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

It must be noted that under Sections 58(6)(a)(c) of the Presidential Elections Act, the burden of proof squarely lies on the petitioner to prove what he asserts. If he wants the election of the President to be annulled he must prove to the satisfaction of the court that there was non-compliance with the relevant provisions of the Act.

I think that a person seeking to set aside election result under section 58(6) of the Presidential Elections Act has heavier burden of proof than in ordinary civil suits, because he is asking court to annul l respondent’s election results. In a Tanzanian case of Mbowe vs. Eliofoo (1967) EA 240 Sir George CJ., held that the reason why the Petitioner in election petition should shoulder the burden was because he was asking the court to set aside the respondent’s election. Mr. Justice Kibuuka Musoke J, was of the same view in Yorokamu Katwiremu Bateqana v. Ellal Mushemeza & Anor Election Petition No. 1 of 1996. Ntabgoba PJ., in Odetta v Omeda Election Petition No. 001 of 1996 at Soroti Civil Registry emphasized that the standard of proof in election petition was to prove to the satisfaction of the court. In Ayena Odongo v. Ben Wacha Election Petition No. 2 of 1996 at Lira (G.M. Okello, J) as he then was, held that the burden of proof is on him (petitioner) and the standard is beyond reasonable doubt. Ouma J., as he then was seemed to have been of the same view in Micheal A. Ogoola vs. Akil Othieno Emmanuel Election Petition No. 2 of 1996 at Tororo. In Byakutaga Rugadva Israeri & Returning Officer Election Petition No. CM/MHI/198 1 Opu J as he then was, held that the standard of proof in election petition was on the Petitioner and that the standard of proof must be such that one had no reasonable doubt that one or more of the grounds for challenging the election had been proved. The Uganda Court of Appeal held in Margaret Zziwa v. Catherine Naava Nabagesera civil Appeal No. 39 of 1997 that the standard of proof in election .

petition must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, because the court cannot be said to be satisfied if there was a reasonable doubt.

We were persuaded by Dr. Khaminwa, one of the Counsel for 1^st respondent that the standard of proof to prove these charges is very, very high just near beyond reasonable doubt. Our Court of Appeal and some decision of the High Court of Uganda have held the standard of proof in Election petition is beyond reasonable doubt.

With respect, I do not know why we are trying to supply words to what the Act states. The Act says:

“The election of a candidate as president shall only be annulled on any of the following grounds if proved to the satisfaction of the court”

Are we adding proof “beyond reasonable doubt” because our Members of Parliament did not know the phrase when they were debating the bill?

In my view, I would not deviate from what Parliament stated in the Act, especially when there is no ambiguity in Section 58(6) of the Presidential Elections Act. What is required of the petitioner who is seeking annulment of the election of the President is to adduce evidence and satisfy the court that the allegations he/she is making have been proved to the satisfaction of the court.

So, having disposed of that point, I think that I must now deal with the issue of whether during the 2001 election of the President, there was non-compliance with the provisions of the Presidential Elections Act, 2000.

The Petitioner presented very many complaints against both the 1^st and 2^nd respondents and their agents and/or servants, for acts and omissions which he contends amounted to non-compliance with the provisions of the Presidential Elections Act and the Electoral Commission Act 1 997 as well as to illegal practice and offence under the Act. These have already been dealt with before.

All the evidence at the trial of the petition was required to be adduced by affidavits. Accordingly, parties filed many affidavits to support their respective cases. The Petitioner filed 174 affidavits both in support of the petition and in reply to the affidavits of the 1^st and 2^nd respondents, in turn filed 1 33 and 88 affidavits respectively. In addition to affidavit evidence, leave was granted to call Dr. Diana Atwire who had sworn an affidavit for the 1st respondent to be cross-examined on her affidavit. I must state that I relied on a few affidavits which I considered to be relevant for the purpose of determining the petition.

Counsel for all parties read the affidavits deponed to in support of their respective cases while addressing the court.

1. 
   The first complaint was the 2^nd respondent failed to publish a full list of all the polling stations in each constituency 14 days before nomination day of 8^th and 9^th January 2001.
   

