High court judge Rogers Kinobe has fixed December 22, 2025, for the delivery of judgment in an appeal challenging the Electoral Commission’s (EC) decision to cancel the nomination of Mathias Walukagga as a parliamentary candidate for Busiro East.
Walukagga’s nomination was nullified by the EC on grounds that he allegedly failed to meet the minimum academic qualifications required to contest for a seat in parliament.
Justice Kinobe issued strict timelines for the filing of submissions and rejoinders, citing the urgency occasioned by the fast-approaching electoral calendar. Walukagga, the National Unity Platform (NUP) flag bearer, filed the appeal through his lawyers Alex Luganda, Erias Nalukoola, Jonathan Erut, and Aua Napala.
The Electoral Commission is listed as the first respondent, while John Lubowa Kilimiro, the voter who challenged Walukagga’s nomination before the Commission, is the second respondent.
At the commencement of proceedings, lawyers for the Electoral Commission, led by Patrick Wetaka and assisted by Hamidu Lugoloobi told court that the Commission had not been aware of the appeal and only learnt of it through other channels.
Justice 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, Luganda informed court that the matter had already been fixed for hearing, noting that the summons had only been signed a day earlier and service effected the same day.
Luganda also raised the issue of computation of time, explaining that although the EC’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, agreeing 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.
The judge declined and directed all respondents to file their responses by close of business on December 17. Despite objections from Lugoloobi, who argued that the EC was handling multiple election petitions and that the timeline was too tight, Kinobe maintained his position.
He ordered that rejoinders be filed by December 18, with the Electoral Commission required to file and serve its reply by December 19. Justice Kinobe said that if all parties comply with the timelines, judgment will be delivered on December 22.
He added that any party dissatisfied with the timelines could raise the issue on appeal. The judge further cautioned parties not to return to court for delivery of the ruling, noting that the judgment would be accessed through ECCMIS.
The appeal arises from a complaint lodged before the Electoral Commission by voter John Lubowa Kilimiro, who challenged Walukagga’s eligibility on grounds that he lacked the minimum academic qualifications required for nomination as a parliamentary candidate.
The Commission heard the matter over several sittings in November before cancelling Walukagga’s nomination. Under the law, a parliamentary candidate must possess a senior six certificate or its equivalent.
In his appeal, Walukagga argues that the EC acted without jurisdiction by 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, working jointly 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 currently 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 of advanced level equivalence.
He argues that this certification, together with NCHE’s verification, formed the lawful basis of his nomination. Walukagga maintains that the EC’s decision was unjust, unfair, and illegal, arguing that under Article 60 of the Constitution and the Electoral Commission Act, 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 EC’s decision, reinstate his nomination, compel the Commission to recognise him as a duly nominated candidate, and award him the costs of the suit.
About the Author
