By Aggrey Baba
NUP’s Fred Nyanzi Ssentamu has insisted that his election petition against NRM’s Madina Nsereko is not about seeking a political favour from court but an attempt to recover what he says was his victory in the January 2026 Kawempe South parliamentary election.
Speaking on Monday, after appearing before Justice Faridah Bukirwa, at the Civil Division of the High Court in kampala, Nyanzi said he would have preferred to be serving as the elected Kawempe South MP rather than challenging the election outcome in court.
“I was not supposed to petition my victory here in court. We are supposed to be declared,” Nyanzi said, adding that his decision to pursue the case was driven by what he described as the need to follow the rule of law and fight what he called the “tormentors” who denied him victory.
The court appearance marked the latest stage in Nyanzi’s long-running challenge to the Electoral Commission’s declaration of Nsereko as Kawempe South MP.
The Commission declared Nsereko the winner with 18,591 votes against Nyanzi’s 11,292, giving the NRM candidate a margin of 7,299 votes. Independent candidate Dr Roy Ssemboga came third with 4,111 votes.
Nyanzi has since filed a petition asking court to overturn Nsereko’s election and declare him the duly elected MP, arguing that the figures declared by the Electoral Commission do not reflect what was recorded at several polling stations.
His lawyers, led by Alex Luganda and including Nomwesigwa Kranima and Robert Lutaro, are now pushing for access to original electoral documents which they say could expose how the disputed results were generated.
In anterview after court Lutaro said that the electoral malpractice in Kawempe South was “totally unprecedented”, claiming that virtually every known electoral offence was committed against Nyanzi and that some alleged irregularities were new.
According to him, results from more than 71 polling stations, representing more than 50,000 votes, were not tallied.
He further alleged that more than 3,000 votes which had been cast for Nyanzi were subsequently altered and allocated to Nsereko, while some of Nsereko’s votes were transferred in the opposite direction.
Lutaro said the alleged manipulation went beyond simple alteration, with figures being inflated or reduced on declaration forms at several polling stations.
He gave the example of situations where Madina’s recorded figure could be changed by adding a digit, while Nyanzi’s tally was reduced, describing the practice as “inflation” and reduction of votes.
“These electoral offences that happened in Kawempe, in the area of Chairman Nyanzi, are totally unprecedented in the history of elections in Uganda,” Lutaro said.
The allegations echo the broader claims already contained in Nyanzi’s voluminous petition, in which he argues that results from numerous polling stations were excluded, altered or switched in favour of Nsereko. Mulengera previously reported that Nyanzi’s petition identified dozens of polling stations where he alleges results were manipulated, including claims that figures on DR forms differed from figures subsequently reflected in EC’s records.
The petition also alleges that the EC supplied Nyanzi with certified copies of declaration forms rather than the originals, prompting his legal team to return to court seeking orders compelling production of the original documents.
That application formed the immediate business before Justice Bukirwa on Monday, with lawyer Alex Luganda explaining that Nyanzi’s team wants both EC and Nsereko to produce their original DR-forms because the petitioner’s copies tell a different story from the documents relied upon by EC in declaring the winner.
“If Madina says I won, then bring your original DR forms upon which you won,” Luganda said, further arguing that every candidate had polling agents at the stations and should therefore have original DR forms showing what was recorded at the end of voting.
Luganda said Nyanzi’s team had obtained original DR forms from several other candidates who contested the same election, including candidates who lost badly, and that those documents allegedly correspond with Nyanzi’s version of the results.
He therefore questioned why madina and EC had not produced the original forms upon which the disputed declaration was based.
Apart from the original DR forms, the lawyer said Nyanzi is seeking the Electoral Commission’s official report book, tally sheets, scanner report and accountability forms showing electoral materials issued and returned.
He said the documents are central to establishing whether the results corresponded with what was recorded at the polling stations.
The EC, represented by lawyer Abubaker Kayondo, asked for additional time, explaining that some officials who handle the relevant documents were away because of by-election which is being conducted in Adjuman.
Kayondo said the Commission needed to examine the application properly before deciding its position, arguing that the matter had not yet been fully brought to its attention because of the outstanding documentation.
Nsereko’s legal team, led by David Kamukama and comprising Kibirige Ismael, Kitimbo Shamira, Samuel Wamala and Luyima Jabal, also sought time to consult their client, who was said to be away on official duties.
Nyanzi’s lawyers pushed for a faster timetable, with Luganda telling court that he was prepared to file its response shortly after the respondents filed theirs because they wanted the interlocutory application cleared so that the main election petition could proceed without unnecessary delay.
Justice Bukirwa subsequently directed the parties to work within the expedited timetable, with the relevant filings to be completed by Friday, September 18, and the matter to return for further directions on September 30th.
Luganda also asked that when the parties return on September 30, court should provide guidance on management of the main petition, including scheduling, documentation and witnesses.
He explained that the outcome of the application seeking the original documents could determine whether some additional documents would eventually have to be placed on the court record.
The main petition is therefore scheduled to return before Justice Bukirwa on Wednesday, September 30.
The Monday proceedings also produced a significant media-management discussion before the substantive business of the petition got underway.
Justice Bukirwa cautioned lawyers against allowing disagreements to turn the proceedings into a confrontation, urging them, as officers of court, to help the bench keep discussions focused on the issues before it.
She emphasised respect and dignity among lawyers, telling counsel that where there are disagreements between colleagues, they should be resolved appropriately rather than turning the courtroom into a battlefield. (For comments on this story, get back to us on 0705579994 [WhatsApp line], 0779411734 & 041 4674611 or email us at mulengeranews@gmail.com).
