Magogo denies blocking opponents from running against him.

2 mins read

Read time : 



By Alex Bossa

With little outcome expected of the 21st August 2021 Federation of Uganda Football Association (FUFA) General Assembly in Mbale, sole candidate and incumbent FUFA  president Eng. Moses Magogo has replied back to those who have criticized him for closing the door  on both Allan Ssewanya and Mujib Kasule to run against him.

The two opponents failed to return nomination forms, citing that they were blocked by the incumbent in acquiring signatures. It should be noted that for one to be approved to run for the top job in Uganda’s biggest sport, you have to get nominations from 3 categories which include the special group, Premier League and the regional delegates.

On addressing listeners on a local radio talk show, Magogo was quick to point out that his opponents were not prepared for the challenge. He claimed that the rules that were set up in 2012 were in line with the Federation of International Football Association guidelines on elections have never changed and these rules are used by all FIFA members

For starters, those who were at the heart of drawing in what is considered as unfair rules included Eng. Moses Magogo, Mujib Kasule, Rogers Byamukama and Ojok Odor.

Eng. Moses Magogo’s opponents criticized him for bribing and threatening the delegates who were willing to sign for them but Magogo defended himself that out of the 34 FUFA members, one is only required to be nominated by 3 members where by both the Chairman and CEO from a given region are required to sign for you which his competitors failed.

He went ahead to admit that the secretaries are employed bFUFA but it’s their duty to sign on those forms once the chairman has already signed.

Eng. Moses Magogo who claimed that Hon.Allan Ssewanyana cannot mount a serious challenge and that Mujib Kasule was not prepared was declared unopposed for the August elections after Allan Ssewanyana failed to submit his forms despite being added extra days while Mujib’s petition was denied due to lack of evidence. 

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments