The High Court at Patongo has dismissed former Aruu County MP Samuel Odonga Otto’s application seeking the recusal of the judge hearing his petition challenging the outcome of the January 15, 2026 parliamentary election.
In a ruling delivered electronically on September 28, 2026, Acting Lady Justice Fatuma Nanziri Bwanika said Otto had failed to demonstrate actual or apparent bias against him and ordered that the election petition proceed before her.
Otto, the petitioner in Election Petition No. 001 of 2026, filed the recusal application after the conclusion of the trial, asking the judge to withdraw from the case on five grounds, including alleged bias, interference during cross-examination, procedural irregularities, courtroom conduct and alleged attempts to influence the court.
Justice Bwanika rejected the allegations, saying the application lacked an objective basis.
On Otto’s complaint that the court had altered the Joint Scheduling Memorandum and introduced the statutory test of whether non-compliance with electoral laws substantially affected the election result, the judge said the matter had been discussed and agreed upon by all parties.
She noted that Otto’s lawyers, Layoo Paul Julius and Kizza Oscar, were present when the memorandum was signed in open court and did not object to the changes.
The judge also rejected complaints about her interventions during cross-examination, saying the court has supervisory powers to manage proceedings.
She said the court was entitled to intervene to ensure that cross-examination remained relevant, efficient and within the scope of the evidence before it.
Justice Bwanika further dismissed Otto’s complaint that he had been unfairly ordered away from the bar while not properly robed.
She said advocates appearing before the court are required to comply with courtroom dress rules, including being fully robed when appearing at the bar.
On the appearance of the Electoral Commission Returning Officer through Zoom, the judge said the virtual proceedings were lawful under the Judicature (Electronic Filing, Service and Virtual Proceedings) Rules, 2025.
She said the rules do not require a witness appearing virtually to produce medical receipts or require the court to provide external loudspeakers as conditions for conducting an online hearing.
Justice Bwanika also dismissed allegations arising from an alleged press conference by Christopher Komakech, the declared winner of the Aruu County parliamentary election.
Otto had argued that comments allegedly made at the press conference suggested attempts to influence the court.
However, the judge said Otto had failed to establish an evidential connection between the alleged comments and the court, describing the allegation as unsupported conjecture.
The judge further noted that Otto and his legal team participated throughout the trial, which ended on September 21, without raising concerns about her impartiality. She said the recusal application was filed only after the hearing had concluded.
“Recusal cannot be founded on mere suspicion, conjecture, or mere discomfort or dissatisfaction with the Court’s rulings or case-management decisions,” Justice Bwanika ruled. She added that judges have a duty not to recuse themselves merely to avoid controversy or appease parties.
The dismissal means Otto’s election petition will continue before Justice Bwanika, with the existing schedule for written submissions remaining in force. The High Court is scheduled to deliver its judgment in the Aruu County election petition on November 5, 2026-URN. Give us feedback on this story through our email: kamwokyatimes@gmail.com
