Lawyers representing National Peasants Party presidential candidate Robert Kasibante came under sharp scrutiny from Supreme Court justices on Tuesday after failing to identify a single polling station they claim was illegally gazetted during the 2026 presidential election.
The exchange occurred during pre-hearing conferencing of Kasibante’s petition challenging the victory of President Museveni of the National Resistance Movement (NRM).
The nine-justice bench—headed by Chief Justice Dr. Flavian Zeija and including Justices Percy Night Tuhaise, Mike Chibita, Elizabeth Musoke, Stephen Musota, Christopher Madrama, Catherine Bamugemereire, Monica Mugenyi, and Muzamiru Mutangula Kibedi—sought to clarify the grounds of the petition and streamline the issues for determination at the main hearing.
As counsel outlined alleged irregularities, the justices repeatedly pressed them to identify at least one of the more than 15,000 polling stations they claim were illegally selected and used.
Justice Catherine Bamugemereire questioned the lack of specifics, asking counsel to point out “even one polling station” where voting allegedly took place without proper gazettement.
In response, Kasibante’s lawyer Ivan Bwowe said the defence was not yet ready to disclose detailed evidence. “We are not at a stage of laying out the evidence in detail,” he explained, noting that specifics would be presented during the substantive hearing.
The bench expressed concern over what it described as a lack of clarity in the complaint. Another lawyer for Kasibante, Julius Galisonga, maintained that the petition raised serious questions about compliance with electoral laws, which the court would assess once the full hearing begins.
Counsel for the Electoral Commission, former Attorney General Mwesigwa Rukutana, dismissed the allegations as speculative.
“There are no ungazetted polling stations. All polling stations used in the election were duly gazetted, and the Gazette has already been placed before this honourable court,” he said.
Kasibante’s legal team also requested permission to cross-examine the Electoral Commission Chairperson, Justice Simon Byabakama Mugenyi, and the Deputy Attorney General for up to two hours on alleged electoral irregularities if the matter proceeds to a full hearing.
The respondents strongly opposed the request.
“There is no basis for cross-examining the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission on matters that are either legal or technical in nature,” Rukutana argued.
The respondents—President Museveni, Attorney General Kiryowa Kiwanuka, and the Electoral Commission—stated that they intend to rely on a total of 16 witnesses: two from the Attorney General’s chambers, six from Museveni’s legal team, and eight from the Electoral Commission.
Attorney General Kiwanuka noted that the petition, as framed, lacked the precision required to sustain serious allegations.
“The complaint before court is still not clear,” he said.
Chief Justice Flavian Zeija briefed both parties on the next steps, informing them that the court would communicate its decision on February 18, 2026.
“Our task is to determine whether there was non-compliance with the law in the conduct of the election and, if so, whether it substantially affected the outcome,” Zeija said.
The Supreme Court is expected to rule on whether the alleged irregularities are substantial enough to warrant nullification of President Museveni’s victory.