The evidence to prove that the 2^nd respondent failed to comply with the above provision of the Act is in the affidavit of Mukasa David Balonge paragraph 28 where he stated that on 11th March 2001 the 2 respondent issued a list of polling stations. On this list 11 76 were new polling stations while 303 were missing, though originally appeared on the Gazette. Earlier on, the 2^nd respondent had published a list of polling stations on 19^th February 2001 which was well after the nomination.

The 2^nd respondent said nothing in rebuttal.

Clearly, this means that the list of polling stations issued on 11^th March 2001 and on 9^th February 2001 were issued after the nomination day, which was a non-compliance with section 28 of the Act.
1(a) The other complaint was that the 2^nd respondent created new polling station on the eve of polling.
The affidavits sworn in support of the complaint were of the effect that there were 1176 new polling stations created on the eve of polling day, thus, contravening Section 28 of the Presidential Elections Act where: Mr. Mukasa David Bulonge averred in his affidavit paragraph 2, 3, 28 and 29 as follows:

(2)That I was appointed to work on the National Task Force of the petitioner as Head of Election monitoring desk and electoral process from the time of nomination throughout until polling day and declaration of results.

(3) That in the course attended several consultative meeting with the Electoral Commission and always in touch with the commission officials, representing the interests of the petitioner.

(28) That on 11th March 2001, the 2” respondent issued a list of polling stations On this list 1176 were new polling stations while 303 were missing, though originally appeared on the Gazette.

(29) That while, issuing the list of the polling stations, no corresponding voter’s rolls for the polling stations were issued by the 2” respondent. The affidavits of Edson Bunge and E. Bagenda Bwambale from Kasese; James Oluka from Soroti and Vincent Ebulu from Gulu corroborated the existance of new polling stations which came into existence on 11/3/2001.”

The 2^nd respondent averred that no new polling stations were created but rather that the existing stations were split for purpose of easing the voting process due to the big number of voters in the those stations. I must state that the polling stations on the eve of election prejudiced the petitioner because the petitioner could not appoint polling agents to safeguard his interests. Therefore, this was a non-compliance with Section 28 of the Presidential Elections Act, 2000.

(2) The second complaint was failure by the 2 respondent to compile a purported final voters’ Register on 1 0/3/2001 and failing when requested to supply copies of the same to the petitioner for his agents use although the petitioner was ready and willing to pay for the same contrary to Section 32(5) of the Presidential Elections Act.

In answer to the complaint, the 2u,d respondent stated that the petitioners’ request was received late on 11/3/2002 and there was no sufficient time to print the Register for the petitioner on the eve of polling day. In effect, the 2nd respondent is conceding having failed to comply with the provisions of the Act. In the premises therefore this was a non-compliance with the provisions of the Act, since the 2nd respondent admitted that he never supplied voters Rolls.

3. There was complaint that in some polling stations, polling commenced before 7:00 am. The 2^nd respondent stated that neither itself not its agents or servants allowed people to vote before or after the official polling time.

Affidavit of Moses Babikinamu of Lwebitakuli village Lwebitakuli cub-county Mawongole Sembabule averred:


“(4) That I together with Kafero Anthony were appointed polling agents for the petitioner and posted at Lwebitakuli polling station.

(5) That on the polling day I reported to the station at 6:00 am. By that time people had started voting. I asked the Presiding Officer, Oliver Katirinkiza, who was also a campaigner for the 1^st respondent as to why voting commenced before the stipulated time of 7:00 am. She wondered as to why I was asking. I showed her my appointment letter. She simply told me to sit and concentrate on what I was supposed to do.


(7) At around 10:00 a.m. MP for Mawogola. Sam Kutesa came and asked her the number of people who had voted. She told him it was 300 whereas for me I had counted 52.
(8) That the number of people who voted from the time I arrived to 5:00 p.m. when voting closed was 160. That however, counting all the ballot papers at the end of the exercise showed that the number of voters was 510. That I disputed the declaration but the agents of Museveni issued threats against me and my colleagues saying they were going to arrest us. The presiding officer told me to sign the documents without even reading through. I signed and left immediately as I was fearing for my life”


Affidavit of Musisi Francis of Lugolole, Baitambagwe in Mayuge District:

2. 
   That I was appointed as a polling agent at Baitambagwe for the petitioner.
   
3. 
   That on 12th march 2001, I reported to the said station at 6:00 a.m. only to find that voting exercise which was a scheduled to start at 7:00 a.m. had already started in the absence of all the other polling agents for the different candidates.”
   

