Minister Anywar to be cross-examined in Kitgum election petition
Anywar filed the petition challenging the election of Onekalit as Member of Parliament for Kitgum Municipality following the January 15, 2026, parliamentary elections.
The respondent's lawyer has asked court to require Anywar (Pictured) and her witness to appear for cross-examination over evidence contained in affidavits she filed in support of the petition.
KITGUM - State Minister for Water and Environment Beatrice Atim Anywar is expected to appear before Kitgum High Court on Thursday, September 24, 2026, for cross-examination as the election petition she filed challenging the victory of Kitgum Municipality legislator Denis Amere Onekalit moves to a substantive hearing stage.
The respondent's lawyer has asked court to require Anywar and her witness to appear for cross-examination over evidence contained in affidavits she filed in support of the petition.
The development comes after the court on Monday (September 21) dismissed preliminary objections raised by the respondents, clearing the way for the petition to proceed for hearing of the case on its merits.
Anywar filed the petition challenging the election of Onekalit as Member of Parliament for Kitgum Municipality following the January 15, 2026, parliamentary elections.
The respondents are Onekalit, the Electoral Commission and Kitgum District Returning Officer Betty Atim Owot.
During Monday’s proceedings, the Assistant Registrar, Kitgum Magistrate's Court, Robert Ekirita Mwanda, on behalf of High Court Judge Justice Amos Kwizera, rejected three preliminary objections concerning evidence of alleged electoral offences, affidavits filed in support of the petition, and the capacity in which an electoral official had been cited.
Court further held that a criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for admitting evidence relevant to an inquiry into conduct alleged to constitute an electoral offence.
During Monday’s proceedings, the Assistant Registrar, Kitgum Magistrate's Court, Robert Ekirita Mwanda, on behalf of High Court Judge Justice Amos Kwizera, rejected three preliminary objections concerning evidence of alleged electoral offences, affidavits filed in support of the petition, and the capacity in which an electoral official had been cited. (Credit: Vincent Kaguta)
The court said the questions of whether electoral irregularities occurred, whether the conduct was wrongful and whether witnesses are credible and reliable would be determined after considering the evidence presented before court.
The court also rejected objections to the affidavits supporting the petition, noting that the affidavits contained certificates of translation and that there was no evidence challenging the deponent's understanding or adoption of their contents.
On the third objection, court held that the capacity in which an electoral official was sued should be determined from the circumstances and pleadings as a whole, rather than solely from the name or description used in the petition.
The cross-examination of Anywar and other deponents is expected to form part of the process through which the respondents will test the evidence and allegations contained in the affidavits
The respondents’ legal team has indicated that it intends to cross-examine four deponents during the hearing.
The petition follows Anywar’s challenge against Onekalit’s victory in the Kitgum Municipality parliamentary election. According to the results cited in earlier court proceedings, Onekalit was declared the winner after polling 6,176 votes against Anywar’s 5,013 votes.
Anywar’s petition alleges electoral irregularities, including claims relating to tampering with the voters’ register, multiple voting, impersonation and other electoral malpractices. The Electoral Commission and Onekalit have opposed the petition.
In a related ruling delivered on Monday, the court dismissed Anywar’s application seeking production of the voters’ register, holding that she had not provided sufficient evidence to justify the discovery order.
The court said allegations concerning deceased persons voting, multiple voting, impersonation and ballot stuffing had not been sufficiently linked to specific voters, polling stations or other supporting records.
The court nevertheless allowed the main election petition to proceed.