Wakilii

Akol Zipporah v Akol Hellen Odeke and Others (Miscellaneous Cause 198 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHCCD 186 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for judicial review seeking declarations and prohibitions regarding voter registration status of respondents intending to contest for Woman Member of Parliament for Bukedea District
Decision
Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and prematurity

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

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine election complaints arising before and during polling as a court of first instance. Under Articles 61(1)(f) and 64(1) of the Constitution and Section 15 of the Electoral Commission Act, the Electoral Commission is the court of first instance for such complaints, with appeals lying to the High Court only after the Commission has made a final decision. The application was filed prematurely before the Electoral Commission completed its review process and was accordingly dismissed.

Outcome

Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and prematurity

Facts

The applicant sought judicial review seeking declarations that the first, second, and third respondents were not registered voters in their respective parishes following Parish Tribunal decisions in May 2025 ordering deletion of their names from the voters' roll. The applicant also sought orders prohibiting the Electoral Commission from nominating these respondents for the position of Woman Member of Parliament for Bukedea District in the January 2026 elections. The Electoral Commission had conducted a voter update period and public display of voter rolls. Objections were raised against the three respondents on grounds of lack of origin or residence in their registered parishes. Parish Tribunals recommended deletion of their names. The Electoral Commission invited the affected respondents to a review meeting on 2 October 2025, heard all parties, and upheld the tribunal decisions. The applicant filed the judicial review application before the Electoral Commission completed its review process.

Issues

  1. Whether the application for judicial review was properly before the High Court.
  2. Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine election complaints arising before and during polling as a court of first instance.
  3. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Electoral Law — Jurisdiction — High Court Jurisdiction over Electoral Complaints — Court of First Instance
The High Court does not have jurisdiction to hear and determine election complaints arising before and during polling as a court of first instance. This jurisdiction is vested in the Electoral Commission under Articles 61(1)(f) and 64(1) of the Constitution.
Constitutional Law — Interpretation — Unlimited Original Jurisdiction of High Court — Subject to Specific Constitutional Provisions
The unlimited original jurisdiction conferred on the High Court by Article 139(1) of the Constitution is subject to Articles 61(1) and 64(1)(f) of the Constitution, which vest the Electoral Commission with jurisdiction over election complaints arising before and during polling as a court of first instance.
Administrative Law — Judicial Review — Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies — Premature Applications
An application for judicial review filed before an administrative body completes its review process is premature. Section 15 of the Electoral Commission Act requires exhaustion of administrative remedies before the High Court can entertain an appeal.
Electoral Law — Appeals — Right of Appeal from Electoral Commission — Final Decisions Only
Under Article 64(1) of the Constitution and Section 15 of the Electoral Commission Act, appeals to the High Court lie only against final decisions of the Electoral Commission confirming or rejecting the existence of an irregularity in the electoral process.

Legislation cited (33)

Cases cited (3)

  • Kizza Besigye v YK Museveni and Another (Election Petition No. 1 of 2001)
  • Akol Hellen Odeke v Okodel Umar (Election Petition Appeal No. 6 of 2020)
  • Akol Hellen Odeke v Okodel Umar (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 09 of 2021)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Akol Zipporah v Akol Hellen Odeke and Others (Miscellaneous Cause 198 of 2025) [2025] UGHCCD 186 (24 October 2025)
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.