Besigye, judges react to Kenya ruling

Dr Kizza Besigye

What you need to know:

Praised. Dr Besigye said the judges in Kenya gathered the courage to do what their counterparts in Uganda failed to do on three occasions.

Kampala. Opposition leader Kizza Besigye hailed the decision of the Supreme Court of Kenya to annul the August 8 re-election of president Uhuru Kenyatta, saying the judges in Uganda’s neighbour to the west gathered the courage to do what their counterparts in Uganda failed to do on three occasions.
Dr Besigye petitioned the Supreme Court in 2001 and again in 2006, when he said the elections had been stolen in President Museveni’s favour.
On both occasions, the court agreed with him on many of the grounds, although the court then ruled that the violations did not substantially affect the results.
The four-time challenger against Mr Museveni argued then, and he yesterday repeated after the ruling in Kenya, that it should be enough for the petitioner to win if he can prove that there was non-compliance with the laws.
Justice Benjamin Odoki, who was Chief Justice and presided over the two petitions which Dr Besigye lost, declined to offer a comment about the ruling when contacted yesterday. “I am in Swaziland; I don’t know anything about that,” Mr Odoki said.
But deputy government spokesman Shaban Bantariza argued that the ruling nullifying president Uhuru’s election cannot be compared to Dr Besigye’s unsuccessful petitions because Kenya and Uganda have “different parameters and benchmarks”.
“The beauty with a democracy is that it has the same principles for all but different applications. You can only talk about learning lessons when there are similar benchmarks and parameters because if you do not do that, then the comparison will be non-representative,”Mr Bantariza said.
The retired Justice John Wilson Tsekooko, who in 2001 and 2006 ruled to annul Mr Museveni’s election, told Saturday Monitor that the judges are supposed to rule according to the evidence presented to them.
The 2001 petition was decided 2:3 against Dr Besigye, and the 2006 election went 3:4 again against Dr Besigye. On both occasions, Mr Odoki’s vote was the decisive one.
In 2016, former prime minister Amama Mbabazi also challenged Mr Museveni’s re-election, and the Supreme Court led by Chief Justice Bart Katureebe threw out the petition.

What they say about the ruling

Dr Kizza Besigye

“The judgment simply made one fundamental point; that if you violate the constitution, if you violate the electoral laws, then the election cannot stand because the electoral process is built on the constitution and the laws.”

John Wilson Tsekooko, retired Justice of the Supreme Court

“The constitution gives the court powers to make such a decision. If members of the court were satisfied with the evidence adduced by the petitioner, they had to make a decision.

Stella Arach Amoko, Supreme Court judge
“The constitution gives the court powers to make such a decision. If members of the court were satisfied with the evidence adduced by the petitioner, they had to make a decision.

Francis Gimara, Uganda Law Society president

“This judgment changes the jurisprudence of how courts have been handling election petitions because it makes it clear that it is not an issue of numbers but an issue of adhering to the rule of law and constitutional requirements.

Severino Twininobusigye, Mbabazi lawyer in 2016

“The judgment was unprecedented. This has changed the jurisprudence of constitutional law both in East Africa and the continent. It lays down what a free and fair election is.”

Shaban Bantariza, deputy government spokesperson

“If what has happened is according to the laws and processes of Kenya and happens for the sake of cohesion and harmony, then it is okay.”

“They must have been convinced that there was overwhelming evidence for them to nullify the election.