The High Court has dismissed an
application filed by Kiyaga Hillary Innocent, popularly known as Dr.
Hilda Man, challenging the election of former Minister Ameria Kyambadde
as the Member of Parliament for Mawokota North.
Presiding judge Justice Jamson
Karemani threw out the petition with costs, citing that Dr. Hilda Man's
request for discovery of electoral documents was overly broad, ambiguous, and
lacked the specificity required by law.
Key Takeaways from the High Court
Ruling:
- Unspecific Document Request: The applicant sought broad
access to certified copies of official report books, presiding officer
lists, accountability forms, and original declaration of results (DR)
forms across entire parishes and wards—including Kamengo—without
identifying particular polling stations.
- Avoidance of "Fishing Expeditions": Agreeing with the Electoral
Commission (EC), Justice Karemani ruled that discovery cannot be used for
a general inspection of an adversary's records across a large constituency
like Mawokota North.
- Inconsistencies in Requests: The court highlighted that the
electoral documents requested in Dr. Hilda Man’s court application
differed from those previously requested in his formal letters to the
Electoral Commission.
Court Highlights Lack of Specificity
In his opposition to the application,
the Electoral Commission argued that Mawokota North encompasses a broad
geographical area and that Dr. Hilda Man's omnibus request amounted to a
"fishing expedition". Justice Karemani upheld this defense, pointing
out that an application for discovery must establish clear materiality and
specify exact documents.
"An application for discovery
must be specific, must establish materiality, and must recite precisely what is
wanted. It does not permit general inspection of the adversary's records," Justice Karemani observed.
The judge further explained that
naming general parishes or wards is insufficient under legal standard
procedures, noting that a parish and a ward, while administrative equivalents,
contain multiple distinct polling stations.
Contradictory Pre-Court Requests
Addressing the procedural requirements
for evidence discovery, the court noted that before claiming an information
request was ignored or denied by the Electoral Commission, an applicant must
prove that the exact same documents were previously requested and
rejected.
Justice Karemani noted that Dr. Hilda
Man's initial letters to the EC did not align with what was later demanded in
court, rendering the general requests unreasonable and legally ambiguous.
Consequently, the petition was dismissed with costs awarded to the respondents.
