Central Region Member of Parliament for Older Persons, Mr James Kakooza, has asked the High Court in Wakiso to dismiss an election petition challenging his victory, arguing that it was not served within the time prescribed by law.
The preliminary objection was raised on Monday before Justice George Okello, with Mr Kakooza’s lawyer, Mr Apolo Katumba, arguing that the court has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition because the respondent was served outside the statutory seven-day period.
Mr Katumba told court that the law requires an election petition to be served on the respondents within seven days and that failure to comply with the requirement renders the petition a nullity.
He said the defence would rely on the Court of Appeal decision in Harriet Nakwedde Vs Andrew Muwonge Election Petition Appeal No.1 of 2022, made in 2024.
In that case, the appellate court stressed that the statutory timelines governing election petitions are mandatory and cannot be extended at the discretion of court.
Mr Katumba argued that courts have no residual or inherent power to enlarge a period fixed by statute in electoral disputes, making timely service a prerequisite for a petition to proceed.
The lawyer also raised an objection to a reply filed by the petitioner, Ms Mary Sendi, arguing that it introduced new matters that were not contained in the original petition.
He maintained that parties in election proceedings are expected to remain within the boundaries of their original pleadings and should not use subsequent filings to introduce fresh grounds of challenge.
The objections have placed the question of whether the petition can proceed at the centre of the preliminary proceedings before the High Court.
Justice Okello directed Mr Kakooza’s legal team to file and serve its written submissions, which he referred to as ‘skeleton arguments’, on Ms Sendi by today (September 23).
The petitioner was given until September 25 to file a rejoinder, if any.
The case was subsequently adjourned to September 29 for further hearing.