[2021] UGSC 65
The Supreme Court held that the matters raised in the proposed amendments regarding non-compliance with electoral laws and commission of electoral offences were already pleaded in the original petition, and thus did not require amendment. The applicant is at liberty to adduce evidence in support of those matters....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] UGSC 65
- Parties
- Applicant: Kyagulanyi Ssentamu Robert; Respondent: Yoweri Museveni Tibuhaburwa; Respondent: Electoral Commission; Respondent: Attorney General
- Court
- Supreme Court of Uganda
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 1 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
- Outcome
- application_disallowed
- Judges
- Owiny-Dollo, CJ, Kisaakye, JSC, Arach-Amoko, JSC, Opio-Aweri, JSC, Mwondha, JSC, Mugamba, JSC, Muhanguzi, JSC, Tuhaise, JSC, Mike Chibita, JSC
- Legal Topics
- Presidential Election Petition, Amendment of Petition, Limitation Period, Qualification of Candidate
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Kyagulanyi Ssentamu Robert
Applicant
Yoweri Museveni Tibuhaburwa
Respondent
Electoral Commission
Respondent
Attorney General
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the proposed amendments to the presidential election petition are permissible under the law.
- 2 Whether the issue of qualification of the 1st respondent can be introduced outside the statutory limitation period.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court held that the matters raised in the proposed amendments regarding non-compliance with electoral laws and commission of electoral offences were already pleaded in the original petition, and thus did not require amendment. The applicant is at liberty to adduce evidence in support of those matters. However, the issue of qualification of the 1st respondent, as raised in the proposed amended petition, constituted a new matter that falls outside the statutory limitation period for filing a presidential election petition. The law does not permit the introduction of new causes of action after the expiry of the limitation period. Accordingly, the application to amend the petition...
Court Disposition
application_disallowed
Orders
- The application to amend the presidential election petition is disallowed.
- Costs shall be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
# THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA
## CORAM: OWINY - DOLLO C. J; KISAAKYE; ARACH-AMOKO; OPIO-AWERI; MWONDHA; MUGAMBA; MUHANGUZI; TUHAISE; CHIBITA; JJ. S. C;
## **MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 01 OF 2021**
(Arising from Presidential Petition No. 1 of 2021)
#### KYAGULANYI SSENTAMU ROBERT::::::::::::::::::::::::::::PPLICANT/PETITIONERS 15
### **VERSUS**
$\vdots$ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
- 1. YOWERI MUSEVENI TIBUHABURWA - 2. ELECTORAL COMMISSION - 3. ATTORNE Y GENERAL
### **RULING OF COURT**
We have perused the application, the replies by the Respondents, and considered the submissions of Counsel for the parties.
Court finds that the matters raised in the proposed amendments pertaining to non-compliance with the laws, and the alleged commission of electoral offences, are already pleaded in the petition. What remains is for the Petitioner to adduce evidence in proof of those matters.
However, Court finds that the issue of qualification of the 1<sup>st</sup> Respondent raised in the proposed amended petition, is a new matter which comes outside the limitation period provided for filing a Presidential election petition. Therefore, we disallow it.
$\mathsf{S}$
$20$
In the event, we disallow the application. We shall give the $\mathsf{S}$ detailed reasons for deciding so, in the final Judgment.
Costs shall be in the cause.
Dated at Kampala this. June 2021 10 Alfonse C. Owiny - Dollo **Chief Justice** 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dr. Esther Kisaakye Justice of the Supreme Court . . . . . . 20 Stella Arach-Amoko Justice of the Supreme Court . . . . . . . . . . Ruby Opio-Aweri 25 Justice of the Supreme Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Faith Mwondha Justice of the Supreme Court 30 **...............** Paul Mugamba Justice of the Supreme Court $\overline{2}$
**.........** Ezekiel Muhanguzi Justice of the Supreme Court
$\forall$
Percy Night Tuhaise<br>**Justice of the Supreme Court**
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$\cdots \cdots$
. . . . . . . . . *.* Mike Chibita Justice of the Supreme Court
$10$
$\mathsf{S}$
$15\\$