Affidavit of Sam Kakuru:
“(2) That I was registered to vote at Karuhinda in Kirime Kanungu District.

(12) That on 12tk March 2001 I met people singing “No change. Kaguta” who chased me back to my home at 5:00 a.m.

(14) That at 6:30 a.m. I left and arrived at the polling station where I found people already voting. I asked for my ballot paper and voted.

(16) Thereafter I showed my letter of appointment as a polling agent. The presiding officer ordered me to sit far from the agents table, saying the table was for Government people not us “rebels “

(17) That the presiding officer and other polling officials started ticking ballot papers for people on the table. I objected and was manhandled and beaten when police were looking on helplessly.


(18) I was chased away from the polling station. I went home until around 5:00 p.m. when I saw a group of Museveni supporters coming for me to go and sign. I refused to go. I entered my house. They threatened to burn my house….

Affidavit of Oliver Karinkiza states as follows:

(2)That I was the Presiding Officer at Lwebitakuli polling station on 12/3/2001.

(3) That I have carefully read and understood the affidavit of Moses Babikinamu in support of the petition and I respond as follows:

(4) That it is not true that I was a campaigner for the 1^st respondent.

(5) That on 12/3/20011 the voting commenced at 7:00 am and not at 6:30 am as alleged by Babikinamu.

(9) That the said MP for Mawogola Sam Kutesa came to the polling station in the afternoon and not at 10:00 am as alleged.

(10) That the voting exercise was peaceful and orderly and I never heard any body complain.

(11) That the number of people who voted at the polling station were 510 and this was in the presence of polling agents for both candidates.

(12) That after counting Babikinamu confirmed the results and willingly signed.

(13) That it is not true that I threatened Babikinamu with arrest.


The affidavit of Moses Babikinamu shows in paragraph 5 that when he reported to the polling station of Lwebitakuli, in Sembabule at 6:30 a.m., he found voting had already started. When he asked the presiding officer why they started voting before official time of 7:00 am, she told him to sit and do what she was supposed to do. Between 7:00 am. and 5:00 pm only 160 people voted; but after counting all the ballot papers, the total number of voters cast were 510. Although he protested, he was forced to sign the declaration forms for fear for his life.

The affidavit of Bernard Masiko Paragraph 8 shows that he arrived at the polling station with petitioner’s agents at 6:00 a.m, he found voting already in progress.

Kakuru Sam and Francis Musisi’s affidavits shows voting started before 7:00 am.

Oliver Karikiza, presiding officer of Lwebitakuli denied in her affidavit that polling did not start before 7:00 am I rejected her denial as an after thought. I do accept the evidence in the affidavit of Babikinamu, because I would not expect the presiding officer to swear admitting having infringed the law.

Clearly, in certain polling stations polling commenced before 7:00 a.m and this was on infringement of S.29 (2)(5) of the Act.

4. Another complaint was stuffing of ballot boxes with ballot papers. It was alleged that this contravened section 30(7) of the Act. I must state that the petitioner never raised this stuffing of ballot boxes in his affidavit in support of his petition. However, Bernard Masiko from Rukungiri, Stanley Bugando from Kanungu and Babikinamu from Sembabule stated in their affidavits that ballot boxes at their respective polling stations were stuffed with ballot papers before voting commenced and that voting commenced without opening the boxes for public to view if they were devoid of any ballot papers. But Moses Mwesigye from Kanungu and Oliver Karinkiza from Sembabule denied such practice.

However, on 6^th April 2001, the petitioner in paragraph 39 raised the issue in support of complaint of ballot box stuffing in his argumentative affidavit, after he had quoted six cases where the number of ballot papers issued, those cast and those unused do not tally or make sense. For instance, in the case of lshaka Adventist College, Igara county in Bushenyi, the number of ballot papers issued were 477. These were equivalent to the number of ballot papers counted. Yet 253 ballot papers were unused.

In paragraph 39 the petitioner concluded that the above act (acts) constituted ballot stuffing that characterised the election Countrywide.

With due respect, I think it would be difficult to conclude from such forms that there were ballot stuffing without calling one of the Presiding Officials and polling agents who filled those forms to court and throwing light on what he or they meant. I think, as I stated when I was discussing affidavits, this is one of the problems of trying a case of this magnitude relying only on affidavits.

