The High Court in Mbarara has rejected three supplementary affidavits filed by Julius Tumuhimbise in his petition challenging the election of Bukanga North MP Nathan Byanyima. The presiding judge ruled that the petitioners sought to introduce fresh evidence after the agreed closure of pleadings.
Justice Isaac Bonny Teko said admitting the affidavits would prejudice Byanyima, the Electoral Commission and the Isingiro District Returning Officer by requiring them to examine and respond to new evidence at a late stage of the proceedings. The affidavits were sworn by Tumuhimbise, his advocate Asiimwe Mugumya and a forensic expert, Richard Mwiru.
Tumuhimbise had sought to introduce the additional evidence as part of his petition concerning alleged intimidation of four witnesses who had participated in a recounting process, as well as in response to issues raised by the respondents concerning a forensic report. But Justice Teko said the court’s earlier permission to file supplementary evidence had been limited to specific matters and did not allow the petitioner to reopen the evidentiary stage of the case.
“In the present case, the position is clear from the report: the parties expressed their outrage on the 20th of September, and that pleadings closed on 21st of September, 2026,” Justice Teko said. The judge said the liberty granted by the court on September 14 was restricted to the parties’ responses to an expert witness and additional evidence relating to the alleged intimidation of witnesses.
He said Tumuhimbise’s affidavit, sworn on September 20, was filed after the closure date and introduced documents that the respondents would have to examine and answer. Justice Teko similarly rejected the affidavit of Mwiru, saying it sought to introduce a further forensic report and curriculum vitae after the parties had completed conferencing.
The judge said the material went beyond a formal clarification and had the potential to require a further response from the respondents. He also rejected Mugumya’s affidavit, which Tumuhimbise’s lawyers had argued merely confirmed that the four recounting witnesses had sworn their earlier affidavits.
Justice Teko said the affidavit introduced additional material and background matters that the respondents would have to test. He added that the fact that the four witnesses could face further legal action did not cure the procedural irregularity of introducing fresh evidence after the closure of proceedings.
On Tumuhimbise’s own supplementary affidavit, the judge said it introduced new evidence, including certified copies of death certificates, which would require the court to undertake additional processes to establish their authenticity.
The judge also rejected the supplementary forensic affidavit dated September 26, saying it introduced a new paragraph and additional exhibits that created a new evidentiary issue and could require further expert examination.
Justice Teko ruled that the three affidavits had been filed outside the procedural framework agreed by the parties and adopted by the court. He said allowing them would cause procedural prejudice and undermine the orderly and fair determination of the election petition. Tumuhimbise filed the petition challenging the Electoral Commission’s declaration of Byanyima as the winner of the January 2026 Bukanga North parliamentary election.
The petitioner alleges electoral irregularities and seeks to overturn Byanyima’s election. The Electoral Commission, Byanyima and the Isingiro District Returning Officer are respondents in the case. The hearing is before Justice Teko. Official results cited in reports on the petition show that Byanyima received 19,932 votes against Tumuhimbise’s 10,745.
The ruling does not determine the merits of Tumuhimbise’s election petition. It concerns whether the three supplementary affidavits can form part of the evidence before the court. Tumuhimbise has said the ruling will not deter his challenge to the election result-URN. Give us feedback on this story through our email: kamwokyatimes@gmail.com
