The Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) has reiterated its demand for access to Inter-Party Organisation for Dialogue (IPOD) funds, insisting that state financing for political parties is a constitutional right that should not be tied to participation in dialogue summits.
Speaking at the FDC headquarters in Najjanankumbi, Kampala, party spokesperson John Kikonyogo said government funding for political parties is public money, not a tool for rewarding compliance.
He accused the ruling party of attempting to politically isolate dissenting voices by threatening to withhold funds.
“It is taxpayers’ money, not Museveni’s money. We should all benefit from the funding since we are a legally registered political party,” Kikonyogo said.
His remarks follow speculation that parties not actively engaging in IPOD activities, especially its summits, may be excluded from the next tranche of public funding.
Critics say such a move would amount to financial coercion and political exclusion.
FDC has boycotted IPOD summits since 2018, citing a lack of genuine dialogue and state repression under the Public Order Management Act, which it says has been used to stifle opposition political activity.
At the time, the party also raised concerns over broader governance and human rights issues.
“Even when we need the funding, not until our concerns of 2018 are seen to be addressed in the current situation, we cannot attend the IPOD summit. It’s like a photo moment,” Kikonyogo added.
The party’s continued refusal to rejoin IPOD meetings has reignited questions about the purpose and integrity of the dialogue platform, especially ahead of the 2025/2026 electoral cycle.
FDC maintains that dialogue must be meaningful, not symbolic, and that access to public resources should not depend on political alignment.
Opposition leaders and civil society groups have in recent years raised alarm over the structure and functioning of IPOD, saying it has failed to produce tangible reforms and has instead served to legitimise the status quo.
FDC’s latest position is expected to intensify debate on the political financing framework in Uganda and whether participation in government-sanctioned platforms should influence access to funding meant to support multiparty democracy.
As Uganda heads into another politically charged election season, the government and IPOD leadership may face increased pressure to demonstrate neutrality and ensure that no party is punished for dissenting from officially sanctioned spaces.
