Erias Nalukoola Luyimbazi has filed an appeal challenging the High Court ruling that nullified his election as Kawempe North Member of Parliament.
In a memorandum of appeal filed before the Court of Appeal in Kampala on Wednesday, Nalukoola raises 14 grounds seeking to overturn the judgment delivered on May 26, 2025, by Justice Bernard Namanya.
The ruling followed a successful election petition by Faridah Nambi Kigongo of the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM), who was the runner-up in the March 13 parliamentary by-election.
The High Court nullified Nalukoola’s victory and ordered a fresh election, citing serious irregularities that substantially affected the final outcome.
Justice Namanya found that the Electoral Commission failed to count, declare, and tally results from 14 polling stations, effectively disenfranchising 16,640 registered voters. Among those affected was the petitioner herself, Faridah Nambi.
The court also faulted Nalukoola for campaigning on polling day at two stations, Mbogo Primary School Playground and Kazo Angola LC1 Office, in violation of the Parliamentary Elections Act.
Nalukoola had been declared the winner with 17,939 votes, while Nambi polled 9,058. Dissatisfied with the result, Nambi petitioned the High Court, accusing Nalukoola of multiple electoral offences including voter bribery, illegal campaigning, and procedural irregularities.
Among her allegations, Nambi claimed that Nalukoola distributed cash to voters, offering 10,000 shillings to Kyemba Muwanguzi Nathan, and 5,000 shillings each to Mawumbe George William and Wamukubira Geoffrey, among others.
The Electoral Commission, represented by its Head of Litigation Eric Sabiiti, dismissed the claims and maintained that the election was conducted in accordance with the law.
However, the judge ruled that the Commission’s failure to account for results from key polling stations, combined with Nalukoola’s conduct, amounted to non-compliance with electoral laws and had a material effect on the results.
In his appeal, Nalukoola argues that the judge erred in both law and fact. He denies campaigning on polling day and claims he was unjustly denied the opportunity to cross-examine 19 witnesses who submitted affidavits in support of Nambi’s petition.
He further contends that the judgment relied on weak and untested affidavit evidence, some of which was hearsay, and that the court ignored binding legal precedents.
Citing landmark cases such as Col. (Rtd) Dr. Kizza Besigye versus Yoweri Museveni in 2001 and 2006, and Opendi and Electoral Commission versus Nyakecho in 2011, Nalukoola argues the ruling was made per incuriam, meaning in ignorance or disregard of the law, which resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
He also faults the judge for shifting the burden of proof onto him, arguing that it was Nambi’s responsibility to demonstrate that any irregularities had a substantial effect on the results.
Nalukoola insists that even if irregularities occurred, they were not significant enough to overturn his overwhelming margin of victory.
He is now asking the Court of Appeal to set aside the High Court decision, reinstate his election, and award him legal costs for both the trial and appellate proceedings. In the alternative, he is requesting a retrial before a different High Court judge.
Meanwhile, the Electoral Commission has indicated it will not appeal the ruling and has begun preparations for a possible by-election in Kawempe North. However, Nalukoola’s appeal keeps the matter active and may delay or reverse the planned vote.
The case is yet to be scheduled for hearing before a panel of three Justices of the Court of Appeal.
English 