Time-barred: Court dismisses Katabu’s challenge against Kampala Central mayor Salim Uhuru

The High Court in Kampala has struck out an election petition filed by National Unity Platform (NUP) candidate Moses Katabu challenging the victory of National Resistance Movement (NRM) incumbent Salim Saad Uhuru as Kampala Central Mayor, ruling that the application was filed outside the mandatory 14-day statutory deadline.

In a decision handed down on Tuesday, October 13, 2026, presiding judge Justice Nabakooza Flavia K. held that Election Petition No. 017 of 2026 was time-barred and therefore incompetent before the court.
Justice Nabakooza observed that strict compliance with electoral timelines is mandatory under the law, noting that the court lacks the jurisdiction to salvage an out-of-time filing.
“It follows from the foregoing provisions that an election petition filed even one day beyond the prescribed fourteen-day period is time-barred,” Justice Nabakooza observed.
“The petition is therefore time-barred and incompetently before this Court,” the judge ruled.

Official court records show that the Electoral Commission published the Kampala Central mayoral election results in the Uganda Gazette on May 15, 2026, setting the statutory filing period from May 16 to May 29, 2026. However, Katabu lodged his petition on May 30, 2026, at 12:21 p.m., missing the deadline by several hours.
Under Section 150(4) of the Local Governments Act, aggrieved parties must file an election petition within 14 days from the date of official publication in the gazette.

In making her determination, Justice Nabakooza relied on legal precedents, including Senyonjo Robert v. Electoral Commission & Kalanzi Robert and Okiria v. Zomu and Another, which established the binding nature of local government election timelines.
She also cited the landmark Supreme Court decision in Kyagulanyi v. Museveni & 3 Others, reinforcing that judicial officers cannot invoke inherent powers to entertain an election petition submitted outside statutory limits.
“Accordingly, Election Petition No. 017 of 2026, Katabu Moses vs Salim Saad Uhuru and the Electoral Commission, is hereby struck out,” she held.

Prior to the court's threshold ruling on timing, Mayor Uhuru and the Electoral Commission had filed an interlocutory application seeking to expunge 28 additional affidavits submitted by Katabu between August 24 and September 3, 2026.

The applicants contended that introducing new affidavits months after the initial petition violated legal procedure, was prejudiced against the defense, and deprived them of proper service, as the witnesses were omitted from Katabu’s original filing.
In a supporting affidavit sworn on behalf of the Electoral Commission, official Abubaker Kayondo argued that all supporting evidence and witness statements must strictly adhere to statutory filing rules.

Counsel for Mayor Uhuru similarly submitted to the court that allowing late supplementary affidavits would effectively permit a petitioner to construct a new case outside the legally mandated timeframe.
Katabu vigorously resisted the application, contending that electronic filing through the Electronic Court Case Management Information System (ECCMIS) served as valid service and arguing that technical errors should not deprive a litigant of the right to present key witnesses.

However, Justice Nabakooza declined to rule on the merits of the affidavit dispute, holding that the collapse of the underlying petition rendered the supplementary applications redundant.
“Consequently, I find that the present application is likewise incompetent,” Justice Nabakooza ruled, adding that it was unnecessary to determine the procedural objections raised by counsel.
The judge directed that each party bear their own costs, noting that the court raised the issue of statutory non-compliance on its own motion rather than through a preliminary objection raised by either party.

The Electoral Commission declared Uhuru the winner of the Kampala Central mayoral race after he polled 32,769 votes against Katabu’s 9,090 votes. The High Court's dismissal definitively concludes the legal contest without entering into the substantive merits of the election challenge.