Court Upholds EC Decision Blocking Magogo Rival from Budiope East MP Race

The High Court in Kampala has dismissed an appeal by former police officer Daniel Mulirire, keeping in place the Electoral Commission (EC) decision that removed him from the ballot for Budiope East constituency (Buyende District).

In a judgment delivered electronically on January 9, 2026, Justice Simon Peter M. Kinobe upheld the EC’s December 23, 2025 decision that annulled Mulirire’s nomination after a complaint by Yeko Ibrahim, a voter in the constituency.

Mulirire had asked court to overturn the EC decision, arguing that the commission wrongly disqualified him on the ground that he failed to attach proof of resignation from the Uganda Police Force to his nomination papers. He also wanted court to order that he be reinstated on the ballot paper.

A key part of the judgment is the court’s clarification that the law does not strictly require a candidate to attach resignation proof on nomination day.

Justice Kinobe held that Section 4(4)(a) of the Parliamentary Elections Act and the EC’s own nomination guidelines do not make it mandatory to submit proof at the time of nomination.

“Section 4(4)… and [the] Guidelines… do not make it a requirement… to render proof of resignation before or on nomination,” the judge said, adding: “It is a call of prudence… but not one of law.”

He warned that making it mandatory without a clear legal basis “would… create an injustice.”

The judge concluded that: “The failure to provide proof of resignation on nomination day is not fatal and should not lead to denomination of a candidate … as there is no specific provision of law that makes the provision of proof on nomination day mandatory.”

Why Mulirire still lost

However, the judge drew a firm line on what happens once a complaint is lodged.

He ruled that when resignation becomes contested, the candidate must provide strong, convincing evidence to the EC.

“It is… the finding of this court that the provision of proof of resignation becomes mandatory and vital at the point of a complaint being lodged with the Electoral Commission,” he wrote.

Mulirire had attached a photocopy letter in his response to the complaint, which he said showed the police accepted his resignation. But the court found the document was not strong enough to prove he had effectively resigned.

“It is my opinion that the letter was not sufficient,” the judge said, listing reasons including that it was signed by “one Aryatuha Dora… on behalf of the Inspector General of Police” but the author’s “title and capacity… is not indicated,” and that the letter “is not certified.”

The ruling keeps Mulirire off the ballot in a constituency where he is seen as a key challenger to incumbent MP Moses Magogo.

Magogo is married to Speaker of Parliament Anita Among, whose own political contests have in the past drawn attention over nomination disputes affecting challengers.

The decision comes as nomination and qualification battles intensify ahead of the 2026 elections, with opposition parties — especially NUP — repeatedly accusing the electoral process of being tilted by technicalities, a claim the EC has previously denied.

Justice Kinobe said the most important document for proving resignation is the resignation letter itself, properly received and dated.

“This resignation letter should be stamped by the employer as proof of receipt and date of resignation to indicate fulfilment of the 90-day requirement,” he said.

The judge also noted Mulirire did not explain why he failed to present better evidence during the EC process, such as a certified copy, a received copy of his resignation letter, or even an affidavit from the author confirming authenticity.

Court rejects constitutional and quorum arguments

Mulirire also tried to argue that the resignation requirement in Section 4(4)(a) is invalid because a similar provision in the Constitution had been challenged before. The judge rejected this, saying the Supreme Court had previously confirmed that the resignation requirement remained enforceable.

“The current attempt… is an afterthought, misconceived and devoid of merit,” the judge wrote.

On another complaint — that the EC lacked quorum — the judge said it was not properly raised in Mulirire’s petition. Even so, after looking at the record, he found the commission had the required numbers and was “properly constituted with the requisite quorum.”

Was Mulirire heard?

Mulirire had complained that the EC sat on November 18, 2025 before he was served, and that the process was unfair. The court found the commission gave him a chance to respond, including notice and service through WhatsApp and later opportunities to file a response.

The judge said the strict rules used in normal court summons may not fully apply to EC complaint processes as long as fairness is achieved, noting the need for fast handling of election disputes.

No costs — and a warning to lawyers

Although Mulirire lost, the judge declined to award costs, saying the case raised a “rather novel issue” — whether proof of resignation must be produced on nomination day — which the court has now clarified. “All parties shall bear their costs,” he ruled.

In a final caution, Justice Kinobe criticised a “growing trend” of lawyers and litigants debating ongoing cases on social media and “insinuating the likely outcome,” urging advocates to maintain professional decorum and respect sub judice rules.