The republic of uganda in the supreme court of uganda at kampala

(ii) The identity of the voters could not be verified.

3. 
   The electoral process regarding the voters’ register was full of serious flaws and voters were denied the chance and sufficient time to correct those flaws.
   
4. 
   No sufficient time was allowed for the Petitioner and his agents and supporters to scrutinise the voters roll/register and take corrective measures regarding the same.
   
5. 
   The Petitioner’s Polling Agents were denied the opportunity to safeguard their Candidate’s interests at the time of polling, counting and tallying of votes and in the absence illegal voters voted while legitimate voters voted more than once.
   
6. 
   The Petitioner was unduly hindered from freely canvassing for support by the presence of the Military and para-military personnel who intimidated the voters.
   
7. 
   It cannot positively be ascertained that the 1st Respondent obtained more than 50% of valid votes of those entitled to vote.”
   

In answer to the Petition, the 2nd Respondent refuted the allegations and stated:

“(a) that there is no proof that the 2” Respondent did not comply with the provision of the Presidential Elections Act 2000 and the Electoral Commission Act 1997 and that non-compliance in any - which is not admitted - affected the result in a substantial manner.

(b) That in any case non-compliance with provisions of the Electoral Commission Act is not a ground for nullification of results of a Presidential Election.

(c)That the number of Voters on the Voters Register/Ross was known and no persons were disenfranchised and votes were cast following the Voters Registers.