The judge noted that Nabatanzi did not state that she had personally recorded the videos, identify the gadgets used to make the recordings or explain how the electronic files were stored and preserved before being published.
The High Court in Mukono has struck out video evidence and several attachments filed by petitioner Nabatanzi Daisy Ssonko Sarah in her election petition challenging Betty Nambooze’s victory as Mukono Municipality Member of Parliament.
In a ruling delivered on October 1, 2026, Justice Godfrey Himbaza partially upheld preliminary objections raised by Nambooze, ordering that video evidence, transcriptions and translations attached to affidavits sworn by Nabatanzi, Musoke Patrick and Nalubowa Faridah be struck out.
The court also struck out attachments to the three affidavits for failure to comply with requirements under the Commissioners for Oaths (Advocates) Act.
The ruling stems from a petition filed by Nabatanzi challenging the January 15, 2026 parliamentary election in Mukono Municipality, in which the Electoral Commission declared and gazetted Nambooze as the winner with 21,070 votes.
Makerere Breaks Silence on Acid Attack Allegations Against Senior Lecturer
Nabatanzi, who obtained 6,683 votes, alleges that Nambooze, personally or through her agents and campaigners, committed electoral offences and illegal practices, including bribery, undue influence, violence and intimidation.
She is seeking to have Nambooze’s election nullified and a fresh election held.
Court rejects video evidence
Justice Himbaza found that the video recordings attached to Nabatanzi’s affidavit did not meet the requirements for establishing their authenticity.
The judge noted that Nabatanzi did not state that she had personally recorded the videos, identify the gadgets used to make the recordings or explain how the electronic files were stored and preserved before being published.
The court also noted that the individuals identified as transcribers had not sworn affidavits confirming the reliability and authenticity of the recordings.
Under the Electronic Transactions Act, the court said, a person seeking to introduce an electronic record bears the burden of proving its authenticity.
Justice Himbaza contrasted the evidence with an earlier case involving videos downloaded from BBS Telefayina and Sky News YouTube channels. In that case, the person who downloaded the recordings explained how they were accessed, stored and preserved and provided the relevant transcriptions and translation.
The judge found that the required test had not been met in Nabatanzi’s case.
Musoke affidavit struck out
The court also struck out the affidavit of Musoke Patrick, finding that it did not comply with requirements under the Illiterates Protection Act.
Justice Himbaza further found that the affidavit concerned incidents involving supporters of another candidate, Hanifah Nabukeera, who is not a party to the petition.
District Human Resource Officer Convicted, Ordered to Refund Sh125m
The judge therefore found the affidavit’s relevance to the petition to be too remote.
However, the court declined to strike out other affidavits on the argument that they introduced new incidents of bribery and other claims that had not been specifically detailed in the original petition.
Justice Himbaza held that once a broad ground such as bribery is raised in an election petition, supporting affidavits may provide evidence of different incidents, provided they are filed before the scheduling conference.
Petition proceeds
In the final orders, the court said the preliminary objections were partially sustained.
The impugned attachments to the affidavits of Nabatanzi, Musoke and Nalubowa, together with the video evidence, transcriptions and translations, were struck out.
Musoke’s affidavit was also struck out.
However, the other affidavits filed by Nabatanzi and her witnesses in support of the petition were retained as valid evidence.
The court made no order as to costs.
The ruling does not determine the merits of Nabatanzi’s allegations against Nambooze. It dealt only with preliminary objections concerning the admissibility and validity of some of the evidence filed in support of the election petition.