However, in addition to Babikinamu and Stanley Bugando, there were affidavits of Bernard Masiko, Kakuru Sam and Francis Musisi which stated that voting commenced before 7:00 am when there were no petitioner’s polling agents. I would in the circumstance state that the evidence of ballot stuffing given by Babikinamu and Bugando is by inference confirmed from the evidence of Masiko Bernard, Kakuru Sam and Francis Musisi who stated voting commenced before 7:00 am. In my view, the presiding officers started voting before the official time laid down by statute and in the absence of petitioner’s polling agents, because they did not want the ballot papers stuffed in the boxes to be seen.

I therefore rejected the denial by Karinkiza and Mwesigye. In the result, it was proved to the satisfaction of the court that in a limited number of polling stations, there were ballot stuffing of ballot boxes before polling commenced.

5. Another complaint concerned multiple voting. It was alleged that 2’ respondent’s agents/servants with full knowledge permitted people who had already voted to vote again. The affidavits of the following deponents show that people who had already voted, voted again. The presiding officer was not bothered about multiple voting.

In the affidavit of one Change Gideon from Kabale he averred as follows:-

(2) That I am a registered voter in the 2007 Presidential Elections at Bubare Headquarters B polling station.

(5) That on the polling day as I was going to monitor at Ahabigungiro polling station, Mr. Dan Kaguta, the Deputy RDC of Kabale stopped and offered to give me a lift.


(6) That in the car, he asked me whether I was going to vote for Candidate Museveni and I said I was, where upon he told me that in that case, I must overlook whatever rigging I saw.

(7) That at Kaziniro polling station. I saw Kaguta distribute to each of LC 11 chairman, presiding officer and a police constable a bundle of cards and money.

(8) That at Ahabigungiro polling station the said Kaguta gave more cards to the polling officials to distribute to Museveni’s supporters.


(9) That later when he found LC officials distributing these cards, he seized a stack of 6 of those cards from Kate Tumwijukye — but he was summoned by the presiding officer and ordered to stop forth-with, since the cards were for Museveni whom I had told them I supported. For fear of being harmed I refrained from complaining and so rigging continued unchecked.

Although the 2^nd respondent denied knowledge of this and although respective presiding officers denied any knowledge, I know that they would not admit that they permitted such malpractice to be committed. However, the affidavit of Kiryowa ldd from Sembabule stated in paragraph 7 that:

“Kakuru who had earlier on cast his vote came back and stuffed a heap of ballot papers in the ballot box but because I had earlier on been threatened. I kept quiet”

Then Byaruhanga Yahaya of Busia stated in his paragraph 4 of his affidavit:

“That I also noted that one Birungi voted twice at Marach polling station.”

Ssentongo from Ntungamo stated in paragraph 5 that soldiers at polling station allowed Museveni’s supporters to vote more than once. When he complained about it, his complaint was ignored.

Then Mubarak Kirunda from Mayuge stated that within Magamaga army barracks soldiers were voting many times. He saw some civilians whom he knew, wearing
army uniform and voting when he complained soldiers chased him from the polling station.

Then the affidavit of Patrick Matsiko Wa Mucoori senior reporter with the Monitor Newspaper stated”

“(1) 1 am an adult Ugandan and a registered voter at Bihanga polling station
(2) That I work as a senior reporter with the Monitor News paper
(7) That on the polling station of the civilians where I reached first, I found several people complaining that their names were missing from the register.
(18) That in the progress of the voting I started noting that people who had already voted were voting again at this same station and I continued seeing many voters voting multiples times.
(19) That at one moment I saw a young girl of about 12 years coming to vote with voter’s card and she was allowed to vote
(21) That after the incident of the 12 years old girl who voted once, other voters continued to vote several times, and in formed the presiding officer and pointed out 2 (two) men whom I was sure had already voted but had come back to vote again and asked the presiding officer to check on the names of the men on the voters cards and then ask their real names. The presiding officer declined to do that.
(22) That I again saw the Battalion intelligence officer voting more than five times by changing his clothes each time he came to vote.
(23) That when multiple voting continued I started getting scared of my safety and restrained myself from pointing out the many multiple voters.
(25) That the presiding officer asked why I was observing votes. I told him that was a journalist and I told him that it was part of my job.
(26) That the presiding officer then confiscated my personal effects mobile phone, note book — Regimental police took me to quarter guard. Later I was released.

