By Spy Uganda
Elias Luyimbazi Nalukoola of the National Unity Platform (NUP) has formally filed a Notice of Appeal challenging the High Court’s decision to nullify his election as Member of Parliament for Kawempe North. The move marks the beginning of what could become a pivotal legal showdown, with potential implications for both the constituency’s political future and broader electoral accountability in Uganda.
The appeal comes in response to a ruling delivered on Monday by Justice Bernard Namanya of the High Court’s Civil Division, which found that the January 2025 by-election in Kawempe North had been fraught with significant electoral irregularities. Justice Namanya cited gross non-compliance with key provisions of the Parliamentary Elections Act and ordered Nalukoola’s removal from Parliament, alongside a directive for the Electoral Commission to conduct fresh elections.
In swift reaction, Nalukoola’s legal team filed the appeal, asserting their complete dissatisfaction with the court’s findings and indicating their intent to contest the ruling in its entirety.
“Take notice that the appellant, Luyimbazi Elias Nalukoola, is dissatisfied with the judgment of Hon. Justice Bernard Namanya from the High Court of Uganda (Civil Division) delivered on the 26th day of May, and intends to appeal to the Court of Appeal of Uganda against the entire decision,” the notice reads.
The appeal is being led by a formidable coalition of law firms, including PACE Advocates; Nyanzi, Kiboneka & Mbabazi Advocates; Nalukoola Advocates & Solicitors; Aharmark Advocates; Alaka & Co Advocates; and Reeve Advocates. Their involvement underscores the gravity Nalukoola attaches to the case, and the legal weight being mobilized behind the challenge.
Justice Namanya’s ruling came after weeks of intense legal arguments regarding the integrity of the by-election. The court concluded that the process had been compromised to an extent that fundamentally affected the outcome, leading to the invalidation of Nalukoola’s election under Sections 80, 82(4)(c), and 82(6)(c) of the Act.
In a notable decision, the court ruled that both parties would bear their own legal costs—a move some legal analysts interpret as a gesture toward equitable access to justice in cases of significant public interest.
Nalukoola, who had only served in the 11th Parliament for two months before the decision, ran his campaign on a platform of transparency, good governance, and human rights advocacy. His removal has created a gap in opposition representation in Kampala, triggering concern among NUP supporters who viewed his presence as essential in a key urban stronghold.
This case adds to a growing list of high-profile electoral disputes that have placed the judiciary and Electoral Commission under scrutiny. While some have welcomed the High Court’s ruling as a demonstration of judicial independence, others argue it risks silencing voter intent in politically active constituencies.
With the appeal now before the Court of Appeal, Nalukoola’s legal team is expected to argue that any procedural irregularities did not substantially alter the will of Kawempe North voters. The court’s upcoming decision may help clarify the legal threshold for nullifying an election and further shape Uganda’s evolving electoral jurisprudence.
As anticipation builds around a possible re-election, political parties—both in the opposition and the ruling National Resistance Movement—are already preparing for a renewed contest. Analysts expect increased mobilization, tighter oversight of the Electoral Commission, and heightened political tension in the capital.
Ultimately, Nalukoola’s appeal places the matter squarely in the hands of the Court of Appeal, whose ruling will not only determine the fate of one parliamentary seat but could set a lasting precedent on how Uganda handles electoral disputes moving forward.
