MENGO COURT DISMISSES NAMIREMBE WOMAN COUNCILOR PETITION - SAYS COURT HAS NO JURISDICTION OVER PRE-ELECTION MATTERS

By Peter Ssuuna

The Chief Magistrate's Court of Mengo at Mengo has dismissed Election Petition No. 009 of 2026 filed by Namuddu Joyce challenging the election of Nakitto Lydia Nalongo aka Maama Sama as City Division Woman Councilor for Namirembe Parish, Rubaga Division.

In his judgment delivered by His Worship Natwijuka Aloysius Baryeza, the court upheld the preliminary objection raised by Counsel Jessy Magala for the 1st Respondent and Counsel Fred Johnson Asiimwe for the Electoral Commission, that the petition was based on a pre-election complaint and therefore this court has no jurisdiction to handle it.

THE PETITION

Namuddu Joyce, who contested in the elections held on 22nd January 2026, had asked court to declare the election of Nakitto Lydia Nalongo null and void.

She alleged that Nakitto's nomination papers - including the Oath Authenticating Statement, Form EC 7 (Statement Under Oath) and Form EC 8 (Consent to Nomination) - were forged and bore an invalid commissioning stamp of one Emmanuel Meta Aloro, who she claimed was not a Commissioner for Oaths.

Namuddu argued that Nakitto never appeared before the said Commissioner as required under Section 132(4)(c) & (d) of the Local Government Act Cap 138, and therefore was not validly nominated or qualified to contest.

She had asked court to set aside Nakitto's election, declare her (Namuddu) as the duly elected Councilor, and order the Respondents to pay costs.

Namuddu was represented by Counsel Twesigomwe Mary and Amaro Grace.

DEFENCE

In reply, Counsel Jessy Magala for Nakitto argued that the petition was fundamentally a pre-election nomination complaint that should have been raised and resolved at nomination stage.

He relied on Article 61(1)(f) of the Constitution, Section 15(1) of the Electoral Commission Act Cap 140 and Section 185 of the Local Government Act, which confer powers upon the Electoral Commission to hear and determine electoral complaints arising before and during polling.

He cited authorities including Gaddafi Massur vs Sekabira Denes, Akol Hellen Odeke vs Okodel Umar (2021) and Ongole James Michael vs Electoral Commission (2007) where courts held that nomination irregularities must first be brought before the Electoral Commission, and an aggrieved party should appeal to High Court, not wait to file an election petition.

The Electoral Commission through Counsel Fred Johnson Asiimwe added that Namuddu wrote a letter dated 1st October 2025, 3 months before elections, complaining about illegal documents, but she never adduced evidence nor followed up the complaint to its logical conclusion. EC said it was busy and could not respond to the letter.

They argued that the case of *Hon. Ogwari Polycarp vs Ochwa David (2024) UGCA 61*, which Namuddu relied on to claim court has jurisdiction, only applies where the invalidity of qualifications is discovered after the election, not where the petitioner knew about it before election.

COURT'S ANALYSIS

In his analysis, His Worship Baryeza defined jurisdiction as the fundamental power and competence of a court to hear and determine a matter, which must be expressly prescribed by law.

The court agreed with the Respondents that the petition hinged on a pre-election complaint about nomination and forgery of commissioning, not about polling or counting of votes.

Court held that under Article 61(f), Section 15 of Electoral Commission Act and Section 185 of Local Government Act, pre-election complaints are a preserve of the Electoral Commission. It is imprudent to wait until nomination and elections are over then complain about an initial stage.

Court therefore found that it has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition and dismissed it, with a direction on costs to be determined.

IMPLICATION

The judgment sets a clear precedent for other petitions in Rubaga, including the heated Lubaga III case of Julius Katongole alias Mumiransanafu vs Bonny Kabugo, that petitions based on nomination irregularities known before election will be dismissed, while those based on actual polling, counting and DR Forms have a chance.