Mukono polling officials admit tallying errors in LC V election

Electoral Commission officials have admitted before the High court that errors were made while tallying results in the Mukono district LC V chairperson election, in which National Resistance Movement (NRM) candidate Francis Lukooya Mukoome was declared the winner.

Opposition National Unity Platform (NUP) candidate Johnson Muyanja Ssenyonga is challenging Lukooya’s victory, citing discrepancies in declaration of results forms, missing polling-station returns and irregularities in the tallying process.

The petition centres on two declarations made at the Mukono district tally centre. Electoral Commission returning officer Emily Amongin initially declared Muyanja the winner with 51,686 votes against Lukooya’s 50,254. Independent candidate Reuben Ssenyonjo had 2,995 votes.

However, a subsequent tally put Lukooya on 52,523 votes, Muyanja on 52,105 and Ssenyonjo on 3,095, resulting in Lukooya being declared winner by 418 votes.

During the continued hearing of the petition before High court judge Phillip Mwaka, Amongin was cross-examined over discrepancies in declaration of results forms, missing polling-station returns and the circumstances under which disputed results were included in the final tally.

Amongin, who told court she had served as a returning officer for about six years, said the Electoral Commission tallies results received from polling stations and acknowledged that discrepancies can occur during the process.

She explained that a declaration of results form could be rejected where figures recorded on it did not correspond with information contained in other relevant electoral documents.

Muyanja’s lawyers, however, challenged her evidence using declaration forms from several polling stations. At Kiwafu Tea Estate polling station, the lawyers drew attention to a handwritten comment on the declaration form alleging that ballot papers had been taken by armed personnel.

Despite the comment, the results from the station were included in the tally. Amongin told court that she was not physically present at the polling station but said the polling materials were available.

Lawyers also pointed to the absence of signatures by some polling agents on the declaration form. Another disputed form came from Namumpa polling station, where a handwritten comment alleged that some ballot papers had been ticked by armed personnel.

Amongin confirmed that she had tallied 100 votes for Lukooya from the station but acknowledged that she had not read the comment on the reverse side of the form before including the results in the tally.

Justice Mwaka intervened, observing that Amongin could not be expected to agree with a statement she had not personally written.

Missing results

A major issue before court was the omission of results from four polling stations. The court heard that Mukono district had 960 polling stations, but certified tally records did not contain results from Madujju Mosque, Mpunge Primary School in Busooke-Kikeera, Mpunge NAK-Z and Buwujja Faith Nursery School.

The four stations had a combined 1,942 registered voters—278 at Madujju Mosque, 665 at Mpunge Primary School, 618 at Mpunge NAK-Z and 381 at Buwujja Faith Nursery School.

Amongin confirmed that voting had taken place at the four stations but said the Electoral Commission had not received their results. She also confirmed that violence had been reported in some of the affected areas.

Despite the missing returns, Lukooya was declared winner by 418 votes. During re-examination by Electoral Commission lawyer Hamidu Logoloobi, Amongin said that where results were not received, the relevant sub-county supervisor reported the matter and the affected stations were excluded from the final tally.

She maintained that after tallying the available returns, Lukooya had obtained the highest number of votes. Muyanja’s lawyers, however, questioned why Amongin’s affidavit did not specifically mention the alleged violence at the affected polling stations and why it did not contain a police report or reference number relating to the incidents.

Amongin confirmed that no police reference number concerning the alleged violence had been included in her affidavit.

Presiding officers admit errors

The court also heard evidence from presiding officers about discrepancies in figures recorded on declaration forms.

Yulian Nalwanga, a presiding officer at Nasuuti UCC J-T polling station, was asked to explain a declaration form showing Lukooya with 95 votes, Muyanja with no votes and Ssenyonjo with 95 votes, although the same form indicated that only 95 valid votes had been cast.

Nalwanga could not immediately explain the figures and acknowledged that there could have been an error in tallying. She also admitted that she did not personally enter all the figures, despite participating in the tallying and signing the form.

The witness acknowledged that presiding officers were expected to complete the declaration forms themselves. Another presiding officer, Godfrey Nsamba, who supervised voting at Kisoga Central polling station, also acknowledged a tallying error.

The declaration form showed 209 female and 160 male voters, totalling 369 voters. However, the votes recorded for the candidates and invalid ballots amounted to 389.

The figures included 355 votes for Lukooya, 30 for Muyanja, two for Ssenyonjo and two invalid votes. Nsamba agreed that there must have been an error in the tallying. He told court that such errors could be corrected if officials were permitted to do so, explaining that figures could sometimes be mistakenly entered or added.

At Basiima Kikooza Catholic Church polling station, presiding officer Luke Byamukama was questioned over alterations appearing on the declaration form.

The form indicated 397 voters—226 female and 171 male—and 253 unused ballot papers.

Muyanja’s lawyers presented different copies of the declaration form. One copy showed Lukooya with 14 votes, while another certified copy showed 300 votes written over the earlier figure.

Byamukama denied personally inserting the altered figures but told court that he had initially recorded what he described as the actual votes before ending up with different figures amid pressure.

During re-examination, he maintained that voting at the station had proceeded smoothly and said he had initially written the correct figures consciously.

The evidence forms part of Muyanja’s broader challenge to the integrity of the tallying and declaration process. He alleges that results from some polling stations were altered or swapped and that signatures of polling officials were forged.

The allegations remain contested and will be determined by the court.

Court rejects evidence

Justice Mwaka also expunged the affidavit of Peter Ssekiwanda after he failed to appear for cross-examination.

The judge granted the petitioner’s request to remove the affidavit from the court record on grounds that the opposing lawyers had been denied an opportunity to question the witness.

The court had earlier rejected audio and video recordings presented by the petitioner after finding that the chain of custody required to authenticate the electronic evidence had not been sufficiently established.

At the close of witness examination, lawyer Humphrey Ategeka, representing Lukooya, told court that the respondents would not cross-examine the petitioner’s witnesses.

Muyanja’s lawyers similarly indicated that they did not intend to cross-examine witnesses presented by Lukooya. The case was subsequently adjourned, with the parties expected to proceed to final submissions and a rejoinder.

Justice Mwaka will ultimately determine whether the irregularities alleged by Muyanja were established and, if so, whether they affected the validity of the election and the subsequent declaration of Lukooya as Mukono district LC V chairperson.

The post Mukono polling officials admit tallying errors in LC V election appeared first on The Observer Media Ltd.