Masaka High Court has barred a police handwriting expert from testifying in the Kalungu West parliamentary election petition, ruling that he was not competent to give evidence in the matter.
Justice Joyce Kavuma made the ruling on Saturday after lawyers for independent candidate Ismael Semakula objected to the proposed testimony of Senior Superintendent of Police Elisha Ssebuwufu, a handwriting expert attached to the Police Forensic Laboratory.
Ssebuwufu had examined four disputed declaration of results forms from the January 15 parliamentary elections. The documents lie at the centre of Semakula’s petition challenging the election of National Unity Platform (NUP) MP Joseph Gonzaga Ssewungu.
Semakula, who finished second in the race, accuses the Electoral Commission of bias and collusion in electoral offences that he says affected the outcome of the election.
In his petition, Semakula singled out results forms from Kakunyu, St Josephine Bulawula Primary School, Nalunya Church of Uganda Primary School and Kisagazi polling stations, alleging that someone forged the documents to alter the results in Ssewungu’s favour.
Semakula attached copies of the declaration of results forms that he said he obtained from his polling agents and other candidates. He argues that the figures on those copies differ from the results forms the returning officer relied on during the final tally.
According to Semakula, the discrepancies gave Ssewungu an inflated winning margin of 46 votes. Ssewungu, through his lawyer Samuel Mulindwa Muyizzi, rejected the allegations and accused Semakula of fabricating documents to mislead the court.
Muyizzi had asked the court to allow the defence to engage a handwriting expert from the Government Analytical Laboratory (GAL) to examine the disputed forms. He argued that an expert could establish whether the signatures attributed to Ssewungu’s polling agents were genuine.
However, Semakula’s lawyers, led by Ambrose Tebyasa, objected when the defence presented Ssebuwufu, arguing that the police forensic expert was not competent to testify in the matter.
Tebyasa told court that Ssewungu had sought permission to engage an expert from GAL but instead presented a specialist from the Police Forensic Laboratory. He argued that the defence could not depart from the expert arrangement it had sought and asked the court to reject Ssebuwufu’s testimony.
Although Ssebuwufu appeared in court with his forensic analysis report, Tebyasa maintained his objection and told the judge that the petitioner’s legal team would not cross-examine him because it considered him an inappropriate witness to present the analysis.
Justice Kavuma upheld the objection, stopped Ssebuwufu from taking the witness stand and struck out his evidence. The judge, however, directed the parties to address the issue in their final written submissions, saying the court would consider its legal significance when delivering the final judgment.
The court has now concluded the hearing of Semakula’s case after 26 witnesses testified in support of his petition. Justice Kavuma directed Ssewungu to prepare his defence witnesses, who are scheduled to begin testifying on October 23 as the petition enters its next phase.