|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 2011 |
|
|
Petitioner failed to prove falsified results, intimidation, bribery or lack of academic qualification; petition dismissed with costs.
Parliamentary election petition – non-compliance with electoral laws – substantial effect on results – allegations of falsification of tallies; election offences – intimidation and bribery – evidential standard in election petitions; qualification for nomination – authenticity of examination certificates – UNEB technical evidence; remedy – dismissal and costs.
|
30 November 2011 |
|
Petitioner failed to prove unlawful nomination, bribery or electoral malpractice sufficiently to annul the parliamentary election result.
Election law – standard of proof in election petitions (balance of probabilities but heightened "to the satisfaction of the Court"); admissibility of affidavits and hearsay in election petitions; nomination requirements for public officers; illegal practices (bribery, undue influence, multiple voting) and need for cogent independent evidence; ballot pre‑ticking/ballot‑stuffing allegations; duties of the Electoral Commission to ensure free and fair elections; assessment of whether irregularities substantially affected results.
|
14 November 2011 |
| October 2011 |
|
|
Election voided for proven bribery; by-election ordered and costs awarded to the petitioner.
Election law – Parliamentary Elections Act – bribery and illegal practices; proof on a higher civil (balance of probabilities) standard; single proven illegal practice vitiates election; withdrawal of petition as to Electoral Commission for lack of evidence; by-election ordered and costs awarded to petitioner.
|
13 October 2011 |
|
|
4 October 2011 |
| September 2011 |
|
|
Court annulled the election due to non‑compliance and disenfranchisement of voters at six polling stations.
* Electoral law – non‑compliance – exclusion and cancellation of polling station returns – disenfranchisement; s.53(3)–(4) PEA. * Electoral administration – control of ballot papers – discrepancies, multiple voting and cancelled polling station results. * Elections – substantial effect test – excluded votes exceeding margin of victory warrants annulment. * Illegal practices – voter intimidation/violence proved but not attributed to candidate or his agents with knowledge/consent. * Bribery – requires cogent, uncontroverted evidence and proof of agent status and candidate approval. * Remedies – annulment of election, fresh election ordered, Electoral Commission liable for petitioner’s costs and certificate for two counsel.
|
23 September 2011 |
|
|
23 September 2011 |
|
Fraudulent foreign diploma vitiated university degree, respondent lacked required A‑level equivalent, election annulled; fresh poll ordered.
Election law; qualification for nomination – A-level equivalence; fraudulent academic certificates – burden of proof under Evidence Act s.106; contagion effect of forged certificate vitiating admission and degree; validity/licensing of awarding institutions; NCHE verification process.
|
2 September 2011 |
|
Petitioner failed to prove electoral malpractices; recount refused due to tampered boxes and lack of prima facie case.
Parliamentary elections — Allegations of bias, collusion, vote invalidation, disenfranchisement, ballot‑box tampering — Recount — Prima facie requirement and sealed ballot boxes — Burden of proof in election petitions.
|
2 September 2011 |
| August 2011 |
|
|
Applicant failed to prove substantial non-compliance; election result upheld despite some unsigned DR forms.
Election law – compliance with Parliamentary Elections Act – alleged partisan officiating, falsification and wrongful invalidation of ballots – recount discretion under s.63(5) – declaration of results (DR) forms/signatures – standard of proof on balance of probabilities – manufactured/identical affidavits undermine credibility.
|
10 August 2011 |
|
Applicant failed to prove electoral irregularities substantially affected the LC III election; respondent's election declared valid; costs shared.
Local Government elections – s139 grounds for setting aside elections – burden and standard of proof (balance of probabilities); admissibility of affidavits – requirement of personal knowledge (Order 19 r3); Declaration of Results (DR) forms and polling registers as primary proof; bribery – must prove recipient was a registered voter and attach voter ID/polling register; illegal practices (bribery, undue influence, ballot stuffing) require cogent, corroborated evidence; defective or inconsistent affidavit in reply may render an answer unsupported.
|
8 August 2011 |
| July 2011 |
|
|
|
28 July 2011 |
|
Alleged multiple voting and falsified returns were proven insufficient to substantially affect the election; petition dismissed with costs.
Electoral law – alleged multiple voting and votes by deceased persons – discrepancies in polling station ballot-accountability and declaration forms – burden to prove falsification and substantial effect on result – petition dismissed.
|
27 July 2011 |
|
Petitioner failed to prove substantial electoral non-compliance or illegal practices; petition dismissed with costs.
Electoral law – election petition; burden of proof on petitioner (balance of probabilities); non-compliance and illegal practices must be proved and be substantial to vitiate results; recount discretionary and requires evidence of widescale irregularities; procedural defects in pleadings not necessarily fatal if substantial rights can be determined.
|
21 July 2011 |
|
A prior s.236 assault conviction did not amount to moral turpitude; election stood and petition dismissed with costs.
Electoral law – qualification for office – Article 80(2)(f): requires conviction by a competent court within seven years; pending revision does not negate conviction; definition of "moral turpitude" – ordinary meaning, reasonable‑man/community standard, mens rea and context determine classification; assault occasioning actual bodily harm (s.236) not per se a crime of moral turpitude – depends on facts; remedies for disqualification not available where no CIMT found.
|
21 July 2011 |
|
Election petition dismissed: the respondent had requisite academic qualifications and bribery allegations were unproven.
Electoral law – election petition – standard of proof higher than ordinary civil cases; qualification disputes – acceptance of statutory declaration and institutional verification to authenticate academic certificates; hearsay inadmissible to prove electoral malpractices; burden on petitioner to prove fraud or unlawful practices.
|
4 July 2011 |
| June 2011 |
|
|
|
24 June 2011 |
|
Court held it cannot extend the Act’s thirty-day statutory period for filing an election petition; applicant’s delay was dilatory.
* Election law – time limits – Section 60(3) Parliamentary Elections Act – statutory thirty-day filing period cannot be enlarged by Rule 19.
* Civil procedure – enlargement of time – Rule 19 applies to times fixed by Rules, not times fixed by statute; requires existing proceedings.
* "Special circumstances" – must relate to inability to take a procedural step; dilatory conduct and fishing expeditions are not special circumstances.
* Qualifications – NCHE verification for foreign A-levels under Section 4(6) not applicable where higher Ugandan qualifications exist (Section 4(13)).
* Remedies – complainants should use Electoral Commission’s complaint mechanisms for alleged electoral fraud prior to or within statutory timelines.
|
23 June 2011 |
| April 2011 |
|
|
|
29 April 2011 |