A coalition of political parties and civil society organizations has filed a legal challenge against the Electoral Commission’s (EC) plan to deploy Biometric Voter Verification Kits (BVVKs) in the January 15 general elections, arguing that the enabling regulation is unlawful and could undermine the credibility of results.
The objection, filed by Mbaabaali Jude & Co. Advocates on behalf of registered political parties, presidential candidates, and CSOs, seeks an immediate suspension of Statutory Instrument (SI) No. 98 of 2025. The SI, formally titled “The Electoral Commission (Adoption and Manner of Use of Biometric Voter Verification System) Regulations, 2025”, was issued on December 24, 2025, by Justice and Constitutional Affairs Minister Norbert Mao. It mandates the use of BVVKs at all polling stations to identify voters electronically.
The petition contends that the SI is ultra vires the Electoral Commission Act (Cap 176), procedurally flawed, and retroactive, potentially triggering “a significant legal and operational crisis.” Uganda has increasingly embraced electoral technology to enhance transparency and prevent voter fraud. In late 2025, the EC acquired 109,142 BVVKs for voter verification, rejecting proposals to repurpose Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) kits from the 2024 census. Demonstrations were held for MPs and the media, with assurances of the kits’ accuracy and reliability.
Despite this, opposition figures such as Leader of Opposition Joel Ssenyonyi (Nakawa West) and Mathias Mpuuga (Nyendo-Mukungwe Division) have questioned both the legal basis and operational readiness of the kits. They argue that the regulation should have been tabled in Parliament under the Statutory Instruments Act, and unilateral deployment undermines constitutional safeguards.
The challenge cites inconsistencies with Sections 12(2), (4), and (5) of Cap 176, which authorize the EC on matters such as vital statistics, ballot packaging, and penalties, but do not empower it to mandate BVVK use. The petition references High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 11 of 2020, where similar regulations under the Local Government Act were invalidated for exceeding legal authority.
The SI was not tabled in Parliament as required under Section 12(1d) of Cap 176 and the Statutory Instruments Act, violating procedural safeguards. Its application to an electoral process already underway is seen as retroactive, potentially invalidating votes cast under a mid-process system. Uganda has over 21.6 million registered voters across 50,739 polling stations. Experts warn that faulty verification could lead to disenfranchisement, disputes, or post-election litigation, replicating the court congestion experienced after the 2021 elections.
The controversy has divided opinion. Ssenyonyi described the challenge as “long overdue clarity,” while Mpuuga labeled the SI a “legal sham.” EC Spokesperson Julius Mucunguzi dismissed the concerns as “baseless,” emphasizing the kits’ role in fraud prevention. Justice and Constitutional Affairs Minister Norbert Mao has not publicly responded.
The Center for Constitutional Governance, represented by Dr. Sarah Bireete (currently under detention), has publicly supported the objection, stressing the need to uphold electoral legality. With the January 15 elections approaching, analysts say a court ruling or parliamentary clarification will be pivotal to ensuring that the electoral process remains credible and transparent.
****URN***