The High Court in Wakiso has struck out an amended election petition challenging the election of Kira Municipality MP George Musisi, ruling that parliamentary election petitions cannot be amended after filing.
Justice George Okello ruled that the amendment filed by petitioner Daniel Kananura on April 7, 2026, was legally incompetent because the law does not provide for the amendment of parliamentary election petitions. However, the judge ordered that Kananura’s original petition remains valid and will proceed to trial.
Kananura had challenged Musisi’s election in Election Petition No. 003 of 2026 after the Electoral Commission declared and gazetted Musisi as the Member of Parliament for Kira Municipality. The election was held on January 15, 2026.
According to the Electoral Commission, Musisi won the election with 21,561 votes, followed by Ssemuju Nganda Ibrahim with 14,685 votes, while Kananura came third with 6,927 votes. Musisi was gazetted as the winner on March 2, 2026.
Kananura filed his petition on March 31, 2026, and served it on April 7. On the same day, he filed an amended petition, prompting Musisi and the Electoral Commission to separately apply to have the amended petition struck out.
The two applications, Miscellaneous Application No. 048 of 2026 filed by Musisi and Miscellaneous Application No. 069 of 2026 filed by the Electoral Commission, were consolidated on September 23 after the parties agreed that they raised a common question of law.
Musisi argued that the amended petition was filed outside the statutory period and introduced new matters that altered the original petition. He asked court to proceed with the original petition.
The Electoral Commission similarly argued that the amended petition was time barred and contended that once the original petition was amended, it ceased to exist and was replaced by the amended version.
Kananura, however, argued that the amendment was lawful and had been made within the period allowed for amending pleadings without leave of court. He maintained that the amendment did not introduce a new cause of action because it continued to challenge Musisi’s election as Kira Municipality MP.
He also told court that mistakes and omissions by his former lawyers had prompted him to instruct new lawyers, Praxlex Advocates, and that it was in the interests of justice for the court to validate the amended petition.
One of the key changes in the amended petition concerned the election results. Kananura alleged that the results gazetted by the Electoral Commission differed from those contained in the Return Form for Transmission of Results.
In the amended petition, he claimed that the Gazette showed him with 7,799 votes and Musisi with 24,484 votes, while alleging that the figures differed from those in the return forms. He further alleged that the discrepancy was evidence that results had been altered to give Musisi a large winning margin.
Justice Okello, however, rejected Kananura’s argument that ordinary civil procedure rules could be applied to allow the amendment.
The judge relied heavily on Supreme Court precedent, particularly the decision in Kyagulanyi Ssentamu Robert v Yoweri Museveni Tibuhaburwa & 2 Others, and held that the strict legal regime governing election petitions does not provide for the amendment of parliamentary election petitions.
The judge noted that Section 79(3) of the Parliamentary Elections Act requires an election petition to be filed within 30 days after publication of the election results in the Gazette. He said this period is mandatory rather than merely directory.
Justice Okello further held that there is no provision in the Parliamentary Elections Act or the applicable election petition rules allowing a parliamentary election petition to be amended, whether with or without leave of court.
He therefore rejected Kananura’s argument that the amendment merely clarified matters already contained in the original petition.
“An amendment is not thus tenable and is not envisaged under the law regulating parliamentary elections,” the judge held.
The judge also rejected Kananura’s argument that mistakes by his former lawyers could justify the amendment.
Justice Okello said the circumstances surrounding the conduct of Kananura’s former lawyers could not override the strict requirements of electoral law.
He consequently declared the amended petition incompetent and struck it out. However, he made it clear that the decision did not terminate the election dispute itself.
“The strike out order leaves this court with the original petition on which to proceed,” the judge ruled.
The judge also rejected the Electoral Commission’s argument that striking out the amended petition should bring the entire election dispute to an end.
Justice Okello said Musisi himself had agreed that the original petition should remain for trial and determination, describing this as the logical course of action.
On costs, the judge ordered Kananura to pay half of the taxed costs incurred by each of the two applicants, Musisi and the Electoral Commission.
Justice Okello said he reduced the costs because the original election petition remains pending and will still have to be determined on its merits.
He said it would not be just to burden the main election dispute with the full costs of the applications, which were not themselves dispositive of the main petition.
The ruling was delivered by Justice George Okello at Wakiso on September 29, 2026, and uploaded on ECCMIS.
English 