Kiiza v Kabakumba (Election Petition Appeal No.44 of 2016) [2017] UGCA 9 (8 May 2017)

Flynote

Civil Procedure|Actions and applications|Appeals and reviews|Constitutional Law|Elections|Evidence Law|Evaluation of Evidence

Case summary

Court referred to the doctrine of agency and held that to prove agency in electoral matters, specificity was important, that the agent had to be identified and linked to the person accused of voter bribery, the recipient of the bribe had to have been given bribe for purposes of vote choice influence. Court held that the trail judge erred in finding that an the appellant’s agent had engaged in voter bribery for and on behalf of the appellant. Court added that the evidence of agency availed was not cogent enough since it did not disclose the agency relationship between the person agent accused of voter bribery and the appellant. Court accordingly allowed the appeal and held that bribery had not been proved against the appellant. Court set aside the trial judge’s decision and reinstated the appellant as validly elected.

---