Proceedings in an election petition challenging the victory of Mukono Municipality MP Betty Nambooze were temporarily disrupted at the High Court in Mukono on Tuesday after relatives of two men expected to testify in the case confronted security personnel over the men’s whereabouts.
The relatives alleged that Joseph Yiga and Fred Ssebata had gone missing on Sunday and were later found inside a white Toyota Alphard, registration number UA 834 EH, reportedly belonging to Daisy Sarah Sonko Nabatanzi, the petitioner challenging Nambooze’s re-election.
The confrontation sparked commotion at the court premises as the relatives demanded an explanation about the men’s presence in the vehicle and attempted to remove them. Police intervened to restore order and subsequently took the two men and some of their relatives to Mukono Central Police Station.
The circumstances surrounding the incident, including the reasons for the arrests and the allegations against those detained, were not immediately established.
The incident occurred as Justice Godfrey Himbaza presided over the petition filed by Nabatanzi, a National Resistance Movement (NRM) member, challenging Nambooze’s victory in the 2026 parliamentary elections.
Vincent Ngonge, Ssebata’s father, and Juma Magumba, a relative of the two men, alleged that their family members had been picked up by a drone vehicle on Sunday and taken to an unknown destination.
The relatives said they reported the alleged disappearance to police under SD reference number 23/20/10/2026.
According to the family, they later traced the men to Jinja Road Police Station before learning that they had allegedly been transferred to Mpoma Barracks.
They said they subsequently found Yiga and Ssebata inside the white Toyota Alphard at the Mukono High Court premises on Tuesday, prompting them to demand an explanation from those accompanying the men.
Their attempt to remove the two reportedly triggered a confrontation with security personnel, interrupting the court proceedings.
The family’s allegations of abduction had not been independently verified by press time. It was also unclear whether police had established the men’s movements between the locations cited by their relatives.
The incident has brought renewed attention to a dispute over witnesses in the election petition.
Yiga and Ssebata were reportedly among six witnesses initially lined up to testify on Nabatanzi’s behalf. They were later said to have sworn fresh affidavits in support of Nambooze, raising questions about the circumstances in which the affidavits were prepared and the nature of their intended testimony.
The disagreement over the witnesses has become a point of contention between the rival legal teams, with the issues expected to be addressed through the court process.
Aaron Buyinza, one of the lawyers representing Nabatanzi, questioned aspects of the developments involving the witnesses, including why individuals initially expected to testify for the petitioner had allegedly been approached by Nambooze’s side.
Buyinza also questioned the incumbent MP’s motives. However, the allegations had not been established by the court, and no judicial finding had linked either party to the men’s reported disappearance.
The circumstances surrounding the witnesses’ reported change of position, as well as the validity and legal implications of their affidavits, remain matters for consideration in the proceedings.
Justice Himbaza temporarily suspended the hearing while security personnel restored calm at the court premises.
Proceedings later resumed, with Nambooze’s lawyer, Medard Ssegona, cross-examining Nabatanzi.
Nambooze’s legal team included Ssegona, Erias Nalukoola and Daphine Ahebwa, while Nabatanzi was represented by lawyers including Ahmed Mukasa and Malik Kiberu.
The hearing featured tense exchanges as the lawyers addressed issues relating to the election petition and the handling of witnesses.
During cross-examination, Ssegona questioned Nabatanzi about the grounds on which she was challenging Nambooze’s election victory.
The exchanges became heated at several points, reflecting the contentious nature of the proceedings.
Buyinza later clarified that the petition was not necessarily based on a claim that Nabatanzi had personally received more votes than Nambooze.
Instead, he said, the challenge centred on alleged violations of electoral laws and irregularities in the conduct of the election.
The court is expected to examine the allegations and determine whether the evidence presented establishes grounds for a legal remedy under the applicable electoral laws.
The latest confrontation has intensified scrutiny of the handling of witnesses in the case, particularly following the relatives’ claims that Yiga and Ssebata had disappeared before being found at the court premises.
However, the allegations of abduction, the reported transfers between police facilities and Mpoma Barracks, and the circumstances surrounding the arrests remained unresolved at the time of publication.
The court’s determination of the election petition will depend on the evidence and legal arguments presented before it, including any issues arising from the disputed witness affidavits.
No finding of wrongdoing against either party should be inferred from the allegations surrounding the incident unless established through the appropriate legal process.