Cancel election results, Besigye insists

Mar 30, 2006

COL. Kizza Besigye’s lawyers, winding up their arguments yesterday, urged the Supreme Court to cancel President Yoweri Museveni’s election. The judgement is slated for April 6.

By Hillary Kiirya, Milton Olupot,
Anne Mugisa and Hillary Nsambu


COL. Kizza Besigye’s lawyers, winding up their arguments yesterday, urged the Supreme Court to cancel President Yoweri Museveni’s election. The judgement is slated for April 6.

Besigye, the FDC chief and runner-up in the February 23 elections, wants Museveni’s re-election nullified over a number of grounds.

The lawyers called on the court to rely on Dr. Jonathan Odwee’s evidence and find that none of the candidates obtained 51% majority vote as required by the law for a winner.

Besigye lawyers presented a reply on defence evidence relating to sabotage of the Bujagali dam, alleged abusive language, objection to statistician’s report disputing Museveni’s victory, disenfranchising of voters, bribery, multiple voting and ballot stuffing and forgery of affidavits.

Chief Justice Benjamin Odoki leads the coram of seven judges: Arthur Oder, John Tsekooko, Alfred Karokora, Joseph Mulenga, George Kanyeihamba and Bert Katureebe. Besigye together with other FDC officials attended the proceedings
On the allegation that members of parliament, now in FDC, sabotaged the Bujagali power project, John Matovu contested the authenticity and admissibility of the e-mail presented to court as evidence of sabotage.

Matovu said the document was neither copied nor written to Daudi Migereko, then state minister for energy who swore the affidavit, and there was a problem of proof of authorship.

He said even if the email was admissible as evidence, it would still be false to say FDC members stopped the dam project. He said some of the its signatories were not FDC. He cited former MP Ken Lukyamuzi of the Conservative Party.
Matovu also said the issues raised in the document were of cultural and national interest.

Asked if the authors were trying to block the project, Matovu said they were only trying to streamline it.

On the statistician report, Wandera Ogalo said Dr. Jonathan Odwee was required to make analysis of declaration forms and tally sheets submitted to him and he made the analysis. He said the argument about the methods was inapplicable. Electoral Commission lawyer Peter Kabatsi wanted the analysis disregarded over “unconventional” methodology.
Odwee argued in an affidavit that according to his analysis, no one won the elections.

On the alleged forgery of affidavits by FDC, Ogalo said they were drawn and sworn by Mwene, Kahiima Advocates at their Kabale branch.

He said since they complied with the provision of the law, the court should rely on them.

On disenfranchising of voters, Ogalo said Ruranga Rubaramira’s affidavit which the defence had asked court to disregard was good and admissible.
He said since Ruranga’s affidavit mentions places like West Nile, Mbale, Arua, Nebbi, Busia, Iganga, Bushenyi and others, it prove that there was nationwide disenfranchisement.

He said any failure to provide annextures as submitted by defence did not affect the credibility of the witness. He said the defective part of the affidavit could be severed from the rest.

On multiple voting and stuffing, Ogalo said court should believe the evidence of Pte. Allan Barigye who witnessed the malpractice in the 2nd Division army barracks, Mbarara. He said the evidence was corroborated by Ruranga’s that agents of other candidates were not allowed in polling stations.

On the elections being free and fair, Ogalo attacked Dr. Abed Bwanika’s affidavit, saying Bwanika did not have agents in polling stations and that he could not have received information from polling agents.

See verbatim here

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});