Hon. Sabila Herbert v. Maket Latif (HCT-04-CV-MA-124-2010) (HCT-04-CV-MA-124-2010)
Observed later treatment
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
An election petition challenging a candidate's qualification to stand for Parliament is premature if filed before the Electoral Commission has conducted elections. The vetting of candidates during party primaries is an internal party matter under the Political Parties and Organizations Act. Article 80(2) of the Constitution is not an enabling law through which an election petition can be filed. Election petitions must follow the Parliamentary Elections Act framework after the Electoral Commission has taken cognizance of a candidature. A registrar has no jurisdiction to grant interim injunctions in election petitions under Rule 24 of the Parliamentary Elections (Petitions) Rules.
Outcome
Election petition struck off as premature; interim injunction vacated
Facts
Maket Latif filed an election petition seeking to bar Hon. Sabila Herbert Kale from contesting as Member of Parliament for Tingey Constituency, alleging that Kale was disqualified under Article 80(2)(f) of the Constitution because he had been convicted by the Anti-Corruption Court on 2nd March 2010 of corruption contrary to the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to a fine of 200 currency points or 12 months imprisonment in default. The petition alleged this was a crime involving moral turpitude. Kale had been nominated by the NRM to contest in party primaries scheduled for 30th August 2010. On the same day the petition was filed, Latif obtained an interim injunction stopping Kale from participating in the NRM primaries. Kale then filed an application to dismiss or strike off the petition, arguing it was premature because no elections had been conducted or results published by the Electoral Commission, and that no election petition could properly be filed before such publication.
Issues
- Whether an election petition challenging a candidate's qualification can be filed before the Electoral Commission has conducted elections and published results in the Gazette.
- Whether a registrar has jurisdiction to grant interim injunctions in election petition matters.
Orders
- Application granted.
- Election Petition 002 of 2010 struck off the register.
- Interim order issued on 27th August 2010 vacated and declared to be of no legal effect.
- Each party to meet its own costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (10)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 80(2)(f)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 64(5)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 71
- Constitution of Uganda Article 72
- Parliamentary Elections Act 2005 s.60
- Parliamentary Elections Act 2005 s.61(1)(d)
- Political Parties and Organizations Act 2005 s.10(1)
- Parliamentary Elections (Petitions) Rules Rule 24
- Prevention of Corruption Act s.2(b)
- Prevention of Corruption Act s.6(1)
Cases citing this judgment (1)
How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.
- [2026] UGHC 581 followed
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.