Wakilii

Kakooza John Baptist vs Electoral Commission and Yiga Anthony (Election Petition Appeal 11 of 2007)

Supreme Court · [2008] UGSC 8 · 2008 Appeal Dismissed ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Second election petition appeal from the Court of Appeal, which had dismissed an appeal from the High Court's dismissal of a parliamentary election petition.
Decision
Appeal dismissed; the election of the second respondent stands.

The full judgment

Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.

Sign in to read the full judgment
Cited — treatment unverified cited in 5 (treatment unverified) Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions — always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Supreme Court dismissed a parliamentary election petition appeal, holding that although tampering with one open ballot box at one polling station was a serious irregularity, the appellant failed to prove that the irregularities extended beyond that station or affected the election results in a substantial manner. The court divided on the admissibility of uncertified copies of Declaration of Results Forms: the majority of the panel (Mulenga and Katureebe JJSC, with Tsekooko JSC) held that the courts below erred in disregarding the forms for want of certification and a formal notice to produce, given that the Returning Officer had refused to certify them. The appeal nonetheless failed because the alleged discrepancies were not shown to be substantial.

Facts

In the 23 February 2006 parliamentary elections for Kalungu (West) Constituency in Masaka District, the second respondent was declared the winner with 9,411 votes and the appellant the runner-up with 8,602 votes. The constituency comprised the Kalungu and Kyamuliibwa sub-counties; the results from Kalungu were not disputed. The appellant challenged the conduct of the election in Kyamuliibwa, alleging non-compliance with the Constitution, the Electoral Commission Act and the Parliamentary Elections Act, ballot-box interference, and discrepancies between the number of ballot papers received and counted. One ballot box at Kalama polling station was found open, and a presiding officer and others were charged with interfering with election materials. The appellant relied on uncertified photocopies of Declaration of Results Forms obtained from his agents and the District Registrar to show discrepancies, the Returning Officer having refused to certify them. The High Court dismissed the petition, finding none of the issues proved, and the Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal.

Issues

  1. Whether the events in Kyamuliibwa sub-county violated the electoral laws and affected the election results in a substantial manner.
  2. Whether the first respondent discharged its statutory duty to hear and determine the appellant's written complaint before announcing the results.
  3. Whether the courts below erred in rejecting the uncertified copies of the Declaration of Results Forms as inadmissible evidence.
  4. Whether the appellant's affidavit in rejoinder was competent and properly sworn.
  5. Whether the Justices of Appeal failed in their duty to re-evaluate the evidence on record.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs in this court and in the courts below.

Key headnotes

Electoral Law — Election Petitions — Non-compliance — Substantial Effect on Results
To nullify an election result, a petitioner must prove not merely an irregularity but that the non-compliance affected the result in a substantial manner; isolated tampering confined to a single ballot box at one polling station, without proof it extended further or altered votes, is insufficient to vitiate the results of the whole constituency.
Evidence — Public Documents — Declaration of Results Forms — Certification
A Declaration of Results Form is a public document within section 73 of the Evidence Act and ordinarily requires certification to be admitted as authentic; an uncertified copy is not validated merely by being annexed to an affidavit, as rules applying to affidavit evidence do not necessarily apply to annextures.
Evidence — Secondary Evidence — Notice to Produce — Dispensation
Where the original of a public document is in the possession of an adverse party who refuses to certify or produce it, secondary evidence in the form of uncertified copies may be admitted under sections 64(1)(a) and 65 of the Evidence Act; a formal notice to produce may be dispensed with where, from the nature of the case, the adverse party must know the document will be required.
Civil Procedure — Affidavits — Commissioning — Oaths Act
An affidavit signed by a deponent and forwarded to a commissioner for oaths without the deponent appearing and swearing before that commissioner is not validly made under the Oaths Act and is properly rejected; the deponent must take the oath and sign before the commissioner.
Evidence — Admissions — Facts Admitted at Scheduling Conference
Documents admitted by consent at a pre-hearing scheduling conference become part of the record under section 57 of the Evidence Act and need not be further proved; the appropriate time for a court to require an admitted fact to be otherwise proved is at the conference, and any such requirement must be communicated to the affected party.

Legislation cited (19)

  • Parliamentary Elections Act s.47(5)
  • Parliamentary Elections Act s.47(7)
  • Parliamentary Elections Act s.50
  • Parliamentary Elections Act s.50(1)(c)
  • Parliamentary Elections Act s.52
  • Parliamentary Elections Act s.76
  • Evidence Act s.57
  • Evidence Act s.62(b)
  • Evidence Act s.64(1)(a)
  • Evidence Act s.65
  • Evidence Act s.73
  • Evidence Act s.73(a)(ii)
  • Evidence Act s.75
  • Evidence Act s.76
  • Oaths Act s.5
  • Oaths Act s.6
  • Parliamentary Elections (Election Petitions) Rules 1996 r.15
  • Constitution of Uganda
  • Electoral Commission Act

Cases cited (6)

  • Abdu Katuntu v Kirunda Kivejinja (Election Petition Appeal No. 24 of 2006)
  • Life Insurance Corporation of India v Panesar (Civil Appeal No. 1 of 1967)
  • Bwanika and 9 Others v Administrator General (Civil Suit No. 7 of 2003)
  • Amama Mbabazi v Garuga Musinguzi (Election Petition Appeal No. 1 of 2001)
  • Dr Kiiza Besigye v Electoral Commission and Museveni Kaguta (Election Petition No. 1 of 2001)
  • Mbayo Jacob Robert v Electoral Commission and Talansya Sinani (Election Petition Appeal No. 7 of 2006)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.