The High Court in Kampala will on October 7, 2026, rule on an application seeking to remove 97 affidavits from the record in a petition challenging the election of Kampala Central Member of Parliament Minsa Kabanda Nabbengo.
The affidavits have been challenged by the Electoral Commission, which contends that they were introduced without prior permission from the court and outside the legally prescribed period for filing evidence in an election petition.
The petition was filed by former National Unity Platform parliamentary candidate David Lewis Rubongoya, who is contesting Kabanda Nabbengo’s victory in the January 15, 2026 Kampala Central parliamentary election.
According to the Electoral Commission’s declaration, Kabanda Nabbengo won the election with 22,280 votes, while Rubongoya obtained 18,211 votes, giving her a lead of 4,069 votes.
Rubongoya, however, disputes the outcome and alleges several irregularities, including alteration and addition of votes, omission of polling station results, multiple voting, ballot stuffing, use of pre-ticked ballot papers and intimidation of voters and his polling agents.
He claims that more than 1,335 votes were improperly added to Kabanda Nabbengo’s tally in areas including Nakivubo, Mengo, Kisenyi, Kamwokya II, Old Kampala and Kololo III.
The petitioner also alleges that results involving 3,586 registered voters from seven polling stations were left out of the final tally.
Rubongoya further alleges that security personnel and Kabanda Nabbengo’s supporters took control of some polling stations and entered restricted areas, interfering with his agents and voters during the election.
In addition to challenging the election results, Rubongoya has raised questions about Kabanda Nabbengo’s eligibility, pointing to alleged inconsistencies in her name and academic credentials.
He claims that the name used during her nomination did not match records held by the National Identification and Registration Authority. He also alleges that her Advanced Level-equivalent academic certificate was issued only 15 days before nominations and was presented on nomination day.
During proceedings on Wednesday, Electoral Commission lawyer Steven Kalali asked the court to strike out the 97 affidavits, arguing that they were filed without leave of court.
Kalali told the court that evidence supporting an election petition must be presented within the prescribed statutory period. He said the contested affidavits were filed about three months after the Commission had submitted its response to the petition.
The petition was filed on March 30, 2026, while the Electoral Commission filed its answer on April 7.
According to Kalali, admitting the additional affidavits would unfairly disadvantage the respondents because they would not have an opportunity to amend their responses to address allegations and evidence introduced after their answers had been filed.
He also told the court that some of the affidavits contain allegations involving criminal offences and claims of violence at polling stations.
Kalali clarified that the Commission was not asking the court to terminate the entire petition, but rather to remove the evidence affected by the preliminary objections.
The Commission has also filed a separate application concerning complaints raised over Kabanda Nabbengo’s nomination.
Kalali argued that matters arising before nomination, including questions concerning academic qualifications, fall within the Electoral Commission’s jurisdiction and should have been raised through the appropriate processes before the election rather than being introduced as part of the post-election petition.
Rubongoya’s lawyer, Jude Byamukama, opposed the application, maintaining that the petition itself had been filed within the required period.
Byamukama said the affidavits were filed in June and argued that the respondents had adequate time to examine them before raising their objections.
He asked the court to allow the case to move to the substantive hearing rather than allowing preliminary objections to delay determination of the election dispute.
The lawyer maintained that the evidence presented by Rubongoya would demonstrate that his client was the rightful winner of the Kampala Central seat.
Rubongoya has also sought access to additional electoral records, including scanned copies of declaration of results forms and electronic transmission records from selected polling stations.
Byamukama said the request was intended to clarify discrepancies the petitioner had identified in some declaration of results forms already provided to him.
He told the court that some of the forms contained figures that appeared to have been altered and that obtaining additional copies would help establish whether the alleged discrepancies were genuine.
Byamukama further told court that Rubongoya could consider withdrawing the petition if the additional electoral records disproved his claims.
The Electoral Commission opposed the request. Kalali said the Commission had already provided the relevant declaration of results forms and asked the court to first dispose of the interlocutory applications before allowing the main petition to proceed.
Kabanda Nabbengo’s lawyer, Ambrose Tebyasa, also opposed the petitioner’s request to proceed directly to the substantive hearing.
Tebyasa argued that Rubongoya was still seeking additional evidence several months after filing the petition and said the court should first determine whether the disputed affidavits were properly before it.
He said the respondents needed clarity on the evidence that would form part of the court record before preparing for the substantive hearing.
Justice Flavia Nabakooza ruled that the court would first determine the interlocutory applications arising from the petition, except for matters relating to withdrawal of the case.
The judge said hearing the substantive petition before resolving challenges to some of the affidavits could create uncertainty over which evidence was properly before the court.
On the request for additional scanned electoral documents, Justice Nabakooza found that the documents already on the court record were sufficient unless the petitioner could demonstrate that the copies supplied were not genuine.
The court consequently fixed October 7, 2026, for the ruling on the preliminary applications.
Rubongoya is seeking an order nullifying Kabanda Nabbengo’s election and either declaring him the rightful winner or directing that a fresh election be conducted in Kampala Central.
English 