The High Court in Wakiso has upheld a witness summons requiring two Uganda Police forensic officers to appear and explain their findings on disputed Declaration of Results (DR) forms in the Busiro East parliamentary election petition.
Justice George Okello dismissed an objection by lawyers representing petitioner Abdul Kiyimba, who had challenged the Deputy Registrar’s decision to summon the officers. Their forensic analysis is central to the defence of the incumbent MP, Emmanuel Matovu Magoola, who is contesting Kiyimba’s challenge to his election.
He directed the two officers, Clare Hashikamana and Erisa Ssebuwufu of the Uganda Police Forensics Department, to appear before the court as required under the summons issued on October 19, 2026.
The judge, however, deferred a decision on how their evidence would be received, saying the court would first hear from the officers and the parties before determining whether they should testify through affidavits, give oral evidence confined to their report or adopt another procedure.
The dispute arose after Magoola’s lawyers, led by Abdul Katuntu, submitted more than 130 DR forms relied upon by Kiyimba to the Directorate of Forensic Services for examination. The officers indicated that they would only present their findings and appear in court upon receiving formal summons.
Although the court had earlier directed Magoola’s legal team to file affidavits from the forensic experts by October 22, the officers had not done so. A request for witness summons was subsequently made to the Deputy Registrar, leading to their issuance.
Kiyimba’s lawyers, led by Kalule Ahmed Mukasa, argued that the Deputy Registrar lacked the authority to issue the summons without first allowing them to respond. They also questioned the timing of the summons and objected to the possible introduction of the forensic report without supporting affidavits.
Justice Okello rejected the arguments, explaining that the issuance of witness summons falls within the Deputy Registrar’s administrative powers under the Civil Procedure Rules, as amended, particularly Form 14B, which governs the attendance of witnesses. He noted that such procedural matters are ordinarily handled by registrars rather than judges.
The judge also observed that the petitioner remained free to commission an independent forensic examination and produce a counter-report.
“The oral testimony of an expert witness, if allowed, can only be confined to the report that he or she prepared. Nothing stops a petitioner from preparing a counter-report, even without any evidence being lodged by the two officers,” he said.
He added that objections concerning the admissibility and propriety of the forensic report, as well as the possibility of oral testimony, could only be determined after the officers had appeared and explained their position.
The petition, filed by Kiyimba, a National Resistance Movement (NRM) candidate, challenges Magoola’s victory in the January 2026 parliamentary elections. The Electoral Commission declared Magoola, who contested as an independent candidate with backing from the National Unity Platform (NUP), the winner with 45,625 votes against Kiyimba’s 28,499.
Kiyimba maintains that a proper tally of certified DR forms would show that he won the election. Magoola, on the other hand, alleges irregularities and possible forgeries in some of the forms submitted by the petitioner. The disputed forms have consequently become central to the petition, with both sides relying on their authenticity and accuracy to support their respective claims.
However, the Electoral Commission, which is also a respondent in the case, has not filed the DR forms in its custody, despite having relied on them to declare the election results. Its response to the petition was submitted without annexures or copies of the forms.
At an earlier hearing, Justice Okello questioned the commission’s lawyer, Eric Sabiiti, over the failure to produce the documents, given their importance to the dispute. He said the court needed the commission’s copies to compare them with the sets held by Kiyimba and Magoola.
Although Sabiiti subsequently offered to produce all the forms still in the commission’s custody, the judge expressed concern that the integrity of the records could no longer be guaranteed.
Following Thursday’s ruling, the court adjourned the matter to Friday, October 30, 2026, when the two forensic officers are expected to appear.
English 