Isabirye Iddi v Salleh Mpaata and Another (Miscellaneous Cause 214 of 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 dismissed an application for judicial review of a National Resistance Movement Election Disputes Tribunal decision that set aside the applicant's declaration as party flag bearer following a re-tally. The court held that the tribunal acted within its powers under the NRM Election Regulations 2025 to order a re-tally, that the applicant was accorded a fair hearing and participated in the process through his representatives, and that the decision was not tainted with illegality, irrationality, or procedural impropriety. The court emphasised that judicial review concerns the decision-making process, not the merits of the decision itself.
Outcome
Application for judicial review dismissed
Facts
Hon. Isabirye Iddi was declared winner of the NRM primary elections for Bunya County South Constituency on 18 July 2025 with 17,457 votes. Two losing candidates, Salleh Mpaata (6,824 votes) and Frank Tibagendeka (7,498 votes), filed separate petitions with the NRM Election Disputes Tribunal challenging the declaration. The Tribunal consolidated the petitions and conducted a re-tally of the Declaration of Results forms from all 169 polling stations. On 13 August 2025, the Tribunal dismissed Tibagendeka's petition but set aside Isabirye's election, finding after re-tally that Mpaata had garnered 16,115 votes, Isabirye 10,959 votes, and Tibagendeka 8,165 votes. Mpaata was declared the flag bearer. Isabirye applied for judicial review, alleging he was not given notice of the re-tally, was not afforded an opportunity to participate, and that the process violated natural justice.
Issues
- Whether the application is amenable to judicial review.
- Whether the applicant raises any grounds for judicial review.
- What are the remedies available.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Each party to bear its own costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (18)
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 42
- Judicature Act s.37
- Judicature Act s.40
- Judicature Act s.42
- Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules S.I 13-1 Rule 3
- Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules S.I 13-1 Rule 3A
- Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules S.I 13-1 Rule 5
- Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules S.I 13-1 Rule 6
- Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules S.I 13-1 Rule 7
- Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules S.I 13-1 Rule 8
- Judicature (Judicial Review) (Amendment) Rules 2019 Rule 3(f)
- Judicature (Judicial Review) (Amendment) Rules 2019 Rule 7A
- Constitution of the National Resistance Movement Article 1
- National Resistance Movement Election Regulations 2025 Rule 41
- National Resistance Movement Election Regulations 2025 Rule 42
- National Resistance Movement Election Regulations 2025 Rule 43
- National Resistance Movement Election Regulations 2025 Rule 44
- National Resistance Movement Election Regulations 2025 Rule 45
Cases cited (2)
- Chief Constable of North Wales Police v Evans [1983] ALL ER 143
- Ignatius Loyola Malungu v IGG (High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 59 of 2016)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.