Uganda: Court Throws Out Petition Against Twinomujuni Nomination

The High Court in Kampala has dismissed a petition challenging the nomination of Loydah Twinomujuni Kyarikunda as Mbarara District Woman Member of Parliament candidate for the 2026-2031 term.

In a ruling delivered on Monday, December 22, 2025, acting judge Bonny Isaac Teko held that the petition was filed outside the legally prescribed time limits, rendering the court without jurisdiction to hear the matter.

The petition had been filed by Maurishia Hope, a rival candidate in the race, against Twinomujuni and the Electoral Commission. Hope sought to nullify the nomination, arguing that the academic qualifications submitted by Twinomujuni did not meet the minimum requirements under the Parliamentary Elections Act.

She also asked court to order that two diplomas presented by the nominee be equated to the Uganda Advanced Certificate of Education, which is the minimum academic qualification required by law.

Court heard that the Electoral Commission had earlier upheld Twinomujuni's nomination after determining that the diplomas submitted constituted qualifications higher than the minimum requirement.

In response, the respondents raised a preliminary objection, contending that the petition was filed out of time and that the court therefore lacked jurisdiction to entertain it.

Justice Teko agreed, observing that under the Parliamentary Elections Interim Provisions, an appeal against a decision of the Electoral Commission must be filed within five days.

The judge noted that the Commission's decision was made on November 15, 2025, while the petition was filed on December 3, 2025, approximately 18 days later.

"Election timelines are unforgiving and non-negotiable," Teko ruled, stressing that such timelines go to the root of the court's jurisdiction and cannot be extended by the court on its own initiative.

He further faulted the petitioner for relying on a decision allegedly obtained through social media rather than formally obtaining an official copy from the Electoral Commission.

According to the judge, parties involved in election-related disputes have a duty to remain vigilant and to promptly secure official decisions to protect their legal rights.

The court also noted that although the law provides limited room for an application to extend time, no such application was filed in this case.

Without an application for enlargement of time, Justice Teko held that the court could not validate a petition filed outside the statutory deadline.

"As a result, this court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a petition which was filed out of time," he ruled.

Despite dismissing the petition, the court declined to award costs to the respondents, citing the public importance of the matter. Each party was ordered to bear its own costs.

The ruling was delivered electronically through the Electronic Court Case Management Information System.