By Mulengera Reporters
On Monday, High Court Judge Faridah Bukirwa commenced on the processing of NUP politician Fred Nyanzi’s election petition. He is challenging the controversial circumstances under which NRM’s Madina Nsereko was declared Kawempe South MP last January. Nyanzi was given 11,292 votes, and Madina Nsereko 18,591!
Led by Alex Luganda, Nyanzi’s legal team started by submitting on their client’s application calling on the judge to issue an order compelling the Electoral Commission to share original copies of the tally sheets and declaration forms on which they based to declare Madina Nsereko the winner in an election, the petitioner asserts, she lost in broad day light and by a large margin.
It was asserted before Court that the contents of the DR forms EC relied on to procure the Madina Nsereko victory substantially differ from what is contained in the other candidates’ DR forms.
Gratefully, other former contestants including Dr. Roy Semboga Hassan Senkungu have deponed affidavits corroborating the fact the actual winner was Fred Nyanzi and that Madina Nsereko’s declaration was not based on what came out of the 122 polling stations in Kawempe South. EC lawyers, led by counsel Abubaker Kayondo, asked for time to submit the required originals saying he was unable to do so promptly since all his bosses are upcountry in West Nile organizing by-elections to fill Gen Moses Ali’s MP Seat.
Fred Nyanzi’s lawyers told Court that they have so far written seven letters asking for the same to be given to them in vain. The EC has only given them certified photocopies and not the original DR forms. The NRM candidate, who is alleged to have benefited from the EC machinations and deliberate electoral malpractices, was nowhere to be seen and she actually hasn’t been able to share with the petitioner copies of her own original DR forms from which her disputed victory was derived.
Fred Nyanzi called on Kawempe voters to help rebuke and call out Madina Nsereko wherever they find her and remind her of the duty to share her declaration forms with court. Nyanzi told journalists he was hurt to see Madina Nsereko disrespecting court to the extent of going into hiding instead of turning up at Court to defend her victory.
Some voters camped outside Court and addressed journalists while likening Madina Nsereko to a very unstrategic thief who digs her/his grave by stealing an elephant which turns out to be too big to be successfully hidden. Nsereko’s legal team was headed by David Kamukama, one of the Kampala lawyers who are well known for subscribing to NRM.
They had a difficult time pushing back against Nyanzi’s application. At some point, Nsereko’s lawyers demanded that journalists be locked out of the Court session but, progressive-minded as always, Justice Faridah Bukirwa objected to their request.
CAN’T BE SAVED:
Moments after Court adjourned to 30th September, after the Judge gave 29th September as the day she will deliver her ruling on compelling the EC to share the required original DR forms, Nyanzi’s lawyers addressed reporters outside the Court premises at Twed Plaza in the leafy Kampala neighborhood of Nakasero.
Robert Rutaro, a renowned Musevenist whose being part of the petitioner’s legal team shocked many journalists, spoke loudest. He made it clear that the evidence against Madina Nsereko is so overwhelming to the extent that no cadre judge (however shameless) can ever be able to get her out of trouble. Rutaro called on the people of Kawempe to begin slaughtering and eating their chicken because their man Fred Nyanzi has more than enough evidence to expose Madina Nsereko and leave Court with no option but to nullify the NRM candidate’s victory and declare the NUP man the duly elected MP for the area.
Rutaro implied he isn’t surprised the best Madina Nsereko can do is to hide because there is simply no way she can justify her victory. Rutaro said one of the cases they will be laying out is that there was massive disenfranchisement because more than 50,000 Kawempe South voters had their votes excluded. That as many as 50,000 votes were excluded by the EC and not included in the final tally.
He asserted that all this was calculated to reduce Nyanzi’s vote while advantaging Madina Nsereko. Disenfranchisement of voters is criminal and violates clear provisions of the Constitution, Rutaro asserted making it clear that they have hundreds of witnesses who will be corroborating this before Court.
He also spoke about another 3,000 votes which were Nyanzi’s but were allegedly altered and given to Madina Nsereko as the EC put together the alien DR forms and tally sheets. That up to 3,000 of the 18,591 votes Madina Nsereko was declared to have victored with were Fred Nyanzi’s. That the EC merely switched and gave the same to Madina Nsereko and vice versa.
“By all standards, what happened and the electoral offences the EC and Madina Nsereko orchestrated in Kawempe South were simply unprecedented in Uganda’s electoral history. Every electoral offence and malpractice that can ever be committed was done to the Kawempe voters and much more,” Rutaro elaborated to a large army of journalists outside Court premises.
According to the EC gazetted results, the Kawempe South race had 12 candidates (Salim Serunkuma, 131 votes, FDC’s Faisal Ddamulira 131, Roy Semboga 4,111 votes, NRM’s Madina Nsereko Ntale 18,591 votes, NUP’s Fred Nyanzi Sentamu 11,292 votes, EPU’s Umar Nsubuga 39 votes, Muhammed Ismail Senyonga 472 votes, CMP’s Dafala Sekanjako 101 votes, PFF’s Hasan Senkungu 147 votes, DF’s Fatimah Nsubuga 96 votes and Musa Tariq Kyagulanyi 125 votes). Many of these agree with Nyanzi in disputing Madina Nsereko’s declaration as a winner and are ready to give evidence for Fred Nyanzi.
Indeed, several of them were at Court where they expected to come face to face with Madina Nsereko and see her wearing a bold face. They assert that the contents of their DR forms differ with what the EC declared and are consistent with Fred Nyanzi’s.
Rutaro also claimed that there was widespread falsification and alternation of results, among other electoral malpractices, at more than 71 polling stations and all this substantially impacted the final outcome of the election. He described Madina Nsereko as standing on shaky ground, which is why herself and EC are working hard to avoid being compelled to share the originals of the DR Forms and tally sheets they based on to proclaim her victory.
Several voters present outside the fully packed court room cursed and castigated Madina Nsereko for imposing herself on them yet she clearly isn’t prepared to render them any effective representation. One female voter, a mid-aged woman, asserted that Nyanzi is a good man because her children are having free education at his schools.
“What is Madina Nsereko giving us? She isn’t outspoken on the floor of Parliament and isn’t active in the constituency because she knows voters are hostile to her because they never voted her in the first place. In fact, we don’t see her anywhere in the Constituency. She must be very terrified of her own voters,” she explained to journalists making it clear they are more than ready to once again vote for Fred Nyanzi any day a by-election is proclaimed in Kawempe South. Nyanzi called upon Kawempe voters to shut up Madina Nsereko whenever they come across her while making it clear that she will never have the legitimacy to be their organic Member of Parliament.
In a related development, in the same court building another judge presided over the commencement of two other petitions one against LoP Joel Senyonyi and another against Kasirye Ali Nganda Mulyanyama. The duo, like Nyanzi, belong to NUP and they are using the same law firms.
Alex Luganda, one of the NUP lawyers (who is also the AG for Busoga Kingdom), explained that they have filed a preliminary objection to save Mulyanyama on grounds that Francis Lubega, his challenger, filed his petition past the stipulated time and should also have challenged his nomination by petitioning the EC within the prescribed time-way before voting day.
Mulyanyama is being challenged on the basis of the alleged inadequate academic qualifications and his lawyers seem determined to avoid having the petition inquired into substantively by going for preliminary objections of the petition being time-barred. (For comments on this story, get back to us on 0705579994 [WhatsApp line], 0779411734 & 041 4674611 or email us at mulengeranews@gmail.com).
