Wakilii

Kahombo Kakusya v Dr. Asiimwe Akiiki and Another (Election Petition No. 8 of 2021)

High Court · [2021] UGHCEP 29 · 2021 Petition Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Election petition challenging the qualification of the winning candidate for Woman Member of Parliament for Masindi District
Decision
Petition dismissed; 1st respondent's election as Woman Member of Parliament for Masindi District upheld

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 the election petition challenging the qualification of the 1st respondent as Woman Member of Parliament for Masindi District. The court held that a Minister in Bunyoro Kitara Kingdom appointed on voluntary terms does not fall within the constitutional definition of a traditional or cultural leader under Article 246(6), which requires that such a leader derive allegiance from birth or descent. The 1st respondent was therefore validly nominated and elected.

Outcome

Petition dismissed; 1st respondent's election as Woman Member of Parliament for Masindi District upheld

Facts

The petitioner and 1st respondent contested the parliamentary election for Woman Member of Parliament for Masindi District held on 14 January 2021. The 1st respondent won with 44,680 votes against the petitioner's 27,950 votes and was declared winner and gazetted on 17 February 2021. The petitioner challenged the election on grounds that the 1st respondent was disqualified from nomination because she held the position of Minister of Social Services (Education and Health) in Bunyoro Kitara Kingdom on voluntary terms, appointed by the Omukama on 20 October 2018 for five years. The petitioner argued this made her a traditional or cultural leader who was required to resign 90 days before nomination under the Institution of Traditional or Cultural Leaders Act 2011 and Article 246 of the Constitution. The petitioner abandoned the second ground concerning electoral offences at trial.

Issues

  1. Whether the 1st respondent was not qualified for nomination and election as a woman member of Parliament for Masindi district.
  2. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • Petition dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Electoral Law — Qualification of Candidates — Traditional or Cultural Leaders — Definition
A traditional or cultural leader within the meaning of Article 246(6) of the Constitution and Section 2 of the Institution of Traditional or Cultural Leaders Act 2011 is a king or similar leader who derives allegiance from the fact of birth or descent in accordance with customs, traditions, usage or consent of the people. A person appointed as a Minister in a traditional kingdom on voluntary terms for a limited period does not fall within this definition.
Electoral Law — Disqualification of Candidates — Traditional or Cultural Leaders — Ministerial Appointments
A Minister appointed by a traditional leader to serve a kingdom on voluntary terms does not constitute a traditional or cultural leader for purposes of disqualification under Article 80(2) of the Constitution and Section 4(2) of the Parliamentary Elections Act 2005. Such a Minister is not required to resign 90 days before nomination.
Statutory Interpretation — Constitutional Provisions — Strict Construction of Disqualification Provisions
Constitutional provisions relating to disqualification from elective office must be strictly construed. The court cannot adopt a broad interpretation that would bar persons in voluntary employment or relatives of traditional leaders without clear textual support in the Constitution or enabling legislation.
Electoral Law — Remedies — Declaration of Runner-Up as Winner
A runner-up candidate who polled significantly fewer votes than the winning candidate cannot be declared the winner absent exceptional circumstances rooted in law. A petitioner who secured only 35.54% of votes against the winner's 52.02% has no basis to seek a declaration as winner.
Electoral Law — Burden and Standard of Proof — Election Petitions
In an election petition, the burden of proof lies on the petitioner to prove allegations to the satisfaction of the court on a balance of probabilities at a high degree of probability. The standard is higher than in ordinary civil cases because setting aside an election is a grave matter of individual and national importance.

Legislation cited (16)

Cases cited (14)

  • Col. (RTD) Dr. Besigye Kizza v Museveni Yoweri Kaguta and the Electoral Commission (Election Petition No. 1 of 2001)
  • Col. (RTD) Dr. Besigye Kizza v Museveni Yoweri Kaguta and the Electoral Commission (Election Petition No. 1 of 2006)
  • Blyth v Blyth [1966] AC 643
  • Karokora Katono Zedekia v Electoral Commission Kagonyera Mondo (HC-05-CV-EP 002 of 2001)
  • Masiko Winfred Komuhangi v Babihuga Winnie J. (Election Petition No. 9 of 2002)
  • Sarah Bireete and Another v Bernadette Bigirwa and Electoral Commission (Election Petition Appeal No. 13 of 2002)
  • Akurut Violet Adome v Emurut Simon Peter (EPA No. 40 of 2016)
  • Odo Tayebwa v Bassajjabalaba Nasser & Electoral Commission (Election Petition Appeal No. 013 of 2021)
  • Jeet Mohinder Singh v Harminder Singh Jassi AIR [2000] SC 256
  • Paul Mwiru v Hon Igeme Nathan Samson Nabeta & 2 others (EPA No. 6 of 2011)
  • Mashate Magomu Peter v Electoral Commission & Anor (Election Petition No. 007 of 2016)
  • Mashate Magomu Peter v Electoral Commission & Anor (Election Petition Appeal No. 047 of 2016)
  • David Tusingwire v Attorney General (Constitutional Appeal No. 4 of 2016)
  • Political Advertising Case (1992) 177 CLR 106

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kahombo Kakusya v Dr. Asiimwe Akiiki and Another (Election Petition No. 8 of 2021) [2021] UGHCEP 29 (29 September 2021)
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.