Supreme Court dismisses Amama Mbabazi’s petition

Supreme Court seating at Kololo Kampala has dismissed the petition filed by Amama Mbabazi challenging victory of President Yoweri Museveni in 18th February presidential elections. Mbabazi petitioned court saying the elections were free and fair and wanted court to overturn the results but today morning the 9 judges of the Supreme Court led by Chief Justice Bart Katureebe dismissed the petition saying President Yoweri Museveni was validly elected.

Supreme has ruled in favour of President Museveni
Supreme has ruled in favour of President Museveni

Court finds that Museveni was validly elected. Petition is dismissed with no orders to costs.

  1. Assertion of voting without opening ballot boxes was not supported by any evidence so it was not proved.
  1. Evidence on record show that returning officers opened envelopes where not all DR forms were received .
  1. Petitioner’s agents being chased, we find it lacking & with no evidence to back it up since the agents signed on DR forms. In some cases the petitioner’s polling agents were indeed denied information at polling stations.
  1. There was no evidence to back claims that anybody ineligible to vote actually voted as alleged by the petitioner.
  1. On multiple voting. Two of petitioners affidavits are based on hearsay. Therefore no evidence to back the claims
  1. Claim of polling before and after time had no concrete evidence.
  1. Evidence in affidavits before court doesn’t prove there was pre ticking of votes anywhere.
  1. EC did not comply with its duty in failing to deliver voting material in time. It was a sign of gross incompetence.
  1. The petitioner blamed the late delivery of voting materials to some polling stations on EC. EC in defence- voting was extended to 7:00pm.
  1. EC in defence submitted that not only the BVVK machine was used but the voter’s ID, national ID and the Voter’s register. The petitioner submitted that EC used the unreliable BVVK to identify voters which was slow thus affecting the process.
  1. EC also submitted that the constitution allows them to use National ID data to compile, maintain & update voter’s register, EC went ahead to submit that they compiled, maintained and updated the voter’s register as guided by the constitution.
  1. EC submitted that the extension of nomination deadlines wasn’t intended to favor any candidate as alleged by the petitioner.
  1. The petitioner alleged that EC illegally nominated the 1st respondent. EC denied this basing on Lumumba’s affidavit.
  1. On lack of transparency, the petitioner did not provide evidence that EC received results from an illegal tally centre in Naguru.
  1. We recognise the 24hrs given to EC to announce. However EC hasn’t provided any explanation why other results weren’t read.
  1. We have concluded that EC could use other devices to transfer information- there is no noncompliance.
  1. EC should have done more to ensure that all candidates and their agents were briefed about the mode of results transmission.
  1. There were no illegal tally centres from which the electoral commission received results.
  1. We are satisfied that the results declared by EC were based on the tally sheets received and Museveni was validly declared winner.

20.The allegation regarding electronic transmission of results is not non compliance bse EC can use electronic means to transmit results.

  1. We find it difficult to believe that the petitioners performance at polling stations was due to unavailability of his agents.
  1. The first respondent (Kaguta Museveni) did not bribe voters with hoes as alleged because this was an ongoing government program.
  1. On voter intimidation by using violent group called the Kifeesi to beat up opposition members. The credibility of the “kifesi group” as witnesses of the petitioner is questionable so information provided by them is doubtable.
  1. On crime preventers presence and their alleged behaviour, It is through the crime preventers that law and order was maintained through the election period, the petitioner did not prove that crime preventers were recruited to destabilise peace and intimidate.
  1. On using civil servants, UNRA ED Kagina and KCCA ED Musisi to campaign, “They were called to explain government programs, not campaign.”
NRM supporter jubilates after court's decision
NRM supporter jubilates after court’s decision

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button