Claiming that the Supreme Court was in Museveni’s pocket, Kyagulanyi said: “We are taking the case to the Court of the People”.

Kyagulanyi’s lawyers were a day late in filing affidavits in support of his case, so the court rejected them. That – and the fact that judges refused to recuse themselves due to their ties to the ruling National Resistance Movement – led him to judge that the court was unlikely to give him the hearing he felt he deserved.

He and his allies were claiming that the nationwide 14 January vote was plagued with ballot stuffing and voter intimidation. Activists pointed out anomalies, like 409 polling stations where everyone who was registered voted.

The electoral commission declared Museveni the winner with 58.6% of the vote compared to Kyagulanyi’s 34.8%, and the oppositionist accused the Supreme Court’s judges of “unprecedented bias, partiality and double standards.”

Internal divisions

The NUP was divided about whether to go the legal route in the first place, with many arguing that the courts would never overturn a Museveni victory.

Kyagulanyi explained his original reasoning: “But, again, there was also another school of thought, which we agreed with, that much as the judiciary has been reduced to a mockery, it’s an institution that we believe in while we might not believe in the people that are superintending over it.”

Debates are ongoing about the way forward.

What next?

Joel Ssenyonyi, the spokesperson of Kyagulanyi’s National Unity Platform (NUP), says that in the coming days Kyagulanyi will explain what he intends to achieve from the “Court of the People”.

Kyagulanyi sought every opportunity – at home and abroad – to paint Museveni as a dictator and violator of human rights.

• In January, he filed a rights abuse case at the International Criminal Court.
• He submitted a petition at United Nations Human Rights Commission office in Kampala on 17 February, calling for release of his supporters who were kidnapped before and after election.

Soldiers blocked the road as Kyagulanyi and supporters went to the UN office. The troops injured several journalists who were covering the event. An army court hastily sentenced six soldiers to three months for assaulting the journalists.

The security forces attacked Kyagulanyi and his supporters out on the campaign trail. In response in February, he showed off his new armoured vehicle to complement his helmet and bullet-proof vest. He has not recognised Museveni’s January electoral win.

Possible strategies under discussion include the following:

• Street protests, but some in the party are wary of risking people’s lives in the face of state repression and violence.
• Increasing international pressure on the Museveni regime in the hope of isolating his government.
• Talks with the government to seek a compromise solution to the Museveni succession.

The public option

Will the “Court of the People” change anything?

Moses Khisa, a political scientist at North Carolina State University in the US, says Ugandans are well aware of the case against Museveni.

In 2016, Besigye did about as well as Kyagulanyi did in 2021, garnering 35.6% of the vote. Besigye’s experiences could provide lessons for Kyagulanyi and the NUP:

• Besigye did not recognise Museveni’s win in 2016.
• Besigye swore himself as president after 2016 vote.
• He has been running a peoples’ government – with ministers – that promised to reclaim the people’s victory.

Fred Goloba Mutebi, a political scientist based in Kampala, also argues that launching protests and other similar activities will not shift the dial much, as there is already high public awareness of the Museveni regime’s weaknesses.

Mutebi argues that Kyagulanyi and his allies should focus on strengthening his nascent political party by establishing presence across the country, recruiting members and popularising its beliefs. The “NUP was voted because it was seen as a party giving Museveni a headache. It was not known. They should be focus on telling the public what they stand for,” he says.