 Kampala Woman MP race. “Your hatred for NUP because it resoundingly trounced you in the 2021 Kampala Woman MP elections should not spread fake news and wrong information,” the user wrote. “If anything, NUP is entitled to the funds by law as and when it chooses to.”
Other supporters attempted to clarify the legal and political context behind NUP’s move. @SamuelHenrys argued that public funding for political parties is standard practice globally and is often tied to election performance, while @ssemanda_tonny offered a more detailed legal explanation. He noted that recent amendments to the law had effectively made participation in IPOD a requirement for political parties seeking state funding, particularly those represented in Parliament.
“IPOD is no longer just a civil organization. The law was amended to legalize it and make it mandatory for any party with MPs to be part of it in order to access public funding,” he explained. “NUP had no choice. It must follow the law, unless you’re telling us it’s not a legally registered Ugandan party.”
Others accused Nyanzi of fostering division rather than advocating for genuine change. “I love you, Dr. Stella,” wrote @khermanshasha20, “but this incessant attack on NUP and everything about it, and then claiming you also want change, I wonder whose side you’re on.”
Some just welcomed the debate, suggesting that Nyanzi’s remarks, however harsh, raised valid concerns about political accountability and ideological consistency.
“This is not an attack, it’s a question that requires an answer,” wrote @Magnific_lloyd. “If your initial stand was ‘I want nothing to do with IPOD,’ then people have every right to ask why you’re now engaging with it.”
