National Unity Platform (NUP) leader Robert Kyagulanyi Ssentamu — popularly known as Bobi Wine — has publicly criticized Uganda’s religious leadership for their recent engagement with his family. Speaking from the United States at the Onero Institute, Kyagulanyi expressed deep disappointment in religious figures who visited his home in Kampala during a time of intense pressure on his family.
According to Kyagulanyi, the visit by leaders of the Inter‑Religious Council of Uganda — including Bishop Kazimba Sserwada — did not bring comfort or encouragement to his wife and children. Instead, he said, it left them feeling disheartened at a moment when they needed hope.
The visit came at a time when Barbie Itungo Kyagulanyi, Bobi Wine’s wife, and their children were reportedly under heavy security restrictions. Confined to their home, the family faced limited access to food, visitors, and freedom of movement, making the presence of religious leaders especially significant — or so they had hoped.
In his remarks, Kyagulanyi said, “When Bishop Kazimba, Sserwada and other religious leaders went into my house, they told Barbie to tell me not to destabilize the country.” Rather than offering moral support or encouragement, the visitors allegedly delivered warnings against protest and dissent.
Bobi Wine said that the religious leaders also asked his wife whether he would be willing to engage in talks with President Yoweri Museveni so that the government could “forgive” him and his team. According to Kyagulanyi, this line of questioning only deepened his family’s disappointment.
“This was not the message my wife needed at that time,” Kyagulanyi said. “We were hoping for comfort, prayer, and moral support. Instead, we were faced with counsel that seemed to align more with the government’s talking points than with the struggles of the people.”
The Inter‑Religious Council of Uganda, led by Bishop Kazimba, is one of the country’s most respected religious bodies, representing various faiths and charged with moral guidance. Its leaders are typically expected to offer spiritual support, especially during times of social or political crisis.
But Bobi Wine argues that the response from the council, in this case, fell short of what was expected. “Religious leaders are meant to stand with the oppressed,” he told his audience in the United States. “They are meant to offer solace and wisdom, not warnings that echo government concerns.”
He said that instead of bolstering his family’s spirit, the visit placed additional psychological and emotional stress on a household already dealing with confinement and uncertainty. “My wife needed hope,” Kyagulanyi said. “She needed prayerful encouragement and reassurance. What she got was caution and pressure.”
The criticism from Bobi Wine comes amid broader tensions between his political movement and Uganda’s government, which have heightened since the election period. Statements like his underscore growing frustration among opposition supporters over how state and non‑state actors have responded to their challenges.
Political analysts say that Bobi Wine’s comments reflect a deeper sense of alienation felt by many of his supporters, particularly those who expected religious institutions to speak up against what they describe as government overreach and repression.
Some analysts have noted that religious leaders often try to position themselves as neutral mediators during political turmoil. However, Kyagulanyi’s remarks suggest that many in the opposition view this neutrality as a form of moral failure.
Bobi Wine also questioned the sincerity of the religious visit, suggesting it may have been motivated less by genuine concern and more by a desire to align with government preferences. “When spiritual leaders start echoing government language, it raises serious questions about whose side they are on,” he said.
The NUP leader’s speech in the United States drew applause from supporters who see his stance as courageous and principled. International observers have also taken note of his willingness to publicly confront institutions that are typically regarded with respect and reverence.
Yet critics of Kyagulanyi argue that his framing of the event may overlook the complexities involved in religious engagement with political crises. Some defenders of the Inter‑Religious Council say that their visit was meant to de‑escalate tensions and encourage dialogue, not to chastise his family.
In response to Bobi Wine’s criticism, there has not yet been an official statement from Bishop Kazimba or the Inter‑Religious Council defending or explaining their actions during the visit. Religious observers say such a response could help clarify intentions and ease the controversy.
Meanwhile, Bobi Wine’s allies have reiterated his point that religious leaders should adopt firmer moral stances against oppression, rather than aligning with political power — especially when people’s liberties are perceived to be at stake.
“The role of spiritual leadership is not to protect political systems,” one ally stated. “It is to protect the people and offer courage to those who suffer.”
As Bobi Wine continues his speaking tour and engages with international audiences, his criticism of the Inter‑Religious Council adds another layer to the ongoing political narrative in Uganda.
Whether the council responds or chooses to remain silent, the incident has sparked broader discussions around the role of religious leadership in times of political conflict, and what moral responsibility such leaders should bear.
For now, Kyagulanyi insists that his disappointment remains, not just with religious figures, but with any institution he believes has failed to stand with the oppressed at a critical moment in Uganda’s history.
