Uganda Case Law

Akol v Okodel

Akol v Okodel (Civil Appeal 9 of 2021) [2024] UGSC 25 (7 May 2024)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 9 of 2021

Judge

Owiny-Dollo, CJ, Mwondha, JSC, Tuhaise, JSC, Mike Chibita, JSC, Elizabeth Musoke, JSC

The Supreme Court held that it lacked jurisdiction to grant the consequential orders sought by the Appellant, specifically the revocation of the gazette notice declaring Hon. Among Anita Annet as unopposed Woman MP for Bukedea District and the order for fresh nomination and election. The Court reasoned that such remedies are only available in the High Court as the final appellate court from the Electoral Commission, or in the Court of Appeal as the final court in parliamentary election petitions, neither of which applied to the present case. Furthermore, the Court found that granting the orde…

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction Of Courts
• Consequential Orders
• Fair Hearing Rights
• Gazetting Of Elected Members
• Nomination Disputes

Baguma v Kunihira & Another

Baguma v Kunihira & Another (Election Petition Appeal 3 of 2023) [2024] UGCA 100 (3 May 2024)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Election Petition Appeal 3 of 2023

Judge

Muzamiru, JA, Mulyagonja, JA, Gashirabake, JA

The Court of Appeal held that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to determine the issue of the 1st respondent's academic qualifications as a court of first instance in an election petition, where the appellant had already raised the issue before the Electoral Commission and failed to appeal the Commission's decision to the High Court as required by law. The court reaffirmed that nomination disputes are to be resolved by the Electoral Commission, with a right of appeal to the High Court, and cannot be re-litigated in an election petition after the election. The court found that the trial judge…

Source excerpt

• Parliamentary Elections
• Nomination Disputes
• Academic Qualifications
• Jurisdiction Of High Court

Kalibbala v Electral Commission (Misc Cause 93 of 2021)

Kalibbala v Electral Commission (Misc Cause 93 of 2021) [2024] UGHCCD 12 (15 January 2024)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Misc Cause 93 of 2021

Judge

Boniface Wamala, J

The court held that the Applicant failed to exhaust the statutory remedies available under Section 15 of the Electoral Commission Act and Article 61(f) of the Constitution, which require an aggrieved party to lodge a written complaint with the Electoral Commission and, if dissatisfied, to appeal to the High Court. The evidence did not show that the Applicant properly lodged such a complaint, as the letter relied upon was not acknowledged as received by the Respondent. Judicial review is a remedy of last resort and cannot be invoked where an effective alternative remedy exists and has not been…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Review
• Exhaustion Of Remedies
• Electoral Process Irregularities
• Nomination Disputes

Nalubega v Kinyamatama and Another

Nalubega v Kinyamatama and Another (Election Petition Appeal No. 27 of 2021) [2022] UGCA 156 (26 May 2022)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Election Petition Appeal No. 27 of 2021

Judge

Monica K. Mugenyi, JA, Kibeedi Mutangula, JA, Musoke, JA

The Court of Appeal held that nomination complaints about a candidate’s eligibility must be raised before the Electoral Commission, not after the election.

• Nomination Disputes
• Voter Registration
• Parliamentary Elections
• Electoral Dispute Resolution
• Election-petitions
• Nomination-disputes

Gaddaffi v Sekabira and another

Gaddaffi v Sekabira and another (Election Appeal No. 56 of 2021) [2022] UGCA 139 (6 May 2022)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Election Appeal No. 56 of 2021

Judge

Madrama, JA, Egonda-Ntende, JA, Luswata, JA

The Court of Appeal held that the High Court does not have original jurisdiction to hear and determine complaints regarding the nomination of candidates; such complaints must first be lodged with the Electoral Commission, and only appeals from the Commission's decisions may be heard by the High Court. The appellant failed to exercise due diligence by not inspecting nomination papers prior to the election and did not raise his complaints at the appropriate time. The trial judge was correct to expunge evidence obtained through falsehoods and procedural defects, as the appellant misrepresented h…

Source excerpt

• Nomination Disputes
• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Bribery In Elections
• Burden Of Proof
• Registered Voter Status

Nandagire v Katushabe

Nandagire v Katushabe (Election Petition Appeal No. 34 of 2021) [2022] UGCA 116 (28 April 2022)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Election Petition Appeal No. 34 of 2021

