Connect with us
Ministry of health

Blow to Nalukoola: Court Drops Two Witness Affidavits in Election Dispute

Law

Blow to Nalukoola: Court Drops Two Witness Affidavits in Election Dispute

In a dramatic turn of events at the High Court in Kampala, two crucial affidavits presented by Kawempe North Member of Parliament Elias Nalukoola Luyimbazi to defend his election victory have been expunged from court records.

Civil Division Judge Bernard Namanya made the order on Thursday at the request of Nalukoola’s legal team, led by prominent lawyers Alex Luganda, Samuel Muyizzi Mulindwa, and Muhammad Mbabazi.

The court had previously heard allegations that agents acting on behalf of MP Nalukoola had approached, coerced, and even enticed the two witnesses to retract their initial sworn statements. These initial statements had reportedly supported the election petition filed by Faridah Nambi Kigongo of the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM), who is challenging Nalukoola’s recent electoral win.

The expunging of the affidavits occurred shortly after Nambi Kigongo concluded her case, having presented nine witnesses in an attempt to prove her claims that Nalukoola engaged in bribery to secure his victory.

Intriguingly, one of Nambi’s witnesses, Nathan Kyemba Muwanguzi, testified that he was promised one million shillings by individuals within the National Unity Platform (NUP) camp to withdraw his affidavit supporting Nambi’s petition. Kyemba informed the court that he only received a partial payment of sh200,000 and is still seeking the outstanding balance of sh800,000.

This testimony followed statements from another individual, George William Mawumbe, who alleged that he was coerced and intimidated by Nalukoola’s agents, allegedly led by one Ben Ntale, into signing an affidavit on April 22nd. This later affidavit contradicted his earlier statement in support of Nambi’s petition, where he claimed Nalukoola’s agents had given him 5,000 shillings.

Meanwhile, Thursday also saw MP Nalukoola himself take the stand for cross-examination. However, his defense faced an early setback when his legal team reportedly failed to attach crucial supporting documents, including copies of election results, to his response to Nambi’s election petition.

Despite these challenges, Ritah Nabakooza, a woman councillor representing Mpererwe, testified as a witness for Nalukoola, stating to the court that she had never witnessed him bribing voters.

Following the expunging of the affidavits from Mawumbe and Muwanguzi, Justice Namanya directed that the case would proceed to oral hearings of submissions from both the petitioners and the defense. He scheduled Nambi’s legal team to present their oral submissions on May 19th, followed by Nalukoola’s lawyers on May 20th. Any rejoinder submissions are expected to be heard the following day.

It will be recalled that on March 13, 2025, the Electoral Commission officially declared Elias Nalukoola Luyimbazi of the opposition National Unity Platform as the winner of the Kawempe North parliamentary election held on the same day. Nalukoola garnered 17,939 votes, significantly surpassing the 9,058 votes obtained by the NRM’s Faridah Nambi Kigongo.

Dissatisfied with the election outcome, Nambi Kigongo filed a petition with the High Court, seeking a fresh by-election. She alleges that the electoral process was marred by various malpractices, offenses, and irregularities, including voter bribery, which she claims substantially affected the final results.

Nambi, who was the runner-up in a race that involved ten candidates, specifically accused Nalukoola of bribing voters with cash, including alleged payments of 10,000 shillings to Nathan Kyemba Muwanguzi, 5,000 shillings to George William Mawumbe and Geoffrey Wamukubira, among others. However, the Electoral Commission, through its legal representative Eric Sabiiti, has refuted these allegations, maintaining that the election was conducted in accordance with the Constitution and relevant electoral laws. The upcoming oral submissions will be crucial in determining the High Court’s final verdict on this contentious election petition.

Comments

comments

More in Law

Advertisement

Columnists

solar

Advertisement
To Top