The Forum for Democratic Change (FDC), one of Uganda's most prominent opposition parties, has recently been embroiled in a significant internal conflict that has given rise to a factional split.

The Katonga faction, a group of senior members who were once central to the party's leadership, announced their intention to dissolve the FDC and establish a new political entity, the People's Front for Freedom (PFF). However, despite their assertions, there are several compelling reasons why the Katonga faction may not have the legal or practical standing to dissolve the FDC.

1.Legal Authority and Party Constitution

One of the primary arguments against the dissolution of the FDC by the Katonga faction lies in the legal framework governing political parties in Uganda. According to the FDC's constitution, the authority to call for a National Delegates Conference—a key forum where decisions such as dissolution could be made—is vested in the party's National Chairman. Currently, the leadership of the FDC, recognized by the party's constitution and the Electoral Commission, resides with the Najjanankumbi faction.

This faction, following a series of court rulings, successfully held a National Delegates Conference on October 6, 2023, where new party leaders were elected, further solidifying its legal standing.

The Katonga faction's attempt to hold an alternative delegates conference was deemed illegal by a court ruling from High Court Judge Esther Nambayo in September 2023, which issued an interim injunction blocking the conference. Despite this, the Katonga group proceeded with their meeting, but it holds no legal weight due to the court's prior intervention.

The legal standing of the Najjanankumbi faction was further reinforced when Justice Musa Ssekaana dismissed a petition from the Katonga faction, allowing the officially sanctioned National Delegates Conference to proceed.

Given these legal precedents, it is clear that the Katonga faction does not possess the authority to dissolve the FDC. The party's constitution, as upheld by the courts, recognizes the Najjanankumbi faction's leadership and their decisions as legitimate. Without control over the official party structures, the Katonga faction's efforts to dissolve the FDC are legally untenable.

2.Electoral Commission Recognition

Another critical factor undermining the Katonga faction's ability to dissolve the FDC is the recognition of the party's leadership by Uganda's Electoral Commission. Following the election of new leaders at the Najjanankumbi-led National Delegates Conference, the names of these officials were submitted to the Electoral Commission for certification. This move effectively legitimizes the current leadership in the eyes of the law and the electoral body, further entrenching their control over the party.

The Electoral Commission's role is crucial because it is the regulatory authority responsible for overseeing political parties' activities, including any potential dissolution.

The fact that the Najjanankumbi faction has been certified by this body indicates that, from a legal standpoint, they are the legitimate stewards of the FDC. Consequently, any attempt by the Katonga faction to dissolve the party without the endorsement of the Electoral Commission would be considered null and void.

3.Political and Organizational Challenges

Beyond the legal hurdles, the Katonga faction faces significant political and organizational challenges that make the dissolution of the FDC impractical. The FDC has a robust national presence, with established structures across Uganda, including district branches, youth wings, and other affiliated groups. These structures are loyal to the recognized leadership at Najjanankumbi, which complicates any effort by the Katonga faction to assert control over the party.

Moreover, the FDC's identity and brand have been built over years of political struggle, positioning it as the main opposition force against President Museveni's government. The party has garnered substantial grassroots support, which is unlikely to shift allegiance overnight to a new political entity like the PFF. The dissolution of a party with such deep roots in Uganda's political landscape would require more than just a factional declaration; it would necessitate widespread consensus within the party ranks, which the Katonga group currently lacks.

4.Precedents and Historical Context

The FDC has experienced factional splits in the past, notably when key figures like General Mugisha Muntu left to form the Alliance for National Transformation (ANT). However, these splits did not lead to the dissolution of the FDC; instead, they resulted in the creation of new political entities while the FDC continued to operate and contest elections. This historical precedent suggests that while factions may break away to form new parties, they do not have the capacity to dissolve the FDC unless they have overwhelming support within the party's official structures.

The current situation mirrors these past events. While the Katonga faction has made moves to reserve a new party name, colors, and slogan, these steps indicate a departure from the FDC rather than an outright dissolution. If history is any guide, the FDC will continue to function as a political party despite the formation of the PFF, just as it did after previous splits.

In conclusion, the Katonga faction's attempt to dissolve the FDC faces insurmountable legal, political, and organizational challenges.

The party's constitution, reinforced by court rulings, places the power to make such a decision in the hands of the recognized leadership at Najjanankumbi. The Electoral Commission's certification of this leadership further cements their authority over the party. Additionally, the FDC's extensive national structures and historical resilience suggest that the party will survive this latest factional split, just as it has in the past. While the Katonga faction may proceed with their new political venture, the dissolution of the FDC remains beyond their reach.