By Halima Abdallah
On the second day of the hearing in the
ongoing election petition at Uganda’s Supreme Court challenging
President Yoweri Museveni’s win, the petitioner’s lawyers spent much of
Tuesday
scrutinising affidavits as part of their evidence of
non-compliance with the various electoral laws and the Constitution.
The petitioner – former prime minister Amama
Mbabazi’s – legal team said that there were no results that the
Electoral Commission used to declared the winner in line with the
Presidential Elections Act, the Electoral Commission Act and the
Constitution.
Led by Muhammad Mbabazi, the former premier’s
team argued that under the law, Declaration of Results (DR) forms, tally
sheets and returns from the districts’ polling stations were mandatory
before the Electoral Commission, the second respondent in the case,
declared the presidential election winner.
“We have discharged the burden that there was
non-compliance with section 56 of the Presidential Elections Act and
Section 48 (iii) of the Constitution because there was fundamental
departure from the principles underlying these sections which rendered
the outcome a nullity,” said Mr Mbabazi.
According to Mr Mbabazi lawyers, affidavits
scrutinised in court on Tuesday and the testimony given by the EC
chairman Badru Kiggundu on Monday revealed that the documents were not
available at the national tally centre by the time of announcing
results.
“I had electronic transmission of results. At
that time I did not have them [the DR forms]. Presiding officers insert
them in tamperproof envelopes and send to tally centre where technical
officers scan the forms and tally clerks enter results as seen on the
screen,” Dr Kiggundu told Court on Monday.
Mr Mbabazi argued that the forms must be dully
signed by the agents of each candidate and the District Retuning
Officer, as proof of actual records of what transpired at polling
stations and at the districts.
The EC however argued that it is not mandatory
for results to be declared with Declaration of Results forms, tally
sheets and returns.
“It is our submission that the second
respondent ‘enacted’ his own laws and used his own results to declare
Museveni the winner,” argued Mbabazi.
No comments :
Post a Comment