Wakilii

Uganda People's Congress and Hon. Jimmy James Michael Akena v Electoral Commission (Miscellaneous Application 824 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHCCD 165 · 2025 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for interim injunction arising from substantive application for temporary injunction
Decision
Interim injunction granted restraining Electoral Commission from implementing decision that UPC Executive Committee expired, enabling UPC to sponsor candidates for parliamentary and other elective positions; application for order to nominate Hon. Akena as presidential candidate dismissed

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 court partially granted the application. It declined to order the Electoral Commission to nominate Hon. Jimmy James Michael Akena as UPC presidential candidate, finding that presidential nominations had already closed and that serious legal questions existed regarding his eligibility. However, the court granted an interim injunction restraining the Electoral Commission from implementing its decision that the UPC Executive Committee had expired on 1 August 2025, to enable UPC to sponsor candidates for other elective positions in the 2025/2026 General Elections.

Outcome

Interim injunction granted restraining Electoral Commission from implementing decision that UPC Executive Committee expired, enabling UPC to sponsor candidates for parliamentary and other elective positions; application for order to nominate Hon. Akena as presidential candidate dismissed

Facts

Hon. Jimmy James Michael Akena sought nomination as UPC presidential candidate for the 2025/2026 General Elections. On 22 September 2025, the Electoral Commission decided he could not be nominated, finding his candidature non-compliant with the UPC party constitution and that the UPC Executive Committee had expired on 1 August 2025. The Electoral Commission's decision was based partly on two prior High Court rulings: one holding that Hon. Akena was ineligible for nomination for a third term as UPC party president under the party constitution, and another issuing an interim order on 25 July 2025 restraining UPC from convening an extraordinary delegates' conference scheduled for 26 July 2025. Despite this order, UPC held a virtual conference on 26 July 2025 which purportedly extended Hon. Akena's term by 12 months. The applicants filed this application on 24 September 2025 seeking an interim injunction. By the time of the hearing on 25 September 2025, the Electoral Commission had already concluded presidential nominations on 24 September 2025.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants satisfied the conditions for granting an interim order of injunction stopping the Electoral Commission from implementing its decision not to nominate Hon. Jimmy James Michael Akena as a UPC presidential candidate for the 2025/2026 General Elections.

Orders

  • An Interim Order of Injunction is hereby issued restraining the Electoral Commission from implementing part of its decision in a letter dated 22nd September 2025 ref: LEG/297/01 that reads 'The term of the Executive Committee of the Uganda People's Congress expired on 1st August 2025.'
  • Other than as specified in paragraph (i) above, the rest of the decision of the Electoral Commission set out in its letter dated 22nd September 2025 ref: LEG/297/01 is not affected by this Interim Order of Injunction.
  • This Interim Order of Injunction shall expire upon the determination of High Court Misc. Application No. 823 of 2025: UPC & Hon. Jimmy James Michael Akena v. Electoral Commission.
  • No costs are awarded.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Interim Injunctions — Conditions for Grant — Preservation of Status Quo
To be granted an interim order of injunction, an applicant must prove three main conditions: that there is a pending substantive application for a temporary injunction; that there is an imminent threat to the applicant if an interim order is not granted; and if the court is in doubt, the decision will depend on the balance of convenience.
Civil Procedure — Interim Injunctions — Status Quo — Definition and Application
Status quo means the situation that currently exists. Where an event has already occurred and been completed, it is practically impossible for a court to order restoration of a prior state of affairs, as there is no status quo to preserve.
Civil Procedure — Interim Injunctions — Balance of Convenience — Public Interest Considerations
In determining the balance of convenience for an interim injunction, a court must consider whether granting the order would cause more inconvenience to the general public than refusing it. Where the Electoral Commission is under a constitutional duty to comply with strict timelines for conducting elections, it is not in the public interest to derail the election exercise to accommodate a single candidate's nomination.
Electoral Law — Political Parties — Executive Committees — Term Limits and Sponsorship of Candidates
Under the Political Parties and Organisations Act, the term of the Executive Committee of a political party shall not exceed five years. Without a legally constituted Executive Committee, a political party is unable to sponsor candidates for nomination for elective positions, as the Parliamentary Elections Act requires nomination papers of sponsored candidates to be endorsed and sealed by the sponsoring political party.
Administrative Law — Judicial Review — Inherent Powers of Court — Public Interest
The inherent powers of the High Court under Section 37 of the Judicature Act and Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act enable the court to intervene and provide relief in the interest of justice and fairness, including to prevent a political party from being unable to participate in general elections due to administrative determinations affecting its internal organisation.

Legislation cited (10)

Cases cited (5)

  • Meera Investments Ltd v National Water & Sewerage Corporation and Sogea Satom Ltd (Court of Appeal Civil Application No. 285 of 2016)
  • Hwan Sung Industries Limited v Tajdin Hussein and Others (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 19 of 2008)
  • Uganda People's Congress v Prof Edward Kakonge (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 20 of 2016)
  • Denis Adim Enap v Uganda People's Congress and Hon. Jimmy James Michael Akena (Miscellaneous Cause No. 148 of 2025)
  • Joseph Pinytek Ochieno v Uganda People's Congress and Hon. Jimmy James Michael Akena (Miscellaneous Application No. 573 of 2025)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda People's Congress and Hon. Jimmy James Michael Akena v Electoral Commission (Miscellaneous Application 824 of 2025) [2025] UGHCCD 165 (1 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.