The Forum for Democratic Change, Uganda’s biggest opposition political party by parliamentary representation, ended its first of three likely national conferences before the 2016 General Election without addressing a festering disagreement over how Mugisha Muntu, its president, has led it thus far.

This row, some party officials fear, is hurting FDC’s public image, weakening its front and scattering its efforts to galvanise and take advantage of the internal turmoil within the ruling NRM party ahead of the presidential poll.

While it may appear the party lost an opportunity to openly and democratically arrest a potentially damaging situation, party officials said the decision to keep the matter away from the main agenda was to minimise the potential distraction it might have caused to the purpose the conference was convened.

“We had planned the conference a long time ago before these sentiments came up and we decided to stick to the programme knowing that there are other forums where such issues can be addressed,” said John Kikonyogo, the party spokesperson.

“It was more important to talk about the proposed constitutional amendments and get done with them once and for all; If you start putting other issues on the agenda, there is the danger that people may rush through everything else and that wouldn’t serve us well.”

Ahead of the conference, which convened on Friday, December 5, at the Mandela National Stadium and drew over 1,000 participants, three top FDC officials resigned, questioning the “calm, laidback and disengaged way” in which Mr Muntu, a retired Major General, was leading the party.

The three are: Sam Akaki, formerly the party’s representative in the UK and the EU, Jack Sabiiti and Nandala Mafabi, its treasurer and deputy respectively.

“Communication style matters in politics anywhere, more so in Uganda, where, thanks to our nature and nurture, people have not been impressed by reticent leaders such as Ben Kiwanuka, Yusuf Lule and Tito Okello,” wrote Mr Akaki in his resignation letter to Muntu in which he criticised him for not moving the party any inch forward since he took over its leadership.

The anti-Muntu camp says his leadership style numbed FDC’s vibrancy, affected how the public perceives it and, to some extent, compromised its sources of funding.

READ: To beat NRM under the current power structure is a tall order

This discontent is drawn largely from comparisons made between Muntu’s reign and that of Dr Kizza Besigye, a persistent, charismatic and fiery politician who gave the party the forceful character it became identified with over the 10 years that he led it.

Dr Besigye stepped down in 2012, two years before the end of his term, to allow his successor enough time to establish him or herself. Yet through political activism he took up afterwards, he has remained a touring political figure who has tended to overshadow his successor.

“Besigye was strong and took many risks that largely brought up this party to where it is. People admire him for that but are not willing or ready to emulate him,” said a party official who works at its Secretariat.

READ: Will Besigye bounce back to navigate FDC out of crisis?
But according to Wafula Oguttu, who leads the opposition in parliament, no two people can be the same and that style should not be a measure of assessing performance.

“FDC’s current leadership should be seen and judged by its works. FDC is leading in parliament. Aren’t we working? FDC went into the Amuru by-election and won not just the parliamentary seat but those of councillors too. FDC has been involved in pushing for electoral and constitutional reforms. So, where are we failing?” said Mr Wafula.

“What is not there or perhaps not working well are the party structures. This is explained by a loss of interest in some of our members, death of others, and some were poached by the NRM in ways we had no control over.”

Although the calm and cautious approach that the FDC operates by reflects the character of Muntu as an individual, the decision to make it the party’s fresh direction was consensual, and was made through its top decision making bodies, according to a source close to the former army commander.

“After the 2011 elections, in the course of analysing the party’s performance, there was a general feeling within that it needed to change tack from being overly confrontational to more engagement because the aggressive way seemed not to be working for us,” said the source.

“Some people felt it was scary to some people who would otherwise have voted for us and the regime as well therefore giving it every reason not to relinquish power. It was then agreed that we needed to tone down.”

FDC suffered a slump in the last elections when it tallied 26.01 per cent against 37.39 per cent it garnered in the 2006 elections. This performance rattled the party’s top ranks and some insiders say, largely informed Besigye’s decision to prematurely step down as its leader.

READ: Polls over, FDC must now reknit fractured ranks

Muntu has led a disgruntled FDC ship ever since his election on November 22, 2012. He spent nearly the entire 2013 trying to reconcile him with Nandala, whom he beat to the presidency by only 32 votes, and holding together a party that on several occasions came close to splitting.