I must state that the affidavits have shown to my satisfaction that in a limited number of polling stations, election officials permitted multiple voting. This offended section 31 of the Act.

6. Furthermore, there was complaint that 2’ respondent’s presiding officers failed to prevent petitioner’s polling agents from being chased away from the polling stations. It was contended that this contravened section 32 of the Act. The 2 respondent said nothing to controvert this complaint.

Clearly, the affidavits of James Musinguzi, Moses Babikinamu, Sam Kakuru, Alex Busingye and Bonafice Ngaruye show that polling agents for petitioner were chased and voting continued.

In my opinion, the presiding officer having been in-charge of the polling station, he failed to stop intruders from chasing away petitioner’s polling agents. Therefore, wherever it was done this was in breach of section 32 of the Act.

7. Another complaint was that the 2nd respondent’s Presiding Officers permitted people who had no voters’ card to vote. The 2 respondent conceded that it did, if such people could be properly identified.

With respect, I think this was in breach of sections 29(4) and 34 of the presidential Elections Act.
Sub-section 4 of Section 29 provides:
“(4) Any person registered as a voter and whose name appears in the voters’ roll of a polling station and who holds a valid voter’s card shall be entitled to vote at the polling station.”


Clearly, the 2 respondent had no discretion to allow any person without voters card to vote merely because he was identified. Otherwise, there would be no need for registration of voters and issuing of voters’ cards. I would in the circumstances find that the 2 respondent was in breach of sections 29(4) & 34 of the Act.

8. Another complaint was that C/s 42 of the Act the 2^nd respondent’s servants and or agents in course of their duties allowed people with deadly weapons to wit soldiers and para military personnel at polling station — a presence which intimidated many voters to vote for the soldiers’ boss and candidate Museveni while many of those who disliked to be forced to vote for that candidate stayed away and refrained from voting.

The 2^nd respondent denied ever allowing any unathorised armed people in any polling stations. I think that the 2t respondent had a problem of enforcing section 42 of the Presidential Elections Act, 2000 after the Army Commander and a group of other Senior Army Commander and soldiers together with other security agencies were deployed as spelt out in the affidavit of Major General Jeje Odongo, to take charge, oversee and ensure peace and security during the electoral process.

Otherwise the law was very clear. Section 41 of the Act gives power to the presiding officer at any polling station to appoint an election constable to maintain order in the polling station throughout the day, if there is no police officer. The section lays down circumstances under which an election constable can be appointed.

Then Section 42 of the Act provides as follows:

“(1) No person shall arm himself or herself during any part of polling day, with deadly weapons or approach within one kilometer of a polling station, with deadly weapons, unless called upon to do so by lawful authority or where he or she is ordinarily entitled by virtue of his or her office to carry arms.


(2) Any person who contravenes sub-section (1) commits an offence.”

In my view, considering the above provisions of the Act, although the Army Commander, Major General Jeje Odongo explained in his affidavit circumstances under which UPDF soldiers got involved in being deployed in the electoral process, I must state that there was no provision in the Presidential Elections Act, 2000 under which they came to be on polling stations. It appears that the nearest the armed soldiers could come to the polling station was one kilometer. Therefore, unless armed soldiers were called upon by lawful authority to be on the polling stations, they should not have been on the polling stations. In my view, for the purpose of the Presidential Elections, lawful authority appearing in sub-section (1) of Section 42 of the Act, would mean those in charge of the Electoral process.

Clearly, the evidence in the affidavit of Kakuru Sam, Kiiza Devis, Alex Busigye, Patrick Matsiko Wa Mucoori and Boniface Ruhinda Ngaruye shows that petitioners’ agents who complained about any mal-practices in the voting process at the polling station were chased away by armed UPDF soldiers who were present.

In my opinion, since the law was very clear that no person shall arm himself or herself during any part of polling day with any deadly weapon or approach within one kilometer of the polling station, with deadly weapon unless called upon, and since the Electoral Commission Chairman had written to the President disapproving of their involvement in the electoral process and had appealed to him to withdraw them from the exercise, it cannot be said that those in lawful authority had called upon the armed soldiers to be on polling stations. Moreover, the armed soldiers had their own designated polling station where they were supposed to cast their votes. Therefore, they ought not to have been on civilian polling stations because their presence could be interpreted as interference with free and fair election.

