By The Insight Post Uganda
Mukono
On May 16th of this year, the Court of Appeal in Kampala will review the election petition judgment that confirmed Fred Kayondo as the duly elected Member of Parliament for Mukono South County.
This comes after Wilson Male, the former National Unity Platform (NUP) candidate for the same county, appealed the judgment made by Justice Collins Accellam at Mukono High Court.
Male’s appeal seeks to challenge the victory of Fred Kayondo in the parliamentary election for Mukono South County. The High Court had earlier confirmed Kayondo’s win, but Male alleges that the election was not conducted in accordance with the law and that the trial court erred in its findings.
The appeal raises issues such as voter bribery, ballot stuffing, and non-compliance with electoral laws, among others. Male claims that these issues affected the outcome of the election and that a fresh election should be ordered.
He further requested court to nullify the victory of the declared winner and instead declare the petitioner as the winner, or alternatively order the Electoral Commission (EC) to conduct fresh elections.
In the 2021 parliamentary elections, Kayondo, a member of the Democratic Party (DP), was declared the winner with 26,512 votes, while Male, the petitioner, received 4,831 votes.
According to Male, Kayondo’s nomination papers were invalid, and he allegedly bribed voters with gifts. Male also claimed that Kayondo used the colours, symbols, and slogans of the National Unity Platform (NUP), despite being nominated as a candidate for the DP.
In addition, Male accused the Electoral Commission (EC) of failing to control the activities of the army and police, which he claims affected his results. He also alleged that the EC delivered fewer ballot papers to three polling stations in Kibazo, Ntanzi, and Ntove.
In a joint scheduling memorandum, the lawyers for all parties agreed upon five issues to be determined by the judge in court.
The five issues that the lawyers for all parties agreed upon in the joint scheduling memorandum included determining the competence of the petition, whether Kayondo was validly nominated and elected, whether the EC conducted the elections in accordance with the constitution and Parliamentary Elections Act, whether the parties are entitled to the remedies sought, and the burden and standard of proof.
However, in his judgment, Justice Accellam ruled that Male had the power to inspect Kayondo’s nomination papers on or close to nomination day, but he waited until after Kayondo had won the election to raise the complaint.
Therefore, the judge found that Male had not met the legal requirements to challenge the validity of Kayondo’s nomination. The judge went on to confirm Kayondo as the duly elected Member of Parliament for Mukono South County.
“The EC is responsible for investigating any complaints that are brought before it during the electoral process, including disputes related to nominations, as stated in the constant petition. As per the judgment, the EC has the authority to issue orders to resolve such disputes,” the judgment reads in parts.
Additionally, Justice Acellam concluded that the petitioner had not provided any evidence to prove that the emblem, logo, and People Power slogan used on Kayondo’s campaign poster were registered symbols of the National Unity Platform (NUP) and therefore exclusively reserved for use by the party.
The judge added that even if irregularities had occurred, there was no evidence to suggest that Kayondo was credited with votes he was not entitled to, or that if such votes were subtracted, he would not have won the election. Therefore, the judge ruled that the petitioner was not entitled to any of the orders sought.
However, in the memorandum of appeal filed by Male’s lawyers of LMN Advocates, they argue that the trial judge erred in both law and fact by holding that Kayondo was duly nominated, and that Male had to challenge Kayondo’s nomination before the Electoral Commission.
In addition, the appellant argues that the trial judge erred in concluding that there was no non-compliance with electoral laws and that it was not the Electoral Commission’s duty to scrutinize the signatures on Kayondo’s nomination papers. Male also claims that he presented evidence to prove Kayondo’s use of NUP symbols, voter bribery, and obstruction during the campaigns.
This case has previously been presented to the Court of Appeal. In the past, Justice Olive Kazaarwe had declined to hear the merits of the petition and dismissed it.
Male appealed against this decision, claiming that the judge had erred in both law and fact by holding that his petition was incompetent and incurably defective. Male also accused Kazaarwe of disregarding Kayondo’s defective pleadings and failing to consider his own submissions.
In 2022, Justices Geoffrey Kiryabwire, Stephen Musota, and Christopher Gashirabake from the Court of Appeal directed that the petition be retried. They believed that the Judge made a mistake by rejecting the petition due to flawed affidavits, especially since she permitted similar ones from Kayondo and the Electoral Commission.
English 