ON DUTY: MP Mukasa at Railway in Ndeeba, getting views from his voters


LAWYERS from Yiga, Semuyaba & Co. Advocates representing Rubaga Division South Constituency Member of Parliament Aloysius Talton Gold Mukasa the 1st respondent in an election petition no. 07 of 2021 filed by DP’s Eugenia Nassolo are set to take off with the matter in a High court hearing sitting tomorrow Tuesday, in Kampala.
Hearing is before Hon. Lady Justice Dr. Winfred Nabisinde at High Court (Criminal Division) court room 1 at 3:00 pm.
Through her lawyers of M/s Alaka & Co. Advocates, Eugenia Nassolo petitioned High court seeking declaration that the respondent (Aloysius Mukasa) was not at the time of his nomination and election qualified to take part in the elections of member of Parliament. 
Secondly, for declaration that the 1st respondent was not validly elected as member of Parliament for Rubaga South Constituency. 
Citing Section 68 (1), (7) & (8) of the Parliamentary Election Act, the petitioner Nassolo Eugenia says, “Mukasa Aloysius and his agents with his knowledge and consent or approval during the election period and with the intent directly or indirectly to influence voters to vote for him and to refrain from voting her gave out donations and gifts like branded masks, water tanks with words, ‘Aloysius Mukasa MP Rubaga South’, to voters on 23rd November 2020 at Nateete Market and Ndeeba Trading Centre.”
Nassolo petitioned court for declaration that  she is the validly elected member of Rubaga Division South Constituency. The Petitioner also sought for an order that the election of the 1st respondent as Member of Parliament Rubaga Division South be set aside,that the petitioner is the dully elected Member of Parliament for Rubaga Division South Constituency, and that the respondents pay the costs of the petition.
Electoral Commission who are the 2nd respondents in this petition, will be represented by their Legal Department.
We are reliably informed, evidence in Nassolo’s petition will be banked on the Election Parish Supervisors some from Nateete who are her prime witnesses.
These Parish Supervisors allege that, Declaration Result (DR) Forms in Nateete were altered and Nassolo wants to bank on this evidence so as to force court to hand out a ruling in her favor.

Lawyers of the 1st Respondent are set to ask court to properly evaluate the petitioner’s evidence on record.
They will ask the trial judge to subject the evidence before court to the standard of proof required in Parliamentary elections petition. 
The 1st Respondent’s counsel is expected to rely on Dr. Kizito Deo Lukyamuzi v Kasamba Mathias and Another; Election petition No. 3 of 2011 for holding that, neither the Act nor the Regulations made under it give the definition of the phrase “change of name” therefore, it is not clear whether variation in name by merely adding or abbreviating your other name, without losing or abandoning the use of the original one, amounts to change. 
It was further held that Parliament intended the registration of change of name to apply to persons who have been registered in accordance with the Act but a person whose name was never registered is at liberty to change his or her name at will and without recourse to the provisions of the Act.
The Petitioner says, academic documents presented for nomination by the 1st respondent do not belong to him but to someone else and the burden will be on the Petitioner to prove this allegation.
In the reply, the 1st Respondent attached his O’ level and A’ level pass slips and the degree transcript from the University. Thereafter, the burden of proof shifts back to the petitioner (Nassolo) to prove whether the adduced documents belong to someone else. 
The learned trial judge is expected to make an inquiry according to section 63 (4) of the Parliamentary Elections Act into whether the 1st Respondent actually studied from Lubiri Secondary School and Merryland High School Entebbe under his current names before reaching a conclusion that he does not have requisite academic qualifications. 
Hon. Mukasa’s counsel is expected to submit that there is no iota of evidence from the two schools that the 1st Respondent was not their former student. The burden of proving that Hon. Mukasa did not posses the minimum academic documents to be nominated as a candidate for election as a member of Parliament.
Mukasa lawyers are expected to ask court to appraise the evidence on vote bribery submitted by the petitioner by subjecting it to scrutiny and coming up with a decision.
A successful businessman who is among Hon. Bobi Wine’s top confidants, Hon. Aloysius Mukasa contested on opposition National Unity Platform (NUP) ticket, massively winning Nassolo Eugenia and other twelve candidates to be declared winner by The Electoral Commission Kampala Returning officer.
Other candidates were; Male Charles Kenneth (NRM), Kifampa Silaje (JEEMA), Kato Lubwama Paul (Independent), Mugga Adam Swift (Independent), Lufunya Derrick (Independent), Ken Lukyamuzi (CP), Lubega Samuel Walter Mukaaku (SDP), Buwembo Habib (FDC), Kiyingi Denis ( Independent), Nakanwagi Grace (Independent), Sebugwawo Mbidde Denis (Independent) and Kayemba Michael Oscar (Independent).
Aloysius Mukasa polled 49,501 (Forty Nine thousand, five hundred and one) and Nassolo came second 12,893 (Twelve thousand, Eight Hundred ninety three) votes.
Nassolo who is said to have ran one of the best bankrolled campaigns in which she donated tents, aprons, masks, water tanks among others items, has instead petitioned court to cancel Mukasa’s election on allegations that he donated 300 bags of cement to St. Peters Church Ndeeba.

“It’s true our MP is known for being very generous and for years, he has been extending a helping hand to the needy. But as a super observer of the Parliamentary election Act as amended, he couldnt commit illegal practices or other offences under this Act. So Nassolo’s allegations are baseless.” Mukasa’s camp told this News website. 
They were shocked that in her petition, Nassolo mistakenly brands Mukasa’s official car, Drone type reg. No. UBE 564W to be an ambulance asking whether this DP lady knows what is an ambulance and it’s features.
“We don’t want to waste time on this empty petition. We shall meet in court but advise her to be ready to the costs for her lies. Lubaga South people will stand with their member of Parliament as he defeats Nassolo in round three.” Vow Hon. Mukasa supporters. Also click and read this story: ‘NASSOLO PETITION IS INCOMPETENT & BASED ON POLITICAL GAMES DISMISS IT WITH COSTS”- NUP MP-ELECT MUKASA’S LAWYERS ASK COURT

For views/Remarks, send us an sms on 0792735159


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here