I would therefore say that soldiers and other para military personnel with deadly weapons at polling stations was non-compliance with the Act.

9.There was a complaint that the 2nd respondent failed to ensure that the entire electoral process was conducted under conditions of freedom and fairness and as a result the petitioner and his agents and campaigns were interfered with by Military including the PPU and the Para Military personnel such as that led by Major Kakooza Mutale. The petitioner’s affidavit in support of the petition states in paragraph 1 5 as follows:

“That during the whole period of the presidential election campaign the respondent deployed the Army and Major Kakooza Mutale’s pare Military personnel of Kalangala Action Plan all over the Country and directed the Army Commander Major General Jeje Odongo and other Senior Military Officers to be in charge of security during the whole Presidential Election process and subsequent to this, my supporters, campaign agents any myself were harassed and intimidated and a number of any supporters and campaign agents were assaulted and arrested.”

There were several affidavits in support of the above complaint, but I shall cite a few.

I shall start with the affidavit of Hon. Major (Rtd) Okwir Rwaboni who stated as follows:

(1) That I was illegally arrested detained tortured and intimidated during the presidential campaigns in Uganda that run from 8^th January to the 12th march at this time I was in the National Campaign Team.

(2) That on 19^th January 2001 I was confronted by members of the Presidential Protection Unit (PPU) in Rukungiri district/Kanungu Trading Centre) and prevented from consulting with our supporters. I was there to meet the supporters of the presidential candidate Dr. Kiiza Besigye between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. I was surrounded together with my colleagues and our supporters- We were then held hostage by members of PPU who were under the Commander of one Capt. Ndahura. I managed to leave the scene but the PPU and police kept the people hostage for the next two hours. They later followed me to the venue of my next meeting, Rugyendo sub-county Kihihi in Rukungiri District.

(3) That on the same day, members of the PPU surrounded me and other supporters of Col. (Rtd) Dr. Kiiza Besigye In Rugyeyo sub-county in Kinkizi ........... About 12 soldiers pulled out their guns cocked them ready to shoot, pointed them at me and ordered me to leave the District. The same soldiers under the command of the said Capt. Ndahura assaulted Dr. Besigye’s supporters and arrested them.


That he was going to be treated like a rebel. This was after Henry Muhwezi had refused Capt. Byaruhanga’s request to him to join candidate Museveni. After that encounter Capt. Byaruhanga’s driver and bodyguard followed him, arrested others as they forcefully dispersed the gathering.


(4) On the 19^th February 2001 I was made against my will to sign a document announcing my withdrawal from the elect Besigye Task Force. I was made to sign this document by two senior UPDF officers (Major General David Tinyefuza and Lt. Col. Noble Mayombo at Nile Hotel, Kampala.


(5) That on the 20th February 2001 I was unlawfully and violently arrested at Entebbe International Airport beaten and sat upon in a military police pick-up truck, in presence of journalists, diplomats and colleagues and illegally detained at the Chieftaincy of Military Intelligence (CMI) Headquarters in Kampala. During the arrest I sustained injuries to my leg, chest and still undergoing treatment for these injuries.


(6) That from 4:00 p.m. on 20th February 2007 to 5:00 p.m. on 2 1 February 1 went through a grilling six hour interrogation session conducted by such officers.


(8) That on 21^st February 2007 I was again forced to make a statement disassociating myself from Presidential Candidate Dr. Besigye’s Task Force. This time in presence of Major-General Elly Turn wine, Major- General David Tinyefuza, Major- General Jeje Odong and Lt. CoL Noble Mayombo a statement I later read to the Press at Parliament.


(9) That between 27^th February 2001 I was under, virtual house arrest at my residence in Bbunga, guarded by officers and men of the UPDF under the guise of state protection against my own candidate and his supporters.


(10) That, on the 21 February 2007 had to leave the country as I felt my life was in danger and presently lives in the UK with my family.


(11) Consequently I did not vote in the 72 March 2001 presidential Election which is a denial of my constitutional right.”
Mpwabwooba Callist stated in his affidavit as follows:
(5 ) I went to meet Major Okwii Rabwoni at Kambuga. There I found PPU soldiers who had Capt. Ndahura’s vehicle and beat up people who had came to meet Major Okwir.
(8) As soon as they saw me, they attacked and hit me with a stick. I rode my motor vehicle. They chased me with their double cabin but failed to catch up.


