Justice Karemani found that the law requires presiding officers to give copies of DR forms to polling agents of each candidate. However, he noted that the law does not require those agents to subsequently hand the forms to the candidates they represented.
Social Media Claims Aside: What Moses Kalangwa’s Will Reveals About His Estate
The High Court in Mpigi has dismissed an application by Kiyaga Hillary Innocent seeking to compel Mawokota County North MP Amelia Anne Kyambadde to produce copies of Declaration of Results (DR) forms from 37 polling stations in connection with an election petition challenging her victory.
Justice Jamson Karemani K. dismissed the application on Wednesday, September 30, 2026, ruling that it lacked merit and ordering each party to bear its own costs.
Kiyaga had asked the court to order Kyambadde to produce, for inspection and copying, DR forms allegedly given to her polling agents at 37 polling stations. He also wanted the documents filed in court for comparison during the hearing of the main election petition.
The application arose from the January 15, 2026 election for Mawokota County North, in which Kyambadde was declared the winner with 27,075 votes against Kiyaga’s 24,801, giving her a margin of 2,274 votes.
Kiyaga argued that the forms were necessary to enable the court to compare copies held by the Electoral Commission with forms in his possession and those allegedly held by Kyambadde.
He alleged that some DR forms used by the returning officer differed from copies given to candidates’ agents and contained alterations. He also claimed that at 13 of the listed polling stations, the forms used by the returning officer did not bear signatures of candidates’ agents and did not contain notes explaining any failure or refusal to sign.
Kyambadde opposed the application, describing it as a fishing expedition and an attempt to gather evidence after the petition had already been filed.
Through her lawyers, she argued that the documents sought had not been listed or referred to in the petition or her response and that the applicant was attempting to amend his case through the application. She also told court that the documents she had were certified copies obtained from the Electoral Commission.
UCU Wins Regional Privacy Moot Competition, Earns Trip to Ghana
Court’s findings
Justice Karemani found that the law requires presiding officers to give copies of DR forms to polling agents of each candidate. However, he noted that the law does not require those agents to subsequently hand the forms to the candidates they represented.
The judge further noted that, under Section 71 of the Parliamentary Elections Act, the Electoral Commission is the institution legally required to keep election materials until electoral disputes are resolved.
He said other participants in the election process are only presumed to have copies of such materials, and cannot be compelled to produce them without proof that they actually possess the documents.
“Unless there is proof that shows that a party possesses the same, he/she cannot be compelled to produce it,” the judge ruled.
The court nevertheless found that the DR forms sought were relevant and material to the issues raised in the election petition and were not protected by privilege or any other legal restriction.
However, Justice Karemani faulted Kiyaga for the timing of the application, noting that the main petition and response had been filed in March 2026, while the application for the documents was filed in September, more than five months later.
He said election petitions are intended to be handled expeditiously and that parties must act promptly when seeking evidence necessary for their cases.
The judge also rejected the application on the ground that it amounted to a fishing expedition.
He observed that Kiyaga’s agents had already received DR forms and that the forms from the Electoral Commission, which he alleged had been falsified, had also been availed to him through the pleadings.
“The applicant does not show that the respondent possesses other forms that are falsified apart from these but appears to be beating up the bush with hope to get support for his claim,” Justice Karemani said.
The court consequently dismissed the application and ordered each party to meet its own costs.
The ruling does not, on its face, determine the merits of the underlying election petition challenging Kyambadde’s election; it concerns Kiyaga’s application seeking production and inspection of additional DR forms.
