Big Story: Don’t Allow Kyagulanyi to File More Evidence -Museveni, AG, EC Lawyers

64

Reading Time: 3 minutes
Lawyers of President Yoweri Kaguta Tibuhaburwa Museveni, the Electoral Commission and the Attorney General, have asked court not to allow Kyagulanyi Ssentamu Robert to file more affidavits to support his presidential election petition.

In a hearing that is currently underway at the Supreme Court at Kololo in Kampala, the lawyers from the three respondents say if Court allows Kyagulanyi to file his affidavits now, it means that it might not be able to determine the case within the mandatory 45 days. 

Last week, Kyagulanyi was supposed to file his affidavit evidence before February 14, however he was only able to file 50 affidavits in the agreed time. When he returned on February 15 to file another more than 150 affidavits, the Supreme Court registry declined to receive them arguing that they were filed out of time. He then filed an application seeking leave of court to submit them.

He then filed an application seeking leave of court to submit them. Joseph Matsiko, the lawyer of the Electoral Commission said when they appeared last week Kyagulanyi sought an adjournment saying that he wanted to prepare for affidavits. 

“This information is on record and court was informed that they were to file about 50 Affidavits by the end of that day,”  Matsiko said.  “He cannot now come to court with falsehoods claiming that he needs more time” 

Matsiko added that if the application is allowed, the court is most likely going to be drawn in a crisis because of time constraints.   

“The applicant must adhere to the timelines and no extra burden should be given to any party as a result of commissions,” said the lawyer. “The applicant here is guilty of total lack of diligence and inadvertencies.” 

Matsiko added that because Kyagulanyi wants to file 200 more affidavits, it means that court should give them as respondents more time to be able to reply to these affidavits.

“This application is coming to you in bad faith because the applicant says he’s coming to expose you but that you have already exposed yourself after dismissing his amendment application,” Matsiko said.

The Attorney General William Byaruhanga’s reasons for objecting to the application were also not very different from those of Matsiko. “It appears the applicant wants court to do inquiry into the election but our view is that the applicant wants court to do an inquiry into his Petition itself, Byaruhanga said. “He said last week that they had 50 affidavits ready and wanted to bring more and was given the time he wanted.”

For his part, Kiwanuka Kiryowa the lawyer for Museveni said that Kyagulanyi has been given 33 days of the 45 that the constitution allows to hear and then determine a presidential petition. He also wondered whether court would meet the deadline of March 18, if Kyagulanyi is granted leave to file more affidavits.

“When you meet difficulties you don’t set your own rules; you go back to court for guidance,” Kiwanuka argued. “Failure to follow orders of court is not a technicality. failure to follow orders has consequences.”

He added that if 200 more affidavits are allowed, it would be a plot to make them fail as the respondents.  “Great prejudice will be caused to Museveni if this application is allowed, Kiwanuka said. “The Affidavits we have got so far are scattered. One talks about things that happened in the whole district. Someone should come to court with a petition with evidence. How do you file without evidence?”

In response, Medard Sseggona who is the lead counsel for Kyagulanyi said it is regrettable that they delayed to file evidence to court in the agreed time. However, he pleaded with court that for justice to be served, they should allow them file evidence supporting their case. He explained that the reason they are failing to meet deadlines is because the state has made it very difficult to gather evidence by arresting or intimidating their witnesses. 

“I have not been sleeping in my house, I have not been working from my house because I’m avoiding the 2016 situation,” he said.  “It’s very painful that I’m revealing this. We are operating mobile law firms. Some of the evidence has been stolen by the State operatives.”

In the 20016 election, unknown persons broke into the offices of Fred Muwema who was the lead counsel of Amama Mbabazi in challenging the results and ran away with most of the affidavits that had been collected.

Court is set to deliver its ruling on the matter at 4:30pm.