(9) At Rugyeyo where Okwir was to address us, they came again ordered us to disperse despite the fact that police authorities and GISO had been notified about our meeting.
(11) On 3rd March 2001 when Dr. Besigye was coming to address a rally at Kanungu the GISO, Baguma John and LC 11 Chairman Kanyonza went around telling people that if they turned up to the rally, they would be dealt with.


(13) Throughout the two remaining weeks to the election, the same people went around directing people to turn up and vote for Museveni and that if they did not, their homes would be burnt.


(14) On the day of elections, PPU soldiers were deployed throughout our village and neighbouring ones and at Gomborora Headquarters. The night of elections some soldiers were distributed at homes of some known supporters of Dr. Besigye such as James Musinguzi and Byaruhanga Benon. I found them there that night.



(17) At Kifunjo Polling station I found the presiding officer Mr. Korutokye personally ticking for candidate Museveni on the ballot papers before handing them to voters. We were counting 500 votes being ticked before we lost count and gave up. At Katojo, I found the same practice. At Kashojwa, Mwebesa Micheal was doing the same. When Kazahura came to vote, he found his ballot paper already ticked, but he insisted on ticking his own ballot paper which eventually they gave and he ticked it himself.

(22) A day after elections, Mugisha a councilor met me in presence of MP Kinyatta and the RDC and introduced me to them as the rebel who was trying to over throw them so as to become RDC in Besigye’s government.”

Affidavit of Bashaija Richard of Rukungiri township stated in his affidavit sworn on 20th March, 2001 as follows:

(1) That I am an adult Ugandan citizen.

(2) That I was registered voter in the Presidential Election at Butagasi polling station. I was also a co-ordinator on Dr. Besigye District Task Force.


(3) That on 27^th January 2001 we were holding our candidate’s meeting at Keijanga, Kirima. At 3:00 pm about 4 police men from Rukungiri came to the venue of the meeting and arrested us saying our meeting was illegal.They rounded us up At Rukungiri police station for 3 days and we were released on police bond. When we later reported back to honour the bond, they tore the bond papers and told us the case was closed.

4. 
   On the 201h February 2001 at Kanungu where we were coming from checking on our agents one Owembabazi and I were arrested by the GISO of Kirima who had set up a road block. We were beaten up, thrown on a pickup truck and taken to Karengye where I was thrown in a pit and buried under soil/mud leaving only the head in the open. After they had left, Owembabazi rescued me.
   
5. 
   As I was trying to go to Rukungiri to report the incident the same day police fired tear gas at me preventing me from doing so.
   
6. 
   A day later, the GISO and police demanded that I take them to the scene. We found there the owner of the land in which 1 had been buried and he corroborated my statement to that effect. They told me to report to the police the next day, but when I did, I was locked up for 3 days. Taken to count and charged with leading a demonstration. I was released on bail.
   
7. 
   That on 2^nd March 2001 as we were waiting for Dr. Besigye in-front of our District Campaign Office, PPU soldiers attacked us and beat us up, dispersing us and preventing us from meeting our candidate. That evening, the PPU soldiers found me in Ifumo hotel, attested me and dragged me to the streets, removed my shoes, kicked me for about 30 minutes and then released me.
   
8. 
   That on 3 March 2001, as we were arranging to hold a rally with our candidate, I found Capt. Ndahura of PPU in Hotel Holiday. He called me to his table, pulled out his pistol held it to my head and warned me he would shoot me if anything happened to PPU personnel in Rukungiri. The same day after Besigye’s rally, the PPU soldiers went on rampage in the town shooting many bullets in the air and at our supporters and killing one Beronda in the precis. We had not provoked them in any way. We had not breached the peace nor were we demonstrating but were just walking back from the venue of our candidates’ rally.
   
9. 
   From then on, the PPU soldiers started actively looking for me and I went into hiding till the morning of voting day when I sneaked in and case my vote.
   

(10) That the above are were examples or the kind of harassment my colleagues and on the Besigye campaign team in Rukungiri went through especially from the time the PPU and Senior District Administrators actively started on a deliberate process to prevent any form of support for Dr. Besigye in Rukungiri and Kanungu District.

Dan Okello in support of the petition stated in his affidavit as follows: