Akello v Electoral Commission Another (ELECTION PETITION NO 10 OF 2020)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains 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
Held that while the petition was competently filed, the remedies sought became untenable after the Electoral Commission declared and gazetted a winner as unopposed candidate. Once a candidate is declared and gazetted, the proper remedy is a petition under sections 60 and 61 of the Parliamentary Elections Act challenging whether the person was validly elected, not an appeal from the Commission's denomination decision. The court cannot grant orders affecting the declared winner who is not party to the proceedings without violating natural justice principles under Articles 28(1) and 44(c) of the Constitution.
Outcome
Petition dismissed as remedies sought were not tenable after declaration and gazetting of winner
Facts
The petitioner, Akello Ketty, was denominated by the Electoral Commission as a candidate for Bukedea Woman Member of Parliament following a complaint by the 2nd respondent alleging that her proposer denied signing her nomination papers, her academic papers were forged, and her nomination was fraudulent. The Electoral Commission upheld the complaint and denominated her on 26 October 2020. The petitioner filed this appeal by way of petition on 2 November 2020. On 3 November 2020, the day after filing, the Electoral Commission declared and gazetted Hon. Among Anita Annet as the unopposed Woman Member of Parliament for Bukedea District. The declared winner was not made a party to the proceedings.
Issues
- Whether the petition is competently before this court?
- Whether the denomination of the petitioner was lawful?
- Whether the Orders sought under the petition are tenable?
- What remedies are available?
Orders
- Petition dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (11)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 64(1)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 28(1)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 44(c)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 61(1)(f)
- Electoral Commission Act Cap 140 s.15(2)
- Parliamentary Elections Act 2005 s.14(3)
- Parliamentary Elections Act 2005 s.60
- Parliamentary Elections Act 2005 s.61
- Parliamentary Elections Act 2005 ss.61-68
- Parliamentary Elections (Appeals to the High Court from Commission) Rules SI No. 141-1
- Judicature Act
Cases cited (3)
- Carolyne Turyatemba and 4 Others v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 15 of 2006)
- Byanyima Winnie v Ngoma Ngime (HCCR No. 9 of 2009)
- Kafeero Ssekitoleko Robert v Mugambe Joseph Kifomusana and Electoral Commission (HC-EP No. 006 of 2011)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.