Court Sets December 22 Date for Walukagga Nomination Appeal Decision

Updated by Faith Barbara N Ruhinda at 1508 EAT on Wednesday 17 December 2025

High Court judge Rogers Kinobe has scheduled December 22, 2025, for the delivery of judgment in an appeal challenging the Electoral Commission’s decision to cancel the nomination of Mathias Walukagga as the parliamentary candidate for Busiro East.

Walukagga’s nomination was annulled by the Electoral Commission on grounds that he allegedly failed to meet the minimum academic qualifications required to contest a parliamentary seat.

Justice Kinobe also set strict timelines for the filing of written submissions and rejoinders, citing the urgency created by the fast-approaching electoral calendar.

Walukagga, the National Unity Platform (NUP) flag bearer, lodged the appeal through his lawyers Alex Luganda, Erias Nalukoola, Jonathan Erut and Aua Napala.

The Electoral Commission is listed as the first respondent in the appeal, while John Lubowa Kilimiro, the voter who challenged Walukagga’s nomination before the Commission, is named as the second respondent.

At the start of the proceedings, lawyers for the Electoral Commission, led by Patrick Wetaka and assisted by Hamidu Lugoloobi, told the court that the Commission had not been aware of the appeal and only learnt of it through other channels.

Justice Rogers Kinobe questioned why the Commission had failed to check the Electronic Court Case Management Information System (ECCMIS), where the appeal had been filed. In response, Walukagga’s lawyer, Alex Luganda, told the court that the matter had already been fixed for hearing, noting that the summons had been signed only a day earlier and served the same day.

Luganda also raised the issue of the computation of time, explaining that although the Commission’s ruling was dated November 25, Walukagga only received it on December 9. He sought clarification on whether statutory timelines should run from the date of the decision or the date of receipt.

Wetaka said the Commission had no objection and agreed that time should be computed from the date Walukagga received the ruling. Justice Kinobe ruled that the matter was settled.

Lawyer Asuman Nyoyitono, appearing alongside Allan James Mwiiko, requested three days to file a response, but the judge declined and directed all respondents to submit their responses by close of business on December 17.

Despite objections from Lugoloobi, who argued that the Commission was handling multiple election petitions and that the timeline was too tight, Justice Kinobe maintained the directive.

Justice Rogers Kinobe ordered that rejoinders be filed by December 18, with the Electoral Commission required to file and serve its reply by December 19. He said that if all parties adhere to the timelines, judgment will be delivered on December 22.

The judge added that any party dissatisfied with the timelines could challenge them on appeal. He also cautioned parties not to return to court for the ruling, noting that the judgment would be accessible through the Electronic Court Case Management Information System (ECCMIS).

The appeal stems from a complaint lodged with the Electoral Commission by voter John Lubowa Kilimiro, who questioned Walukagga’s eligibility on the grounds that he lacked the minimum academic qualifications required to contest as a parliamentary candidate.

The Electoral Commission heard the matter over several sittings in November before cancelling Mathias Walukagga’s nomination. Under Ugandan law, a parliamentary candidate must possess a senior six certificate or its equivalent, The Observer reported.

In his appeal, Walukagga argues that the Commission acted without jurisdiction in cancelling his nomination, despite his academic qualifications having been equated and verified by the National Council for Higher Education (NCHE). He contends that once NCHE, in coordination with the Uganda National Examinations Board (UNEB), has equated a candidate’s qualifications, the Electoral Commission has no legal authority to review or overturn that determination.

Court records show that Walukagga was duly nominated on October 23, 2025, based on a mature age entry certificate issued by the Islamic University in Uganda on June 12, 2023. He maintains that although such certificates are ordinarily valid for two years, his was used within that period to enrol for further studies, an action which, according to clarification from the university’s academic registrar, preserves its validity beyond the two-year window.

Walukagga enrolled at St. Lawrence University in August 2023 and is now in his third year of study. In June 2025, NCHE equated his mature age entry certificate to the advanced level standard and issued him with a certificate of completion of formal education at advanced level equivalence. He argues that this certification, together with NCHE’s verification, formed the lawful basis of his nomination.

He further contends that the Electoral Commission’s decision was unjust, unfair, and illegal. Under Article 60 of the Constitution and the Electoral Commission Act, he says, the Commission’s mandate is limited to verifying whether academic documents originate from recognised institutions, not to overturn determinations made by expert bodies such as NCHE and UNEB.

In his affidavit, Walukagga reiterates that he meets all academic requirements for parliamentary nomination and was unlawfully denied the right to contest for the Busiro East seat. He is asking the High Court to set aside the Electoral Commission’s decision, reinstate his nomination, compel the Commission to recognise him as a duly nominated candidate, and award him the costs of the suit.

Invest or Donate towards HICGI New Agency Global Media Establishment – Watch video here