President Museveni has publicly fired back at veteran journalist and political commentator Andrew Mwenda over a controversial column in which the journalist argued that the President’s advanced age was placing Uganda’s future at risk.
In a lengthy and sharply worded response released more than a month after Mwenda’s April 20 column titled “When old age strikes a leader,” Museveni rejected claims that he had become intellectually weak or incapable of making sound judgments, declaring that he remained ready to defend himself “with the Bible, the AK-47 and the pen.”
“Mr Mwenda, thank you for declaring me senile and incapable of judging right,” Museveni wrote.
“You will, however, discover that at 82, I am still able to defend Uganda and myself with the Bible, the AK-47 and the pen.”
The explosive exchange has opened a rare public rupture between Museveni and Mwenda, who had morphed from one of the fiercest critics of the President into one widely seen as one of his most vocal intellectual defenders.
In his column published in The Independent, Mwenda accused Museveni of increasingly approving dubious multi-billion-shilling projects pushed by “conmen” and politically connected businessmen while refusing to listen to contrary advice from technocrats and cabinet members.
Mwenda particularly questioned government backing for businessman David Ssenfuka, whom he described as “actually a conman,” claiming he had convinced Museveni to support a proposal for a pharmaceutical plant after allegedly telling the President he possessed cures for cancer and diabetes.
“He told our president that he had invented a medicine that cures cancer and diabetes,” Mwenda wrote.
“He then suggested to the president that the government of Uganda give him capital worth $1 billion to build a world-class pharmaceutical plant.”
Mwenda claimed several people familiar with Ssenfuka had warned that he was not a credible businessman and alleged Museveni ignored advice cautioning against the proposal.
But Museveni dismissed Mwenda’s claims as lazy journalism and challenged him to physically inspect the projects and interview beneficiaries.
“You are supposed to be a journalist. Why do you not interview these ‘conmen’ such as Magoola, Ssenfuka, etc.?” Museveni asked.
“They are here in Uganda. They are where you can reach them and even the assets they have put on the ground. Visit Magoola’s factories in Matugga and Kamuli. Interview people who testify that they were cured by Ssenfuka’s mixture of herbs. Visit Tugume’s factory in Ntungamo. Visit Professor Muranga’s banana project in Bushenyi.”
Museveni further accused Mwenda of undermining Uganda’s industrialisation efforts and promoting what he described as neo-colonial economic thinking that confines Africa to exporting raw materials rather than processed products.
“You are ashamed and you dare not talk about the Kiira Motors because that is a shamer of the neo-colonial agents like Mwenda,” Museveni wrote.
“The do-nothingers like Andrew Mwenda, always running around noisily telling lies, claim to save government money from loss-making projects. Yet, they happily cohabit peacefully and gleefully with the neo-colonial status quo of confining Africa to producing and exporting unprocessed raw materials where we lose so much value.”
Mwenda, calling Senfuka a "conman", said the herbalist had sought to gain Shs300 million from the taxpayer by selling his herbal remedies as inventions. However, the Nile Post understands Senfuka had only gone to the President after getting million-dollar offers from American pharmacists to sell his herbal works.
Senfuka reportedly met Mr Museveni in Mbale in the company of the Americans who were offering a bumper $300 million (Shs1 trillion) who her herbal invention.
The herbalist, who treats diabetes and cancer, had decided to seek audience with the President because the amount of money involved would require such approval to roll. It had taken hours for the President to convince Senfuka to keep his remedies local.
Writing in his brittle rebuttal, the President defended his government’s aggressive push toward industrialisation, citing Uganda’s growing mineral refining, dairy, coffee, steel, and agro-processing sectors as evidence that state-backed investment was paying off.
He argued that Uganda had already begun benefitting from policies that prioritise value addition, particularly in the gold sector.
“The stubborn old man of Uganda who is senile banned the export of all unprocessed minerals,” Museveni said sarcastically.
“There are now 10 gold refineries in Uganda. The gold exports from Uganda have now hit USD 7.48 billion.”
Museveni also referenced Uganda’s coffee exports, saying the country was earning far less from raw exports than it would from processed products.
“A kilogram of processed coffee goes for USD 25 to USD 40 depending on the brands and yet for raw materials we get USD 2.5 per kilogram,” he wrote.
Mwenda’s original article had criticised what he described as a growing pattern of risky government spending concentrated in politically connected projects.
He cited state support for Mathias Magoola and Dei Biopharma, claiming Museveni had pressured cabinet to approve hundreds of millions of dollars in funding despite concerns about viability and accountability.
“With this tall tale, Magoola convinced Museveni to force the government of Uganda to give him Shs 735 billion ($200m) for this venture,” Mwenda wrote.
He also questioned state financing for the Lubowa International Specialised Hospital project linked to Italian investor Enrica Pinetti, Roko Construction, Atiak Sugar Factory, and a coffee processing facility owned by businessman Nelson Tugume.
Mwenda argued that although industrial policy itself was necessary, Museveni’s approach had become reckless because of age-related decline and increasing stubbornness.
“At 81 years and having worked all his last 40 years under conditions of extreme pressure, the intellect is giving way to stubbornness,” Mwenda wrote.
“As a result, project proposals of clearly dubious value get his approval without guardrails within the state to protect the national interest.”
The columnist further claimed that many people close to power had realised Museveni was increasingly unable to monitor multiple sectors effectively and were exploiting that weakness for personal gain.
“Seeing that he is being duped right, left and centre by those closest to him, he just abandons the struggle,” Mwenda wrote.
Museveni, however, portrayed the criticism as part of a wider campaign by people uncomfortable with Uganda’s economic transformation and rising growth figures.
“What could be the real motive of Andrew Mwenda of externalising in the social media our internal discussions, including the Cabinet?” Museveni asked.
“It is to scare away our partners because the likes of Andrew Mwenda are worried by the success of Uganda’s economy, now growing at 6.3% per annum.”
The President went further, reviving old battles over Uganda’s electricity sector and accusing Mwenda of previously sabotaging the Bujagali hydropower project.
“This is not the first time Mwenda has done it,” Museveni wrote.
“He was part of those that caused load-shedding in Uganda in 2005 and onwards, having sabotaged our partnership with AES on the Bujagali Electricity Project.”
Museveni used the response not only to defend his judgment but also to reinforce his long-held ideological themes of patriotism, Pan-Africanism, state-led transformation, and resistance to foreign influence.
“As a freedom fighter, I am always stubbornly standing for patriotism, Pan-Africanism, socio-economic transformation and democracy,” he wrote.
“I am never swayed by traitors and foreign agents.”
The President also invoked his guerrilla war experience, arguing that failure was part of any transformation process.
“We attacked Kabamba two times, not succeeding. On the third attempt, we had great success,” Museveni wrote.
“Failure from which we learn lessons, is success.”
In one of the most personal sections of the statement, Museveni accused Mwenda of becoming “omwinazi” — an ill-wisher — likening him to someone discouraging a child learning how to walk.
“With the Banyankore, if a baby is learning how to walk and falling down, we encourage the baby,” Museveni wrote.
“We do not do what Mwenda is doing by saying: ‘The child will never stand.’ You, then, become omwinazi.”
He ended the statement with his trademark revolutionary slogan: “Aluta Continua. Victory is certain.”
The clash now lays bare an increasingly public ideological and political divide between Museveni and one of the country’s most influential political commentators, in a debate that goes beyond personality and touches on the direction of Uganda’s economy, governance, industrialisation strategy, and the question of leadership longevity.