2026 POLLS COURT BATTLE! Dr Hilderman Crushed As Court Upholds Amelia Kyambadde’s Victory
The High Court in Mpigi has dismissed an election petition filed by Hillary Innocent Kiyaga, challenging the election of former minister Amelia Anne Kyambadde as Member of Parliament for Mawokota County North.
In a judgment delivered this afternoon, Justice Jamson Karemani ruled that Kiyaga, popularly known as Dr Hilderman, had failed to provide sufficient and credible evidence to prove allegations of electoral irregularities, deliberate alterations of declaration of results forms and non-compliance with electoral laws that could have substantially affected the outcome of the January 15, 2026 election.
The Electoral Commission declared Kyambadde the winner with 27,075 votes against Kiyaga’s 24,801, giving her a majority of 2,274 votes. But Kiyaga challenged the outcome, and in his petition, he alleged that the election was marred by alterations to declaration of results forms at 24 polling stations, which he claimed resulted in a reduction of his votes and an inflation of Kyambadde’s tally.
He also challenged the validity of results forms that did not bear the signatures of candidates’ polling agents and argued that Kyambadde was ineligible to contest because she had been serving as a Senior Presidential Advisor.
However, Justice Karemani dismissed the allegations, finding that the petitioner had not established sufficient grounds to warrant nullification of the election. The judge acknowledged that some certified copies of declaration of results forms presented before the court contained alterations. However, he found that Kiyaga had failed to demonstrate that the changes were deliberately made to manipulate the election results.
Justice Karemani also ruled that uncertified copies of the forms allegedly obtained from the petitioner’s polling agents could not take precedence over certified copies held by the Electoral Commission, the official custodian of election records.
The court also noted that 22 affidavits sworn by Kiyaga’s polling agents had earlier been struck out for failure to comply with the Illiterates Protection Act. The law requires proper identification of individuals who draft or interpret documents for people unable to understand the language in which they are written.
According to Justice Karemani, the exclusion of the affidavits weakened the petitioner’s ability to establish the authenticity and source of the alternative results forms he had presented. The court instead relied on the testimony of Mpigi District Returning Officer Everest Twinomujuni, who explained that the alterations could have resulted from corrections made by presiding officers while completing the declaration of results forms.
Twinomujuni told the court that he received the forms in the condition in which they were presented, displayed them at the tally centre, read out the results and subsequently declared Kyambadde the winner. The judge further observed that Kiyaga had not raised any complaint during the display of results forms, tallying or announcement of the results at the tally centre.
Justice Karemani held that alterations to results forms do not, in themselves, constitute an offence under Section 95 of the Parliamentary Elections Act unless there is evidence establishing fraudulent intent or an ulterior motive. He consequently found the returning officer’s explanation satisfactory and ruled that Kiyaga had failed to prove deliberate manipulation of the election results.
The court also dismissed complaints concerning declaration of results forms that lacked the signatures of candidates’ polling agents and did not contain explanations for their failure to sign.
Justice Karemani acknowledged that several forms presented before the court had been signed only by presiding officers, without signatures from candidates’ agents or recorded explanations for the omissions.
However, citing Section 66(7) of the Parliamentary Elections Act and previous judicial decisions, the judge ruled that the failure of candidates or their agents to sign declaration of results forms does not, by itself, invalidate election results where the presiding officer has signed the forms. He emphasised that the presiding officer is the principal and mandatory signatory responsible for declaring results at a polling station.
On the question of Kyambadde’s eligibility, Justice Karemani ruled that her former position as a Senior Presidential Advisor did not constitute public service employment that required her to resign before contesting for Parliament. The judge classified Presidential Advisors as political leaders rather than public officers within the meaning of Article 175 of the Constitution.
The court also established that Kyambadde had submitted her resignation letter to the Secretary, Office of the President, on May 23, 2025, and that it had been accepted on June 10, 2025.
Justice Karemani further ruled that Kiyaga had forfeited his opportunity to challenge Kyambadde’s nomination by failing to raise the matter before the Electoral Commission during the nomination period.
Based on these findings, the judge concluded that the petitioner had failed to establish any substantial non-compliance with electoral laws that would justify setting aside the election. The court consequently upheld Kyambadde’s election and confirmed her as the duly elected MP for Mawokota County North in Mpigi District.
Each party was ordered to bear its own legal costs.
GOT A HOT STORY? BLOW THE WHISTLE!
Have breaking news, explosive revelations, juicy leads or evidence of wrongdoing?
WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU!
Send your tips, documents, videos, photos and audio recordings to:
redpeppertips@gmail.com
Whether it’s corruption, scandals, abuse of office, injustice or stories others are afraid to tell, help us bring the truth to light.
SOURCES ARE PROTECTED.
CONFIDENTIALITY IS OUR NO.1 PRIORITY!
About Post Author
