Select Page

Media Forums Uganda Police State The Uganda dictator, Yoweri Museveni Reply To: The Uganda dictator, Yoweri Museveni


The presidential election act is very clear on the grounds that are enough to cause the annulment pf a presidential election.

1-The issue of non-compliance with the electoral laws, is just one of the grounds that lead to this annulment to come into force.The court heard enough evidence that proved the fact that Kiggundu and his commission engaged in conduct, such as announcing results without the DR forms, and the discrepancies that were seen on tally sheets etc.This fundamental issue stands alone to establish this deficiency which is a fundamental requirement for an election to be valid.Here I am not even going into the issue of the register and the more than 100 percent voting registered at some polling stations, plus the more than 60 polling stations where 100 percent voted and all voted for Yoweri Museveni..

2-The other issue that was important, was the offences that were committed by candidate Yoweri Museveni.These were bribery intimidation and promoting violence.The court heard evidence ón how Yoweri Museveni bribed the people of Terego with hoes, the manner in which he used public servants namely:Allen Kagina and Jennifer Musiis on his campaign rallies, to promise people roads and other services.This was a blantant violation of electoral laws that prohibit such conduct. Museveni also was proved to have issued threats to the other candidates, promising to reach harm on them , if his NRM supporters are involved in any fights.Museveni also called the other contestants wolves, and said he was not going to hand over power to them, and even threatened to go to the bush if defeated.These offenses are enough to cause annulment of the election, not even considering several other offenses he committed.

Finally, the logic is that with those offenses by Museveni and the non- compliance by Kiggundu and his commission , the ground was not leveled for all the candidates and there was no transparency in the manner the electoral commission handled the exercise in many different aspects, and that even makes the argument of substantially of numbers invalid. The exercise was a sham, and the only remedy is annulment and repeat of the voting with a strong warning from supreme court to the perpetrators, not to repeat the conduct.