The Masaka High Court has upheld the election of Aisha Ssekindi as Kalungu District Woman Member of Parliament, dismissing a petition challenging her victory over alleged electoral malpractice and violations of electoral laws.
In a ruling delivered on Thursday, Justice Bernard Namanya dismissed the petition filed by Hellen Nakeeya, the National Resistance Movement (NRM) candidate who contested against Ssekindi, an independent candidate.
Nakeeya accused Ssekindi of bribing voters and using her security personnel to orchestrate violence against political opponents during the campaign period and on polling day.
She told the court that two of her campaign coordinators were shot dead, several other supporters were injured, and three campaign vehicles were destroyed in incidents of violence.
Nakeeya further alleged that Ssekindi’s campaign agents circulated dummy ballot papers across the district two days before polling, intending to confuse voters, particularly elderly NRM supporters, and persuade them to vote for an independent candidate.
Through her lawyer, Simon Peter Kasangaki, Nakeeya asked the court to nullify the election results and order a fresh election in which she could campaign and participate without interference.
However, Justice Namanya ruled that although Nakeeya had established that serious incidents of violence and electoral malpractice occurred during the election period, the evidence did not meet the legal requirements for overturning the results.
“Although the petitioner proved that grave incidents occurred during the electoral period, including the killing of two of her supporters, namely Katumba Gerald and Muyingo Frank; assaults; intimidation; malicious damage to a campaign vehicle; and acts of incitement and misinformation, the occurrence of those acts, without more, does not satisfy the statutory threshold for overturning an election,” the judgment reads in part.
The judge criticised the Electoral Commission for failing to take timely action to address the violence and intimidation reported during the electoral process in Kalungu District, including the deaths of Nakeeya’s supporters.
Justice Namanya observed that the Commission had not provided a satisfactory explanation for its failure to take remedial measures following the killings. Such measures, he noted, could have included considering a postponement of polling under Section 64 of the Parliamentary Elections Act.
“No satisfactory explanation was offered by the Electoral Commission for the failure to take timely remedial measures following those killings, including consideration of the power to postpone polling under section 64 of the Parliamentary Elections Act (Cap. 177),” the judgment states.
On the allegations of voter bribery and the distribution of dummy ballot papers, the court found that Nakeeya had not presented credible evidence showing how the alleged practices influenced voters or affected the final election results.
The judge also considered the 20,275-vote margin between the candidates, noting that the seriousness of the incidents alone was insufficient to establish that the alleged irregularities substantially affected the outcome.
Justice Namanya emphasised that an election could not be nullified on the basis of speculation, sympathy or the possibility that disruptions had affected a candidate’s campaign.
The court ordered each party to bear its own legal costs.
Reacting to the decision, Nakeeya expressed dissatisfaction with the ruling and said she was considering appealing against it.
English 