By Eric Yiga
The High Court in Mukono has summoned former Mukono District Returning Officer Emily Amongin to explain the circumstances surrounding the declaration of two different winners in the disputed Mukono District LC5 chairperson election.
Justice Philip Mwaka issued the directive as he commenced hearing a petition filed by National Unity Platform (NUP) candidate Johnson Muyanja Ssenyonga, who is challenging the election of National Resistance Movement (NRM) candidate Francis Lukooya Mukoome.
The dispute stems from the January 23 declaration at the Mukono District tally centre, where Amongin initially announced Muyanja as the winner before later declaring Lukooya the victor after a review of the results.
According to the first declaration, Muyanja had polled 51,686 votes, against Lukooya’s 50,254, while independent candidate Lauben Ssenyonjo had 2,995 votes.
Hon Johnson Muyanja Ssenyonja addresing the media outside Mukono High Court after the session
However, after a review of the results that lasted about three hours, Amongin emerged and announced a revised tally in which Lukooya had 52,523 votes, Muyanja 52,105, and Ssenyonjo 3,095.
The reversal is at the centre of Muyanja’s petition.
Court records indicate that the petitioner alleges that election results from some polling stations were altered or swapped and that signatures of polling officials were forged. He also alleges that some voters were prevented from participating in the election at several polling stations.
Muyanja’s lawyers, led by John Nalera and Charles Wamukota, told court that their client had been publicly declared the winner before the results were changed in favour of Lukooya.
They further sought to introduce additional evidence relating to alleged alterations and forged signatures at polling stations including Kisowera SS, Nama Umea, Nsonga RC and Mavunikire.
The lawyers told court that some of the disputed material had been subjected to verification by police forensic investigators.
However, Justice Mwaka declined to admit the additional evidence at that stage, noting the importance of relying on results officially certified by the Electoral Commission.
Another attempt by the petitioner to introduce forensic evidence also ran into difficulty.
The petitioner’s lawyers had filed supplementary material seeking forensic examination of 22 declaration-of-results forms, alleging that signatures on copies obtained by their client differed from those appearing on certified copies held by the Electoral Commission.
National Resistance Movement (NRM) candidate Francis Lukooya Mukoome Mukono LCV .
The documents were taken to police handwriting expert, Ssebuwufu, for examination.
The respondents, however, objected to the late introduction of the supplementary evidence, arguing that admitting it would require them to obtain their own experts and conduct further examination of the documents.
Justice Mwaka agreed that admitting the material at that stage could disrupt and prolong the proceedings and rejected the attempt to introduce the supplementary affidavit.
Lukooya denies allegations
Lukooya, through his lawyer Ivan Amanya, denied the allegations contained in the petition.
His lawyers maintain that he was lawfully declared winner after the Electoral Commission completed the tallying of results from polling stations.
They argue that the election was conducted freely, fairly and transparently and that the petitioner’s allegations are not supported by the official declaration forms and returned results.
Lukooya was subsequently gazetted as Mukono District chairperson on April 14.
The Electoral Commission, represented by lawyer Mukasa Ssendyona, has also defended the declaration.
Ssendyona told court that Lukooya was declared winner after obtaining the highest number of votes from the tally of returns from all polling stations.
The Commission’s position is that the legally recognised result is the one contained in the official declaration forms.
Dispute over declaration
The events at the Mukono tally centre on January 23 have remained the central issue in the petition.
Earlier that day, Amongin had declared Muyanja winner before a second declaration was made later in the day.
Reports at the time indicated that NRM officials, including Mukono District NRM chairperson Hajji Haruna Ssemakula, Assistant Resident District Commissioner Esther Baroma Nakyaze and NRM spokesperson Hakim Kyeswa, were present at the tally centre during the subsequent review of the results. Muyanja has questioned the circumstances under which the second tally was conducted.
The respondents dispute the petitioner’s interpretation of the events and maintain that the final declaration was based on the completed tally of polling-station returns. Mukoome
serves rival Lukooya over disputed results | battle-looms-as-muyanja-serves-rival-lukooya-over-disputed-results-
The court’s decision to summon Amongin means that the returning officer is expected to account for the circumstances surrounding the two declarations and the changes in the figures.
The case is part of a wider programme of election petition hearings arising from Uganda’s 2026 General Election. The Judiciary has scheduled hundreds of election petitions for hearing across the country, with several cases being handled at the Mukono High Court.
The hearing has been adjourned to Wednesday, when the Electoral Commission is expected to present its witnesses for cross-examination. The Commission is expected to call nine witnesses as the hearing continues.
The court has not yet made a final determination on whether the allegations of altered results, forged signatures or voter disenfranchisement occurred. The substantive dispute over the validity of Lukooya’s election therefore remains before the court.
