By THE INDEPENDENT UG
Kampala, Uganda | THE INDEPENDENT | The Court of Appeal in Kampala has issued an order directing Abim District LCV Chairperson, Yuventine Omara, to vacate office. This decision stems from his election while still serving as an Officer in the Uganda People’s Defence Forces. John De West Ariko, who contested against Omara as an Independent candidate, is declared the rightful winner, and he is expected to assume office immediately.
In the judgment delivered on Tuesday by a panel of three Justices – Frederick Egonda-Ntende, Catherine Bamugemereire, and Eva Luwaga – the Speaker of Abim District is formally notified that “Mr. Omara Yuventine shall from the date of this Judgement cease to be the Chairperson of Abim District Local Government Council.”
This ruling follows a successful cross-appeal by Ariko, represented by his legal team led by Jude Byamukama. The Electoral Commission declared Omara the winner of Abim in 2021 with 14,417 votes, but Ariko, with 4,809 votes, contested the results. He argued at the High Court in Soroti that Omara, then serving as a Captain in UPDF, was ineligible for the position as he hadn’t resigned from the military.
The High Court initially dismissed Ariko’s petition, but he appealed, contending that the court erred in law. The Court of Appeal, comprising Deputy Chief Justice Richard Buteera, among others, ordered a fresh hearing of the election petition before a different judge in July 2022.
In March 2023, High Court Judge Issa Serunkuma nullified Omara’s election, ordering a fresh election for the District Chairperson. Dissatisfied with the decision, both Omara and Ariko went back to the Court of Appeal.
In the recent judgment, the Court of Appeal Justices drew parallels with the Wakanyima Musoke Vs Robert Ssebunya 2016 Case, where a victory was nullified due to invalid nomination grounds. They indicated that the facts of the Abim case were similar, except for the wide margin of victory for Omara. The Justices declared Ariko the validly elected candidate and emphasized that Omara’s wide margin of victory did not legitimize his illegal participation in the election.
The Court of Appeal ruled that only two candidates, Omara and Ariko, were nominated and participated in the election. However, they emphasized that Omara should not have been on the ballot due to his failure to follow the correct procedure to secure discharge from the army, as he was still serving in UPDF at the time of nomination.
The decision emphasized that receiving a salary alone wouldn’t annul the election, but the significant factor was Omara’s failure to follow the correct procedure for discharge. The Court of Appeal’s decision is final in election disputes.
******
URN
Discussion about this post