Uganda: Storm Brews Over Election Petitions As Courts Brace for Impact

As the dust settles on the January 15, 2026 polls, a new legal battlefront is opening, with the High Court expected to be flooded by election petitions.

Following the first gazettement of results on February 6, the 30-day countdown for aggrieved parliamentary candidates to challenge outcomes has officially begun.

But even before the first petitions are filed, skepticism hangs over the process. Senior legal experts and opposition lawyers warn that unresolved issues from voting day--ranging from mismatched Declaration of Results (DR) forms to contentious recounts--could haunt proceedings and shape how courts determine the fate of many cases.

Lawyers caution that for most petitioners, the greatest obstacle may not be the alleged irregularities themselves, but technicalities in how petitions are framed and prosecuted.

Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines

Counsel Jude Byamukama says the majority of election petitions collapse at the preliminary stage due to weak drafting and failure to meet the strict legal threshold set by electoral law.

"Most election petitions focus on offences allegedly committed by candidates," Byamukama explains.

"But strong petitions must demonstrate election offences successfully committed by the declared winner, and show that the outcome would have been materially affected if those irregularities had not occurred. About 94 percent of petitions are dismissed because of poor composition."

Under Ugandan electoral law, petitioners must prove not only that irregularities occurred, but that they substantially affected the results.

Courts have repeatedly held that minor errors or administrative lapses, without proof of impact on the final tally, are insufficient grounds to overturn an election.

For many candidates, the DR form remains the central piece of evidence, often described as the "holy grail" of election disputes.

However, Counsel Samuel Muyizzi of the National Unity Platform (NUP) warns that possession of original DR forms may not be the decisive weapon candidates expect, particularly where discrepancies arise between forms held by candidates and those relied upon by the Electoral Commission.

"This time round, the question of impartiality becomes more difficult," Muyizzi says.

"The hardships seen during recounts could surface again in these petitions. Having original DR forms is not enough if they differ from what the Electoral Commission is relying on. Primary evidence must be a copy already on file, and ascertaining the integrity of seals on electoral materials has become a major issue."

Muyizzi also points to continued resistance by the Electoral Commission to fully open up biometric data, an issue opposition parties argue undermines transparency in resolving disputes over voter turnout and vote counts.

Despite the concerns, the Judiciary insists it is ready to handle the expected surge in election-related cases. Judiciary Public Relations Officer Ereemye Mawanda says preparations are already underway to ensure petitions are concluded within the constitutionally mandated timelines.

"We have had continuous training of judicial officers and magistrates who handle recounts, as well as High Court judges," Mawanda says.

"Tomorrow, we are training magistrates attached to the High Court. While funding is not always adequate, we are ready. Once a petition is filed, it must be dealt with within 60 days."

Mawanda adds that to avoid delays, judges assigned to election petitions will be relieved of other judicial duties during the hearing period.

"A judge given more cases than he can handle is a risk, so we apply a human face to flexibility," he says.

"We are waiting for the final gazettement to deploy more judges to areas where petition volumes are high."

As candidates weigh whether to head to court, legal observers predict that while many petitions will be filed, only a fraction are likely to survive preliminary objections, setting the stage for a legal season where procedure may matter as much as substance.