Wakilii

Hon. Akamba Paul v National Resistance Movement and Another (Miscellaneous Cause 250 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHCCD 179 · 2025 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for judicial review challenging the decision of the NRM Election Disputes Tribunal upholding the declaration of the 2nd Respondent as NRM Flagbearer for Busiki Constituency Member of Parliament
Decision
Application granted; Applicant reinstated as NRM Flagbearer for Busiki Constituency Member of Parliament, 2025

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 held that decisions of the NRM Election Disputes Tribunal are amenable to judicial review. The NRM District Registrar acted illegally and with procedural impropriety when he rescinded the Applicant's declaration as winner and declared the 2nd Respondent without giving the Applicant a hearing, as he was functus officio after the initial declaration. The tribunal acted with procedural impropriety by conducting a re-tally of results without according the Applicant an opportunity to witness the exercise, thereby violating his right to a fair hearing. The tribunal's decision was quashed and the Applicant reinstated as the duly elected NRM Flagbearer for Busiki Constituency.

Outcome

Application granted; Applicant reinstated as NRM Flagbearer for Busiki Constituency Member of Parliament, 2025

Facts

The Applicant and 2nd Respondent were candidates in the NRM Party Primary Elections for Busiki Constituency Member of Parliament held on 18 July 2025. On that date, the NRM District Registrar declared the Applicant the winner with 34,265 votes against the 2nd Respondent's 32,315 votes. The following day, 19 July 2025, the same Registrar issued another Declaration of Results Form declaring the 2nd Respondent the winner with 35,249 votes against the Applicant's 34,269 votes. The Applicant petitioned the NRM Election Disputes Tribunal challenging the second declaration. The Tribunal dismissed the petition on 19 August 2025 after conducting a re-tally of results, upholding the 2nd Respondent's declaration. The Applicant then filed this judicial review application challenging both the District Registrar's rescission of his initial declaration and the Tribunal's decision, alleging illegality, procedural impropriety, and irrationality.

Issues

  1. Whether the application is amenable to judicial review.
  2. Whether the NRM District Registrar by rescinding the declaration of the Applicant as NRM Flagbearer for Busiki Constituency Member of Parliament, 2025 to declare the 2nd Respondent acted illegally and or procedurally improper.
  3. Whether the 1st Respondent's tribunal acted with illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety when it upheld the NRM district registrar decision declaring the 2nd Respondent as NRM Flagbearer after rescinding the declaration of the Applicant.
  4. Whether the Applicant is entitled to the remedies prayed for.

Orders

  • Declaration that the decision of the 1st Respondent's Election Disputes Tribunal dated 19/08/2025 upholding the declaration of the 2nd Respondent by the NRM District Registrar after rescinding the declaration of the Applicant as NRM Flagbearer for Busiki Constituency Member of Parliament, 2025 is null and void for procedural impropriety, illegality, irrationality and breach of the principles of natural justice.
  • Declaration that the procedure of re-tallying used by the 1st Respondent's Election Disputes Tribunal to resolve the Applicant's petition without according the Applicant a chance to witness the exercise was procedurally illegal, irregular and irrational.
  • Order of Certiorari quashing the 1st Respondent's Election Disputes Tribunal's impugned decision dated 19/08/2025, upholding the declaration of the 2nd Respondent as NRM Flagbearer.
  • Order reinstating the Applicant as the duly elected NRM Flagbearer for Busiki Constituency Member of Parliament, 2025.
  • Order of Mandamus compelling and directing the 1st Respondent, its officials, servants, and/or agents to grant the Applicant the NRM Flag or Card to enable him register and contest in the Parliamentary Elections as the NRM Flagbearer/Candidate for Busiki Constituency.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Judicial Review — Amenability — Political Party Internal Disputes — NRM Election Disputes Tribunal
Decisions of the NRM Election Disputes Tribunal are amenable to judicial review. Political parties registered under the Political Parties and Organizations Act are public bodies, and their election dispute tribunals perform quasi-judicial functions. To deny judicial review of such decisions would leave aggrieved parties without recourse and violate the right under Article 42 of the Constitution to apply to a court of law in respect of any administrative decision.
Electoral Law — Party Primaries — Functus Officio — Rescission of Declaration
Once a district registrar has declared a winner in party primary elections, he becomes functus officio and has no jurisdiction to rescind that declaration and declare another candidate as winner. The power to handle errors or irregularities arising from the declaration is vested in the party's Election Disputes Tribunal, not the registrar who made the initial declaration.
Administrative Law — Natural Justice — Right to Fair Hearing — Re-tallying of Election Results
Where an election disputes tribunal conducts a re-tally of results to resolve a petition challenging the accuracy of vote tallying, the tribunal must accord the petitioner an opportunity to witness the re-tallying exercise. Conducting a re-tally without the petitioner's participation violates the right to a fair hearing under Article 28(1) of the Constitution and constitutes procedural impropriety, particularly where the controversy is based on allegations of falsification and alteration of results.
Judicial Review — Grounds — Illegality — Procedural Impropriety
An administrative decision-maker acts illegally when he exercises a power he does not possess or acts beyond his jurisdiction. An administrative decision-maker acts with procedural impropriety when he fails to observe basic rules of natural justice or fails to act with procedural fairness towards the person who will be affected by the decision, including failure to give a hearing before making a decision that affects a person's rights.

Legislation cited (21)

Cases cited (9)

  • Community Justice and Anti-Corruption Forum v Law Council (Miscellaneous Cause No. 301 of 2016)
  • Muhumuza Ben v Attorney General and Others (Miscellaneous Cause No. 212 of 2020)
  • Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for Civil Service [1985] AC 374
  • Master Links Uganda Limited v The Attorney General (Miscellaneous Cause No. 767 of 2022)
  • Nantamba Pascal v National Resistance Movement and Another (Miscellaneous Cause No. 165 of 2025)
  • Hassan Ali Joho and Another v Suleiman Said Shahbai and 2 Others (2014) KLR
  • Associated Provincial Pictures Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223
  • Barbra Awidi Michelle v Uganda Revenue Authority (Miscellaneous Cause No. 322 of 2021)
  • Wakiso Transporters Tours & Travel Ltd & 5 Others Vs Inspector General of Government & 3 Others

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Hon. Akamba Paul v National Resistance Movement and Another (Miscellaneous Cause 250 of 2025) [2025] UGHCCD 179 (17 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.