URN
The High Court in Kampala has dismissed a petition challenging the nominations of eight candidates for Nakawa Division West parliamentary seat, ruling that procedural errors on nomination forms cannot disenfranchise voters.
Justice Collins Acellam issued the ruling on Wednesday, declining to overturn a decision by the Electoral Commission (EC) Elections Tribunal, which had previously allowed the eight candidates to stand despite minor discrepancies on their nomination forms.
The petition, filed by Ivan Bwowe of the People’s Forum for Freedom and Democracy (PFF), argued that the candidates had incorrectly listed “Nakawa West constituency” on their forms instead of the gazetted “Nakawa Division West constituency.”
Among the respondents was Joel Ssenyony, the incumbent MP and Leader of the Opposition. In his ruling, Justice Acellam emphasized that clerical errors corrected by the Electoral Commission cannot be used to invalidate candidacies.
“In handling this petition, this court shall prioritize the merits over formal procedural flaws and technicalities. To allow the appeal would deny the voters of Nakawa Division West Constituency the opportunity to choose their representative. Elective democracy requires that anyone seeking political office submit to the will of the electorate. A proper mandate is through the ballot box, ensuring that the people express their will. The petitioner’s effort through this petition is an audacious attempt to sneak into parliament to represent a group of people whose mandate he has not obtained,” Justice Acellam stated.
The judge further noted that Bwowe himself had used both “Nakawa West” and “Nakawa Division West” interchangeably, and did not raise the issue with the EC or the court at the time of nominations.
“On page 27 of the electronic petition file, Form ND/UO, the petitioner, like all candidates, was declared a nominated directly elected member of parliament candidate to represent ‘Nakawa West’ constituency — a constituency he now claims does not exist. The clerical error was corrected and cannot be held to confuse anyone, including the petitioner,” Justice Acellam ruled.
The court dismissed the petition with each party bearing its own costs, reaffirming thattechnical errors should not override the electorate’s right to freely choose their representatives.
This ruling comes amid heightened scrutiny over electoral processes in Uganda, where minor procedural disputes are sometimes used to challenge candidates, raising questions about voter representation and democratic fairness.