Judge

Kiryabwire, JA, Musota, JA, Gashirabake, JA

The Court of Appeal held that the respondent was estopped from raising nomination and qualification complaints after the election, as such matters must be resolved before the election date under the Parliamentary Elections Act and the Electoral Commission Act. The court found that the petition did not disclose a cause of action because it was entirely based on nomination issues that should have been addressed pre-election. The trial judge erred in entertaining the petition, and the appeal was allowed. The cross-appeal was dismissed as it arose from the same judgment and decree that was set as…

Source excerpt

• Parliamentary Elections
• Candidate Qualification
• Nomination Disputes
• Cause Of Action
• Estoppel
• Burden Of Proof

Komakech and Another v Odonga

Komakech and Another v Odonga (Election Appeal No. 2 & 6 of 2021) [2022] UGCA 141 (28 April 2022)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Election Appeal No. 2 & 6 of 2021

Judge

Kiryabwire, JA, Musota, JA, Gashirabake, JA

The Court of Appeal held that the respondent was estopped from challenging the appellant's nomination after the election because he failed to utilize the statutory process for raising pre-election complaints with the Electoral Commission as mandated by Articles 61(1)(f) and 64(1) of the Constitution and Section 15 of the Parliamentary Elections Act. The court found that the respondent had the opportunity to inspect nomination documents and raise any objections before or during nomination but failed to do so, thereby waiving his right to challenge the appellant's eligibility post-election. The…

Source excerpt

• Nomination Disputes
• Public Officer Resignation
• Electoral Commission Jurisdiction
• Estoppel In Election Petitions

Nandagire Ndiwalana v Katushabe

Nandagire Ndiwalana v Katushabe (Election Appeal No. 34 of 2021) [2022] UGCA 144 (28 April 2022)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Election Appeal No. 34 of 2021

Judge

Kiryabwire, JA, Musota, JA, Gashirabake, JA

The Court of Appeal held that the respondent was estopped from raising nomination-related complaints after the election, as such matters should have been addressed through the statutory process before the election date. The court found that the petition did not disclose a cause of action, since it was entirely based on nomination issues that were not timely raised. The appellate court emphasized that election petitions must relate to the conduct of the election itself, and that the statutory framework is designed to resolve pre-election disputes with finality before voting occurs. Consequentl…

Source excerpt

• Nomination Disputes
• Academic Qualification For Candidates
• Cause Of Action In Election Petitions
• Estoppel In Election Litigation

Akongot v Electoral Commission & Another

Akongot v Electoral Commission & Another (ELECTION PETITION NO. 14 OF 2020) [2020] UGHCCD 219 (1 December 2020)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

ELECTION PETITION NO. 14 OF 2020

Judge

Musa Ssekaana, J

The court held that the Electoral Commission retains constitutional jurisdiction to hear election complaints, even if not first resolved by the Returning Officer. However, once a candidate has been declared and gazetted as elected, the only available remedy is to challenge the validity of the election through a petition under the relevant sections of the Parliamentary Elections Act. The petition before the court was incompetent and the remedies sought were not tenable because the declaration and gazetting of a winner had already occurred, and the person declared winner was not a party to the…

Source excerpt

• Electoral Commission Jurisdiction
• Nomination Disputes
• Gazetting Of Candidates
• Remedies In Election Petitions

Asio v Electoral Commission & Another

Asio v Electoral Commission & Another (ELECTION PETITION NO. 11 OF 2020) [2020] UGHCCD 220 (1 December 2020)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

ELECTION PETITION NO. 11 OF 2020

Judge

Musa Ssekaana, J

The court held that the Electoral Commission has constitutional jurisdiction to entertain election complaints, and that the requirement to first lodge complaints with the Returning Officer does not oust this jurisdiction. However, the court found that the petition was rendered moot and the remedies sought untenable because, by the time of determination, the Electoral Commission had already declared and gazetted a winner (Hon. Among Anita Annet) who was not a party to the proceedings. The court emphasized that once a candidate is gazetted, any challenge to their election must be brought by way…

Source excerpt

• Electoral Commission Jurisdiction
• Nomination Disputes
• Gazetting Of Candidates
• Locus Standi
• Remedies In Election Petitions