Following the High Court’s decision to nullify the election of Elias Nalukoola as Member of Parliament for Kawempe North, legal experts have weighed in on how he could potentially avoid a by-election and maintain a hold on the seat until the next general elections.
In a ruling delivered earlier today, High Court Judge Bernard Namanya declared the Kawempe North parliamentary election null and void, citing irregularities and a lack of free and fair conduct.
He further ordered the Electoral Commission to organise fresh elections in the constituency.
However, constitutional and electoral law experts argue that the legal framework currently favours Nalukoola, potentially sparing him from facing a by-election.
Renowned constitutional lawyer Julius Galisonga pointed out that under Article 81(3) of the Constitution and Section 3(2) of the Parliamentary Elections Act, no by-election shall be held within six months preceding the next general election.
“The law clearly provides that if a parliamentary seat becomes vacant within six months to a general election, no by-election is required. Given the current timeline, this provision significantly alters the political landscape for Kawempe North,” Galisonga explained.
Galisonga elaborated on the appellate process, stating that Nalukoola is permitted under Rules 29, 30, and 31 to file a notice of appeal within 7 days, a memorandum of appeal within 7 days of the notice, and a record of appeal within 30 days after the memorandum. gives Nalukoola a total of 44 days to complete filing his appeal.
“If Nalukoola chooses to file the Record of Appeal on the last permissible day—9th July 2025—the Court of Appeal would then have a maximum of 6 months to render a decision,” he added.
“Even with an expedited hearing, the ruling would likely come no earlier than 9th August, at which point it would be less than six months to the next general elections, typically held in January or February. This would make organising a by-election legally impossible.”
Supporting this interpretation, Nalukoola’s legal counsel, Alex Luganda, reaffirmed the legal timeline and noted that the Court of Appeal is unlikely to conclude the case before the end of July.
“They may expedite the process, but realistically, it’s impossible to conclude and deliver a judgment before the cutoff,” Luganda stated. “That gives us legal ground to argue against a by-election.”
The legal maneuver has sparked debate among political observers, with some critics suggesting that it could undermine democratic accountability. However, legal experts insist that the process remains within the framework of the law and serves to protect the integrity of appellate procedures.
As it stands, unless the Court of Appeal delivers a ruling before August 2025—which experts deem unlikely—Nalukoola may retain his position by default, making any by-election logistically and constitutionally unfeasible.
This unfolding situation not only tests the limits of Uganda’s electoral legal framework but also sets a significant precedent for future electoral jurisprudence