High-Court to hear Ssemugenyi’s case vs EC over 2026 Presidential nomination
Court to determine whether the Electoral Commission violated due process in rejecting independent aspirant Dennis Ssemugenyi’s presidential nomination
Kampala, Uganda – The High Court of Uganda has scheduled a hearing for Friday, 28 November 2025 in a case brought by environmentalist and independent presidential aspirant Dennis Daniel Ssemugenyi, who is challenging the EC’s decision to reject his nomination for the 2026 presidential race.
Ssemugenyi’s complaint centres on what he calls an arbitrary and non-transparent nomination process by the EC – arguing that although he submitted all required documentation and complied with the nomination procedures, the Commission declined to include him among the final list of aspirants cleared to contest the elections.
In his legal petition, Ssemugenyi argues that the EC’s failure to act on his post-nomination petition – filed immediately after his rejection – amounts to a violation of his constitutional rights to a fair hearing and due process. He is seeking a judicial review and a writ of mandamus to direct the EC to include him on the presidential ballot. He is also demanding compensation for the costs incurred in gathering supporters’ signatures across more than 110 districts.
According to EC spokesperson Julius Mucunguzi, the Commission has received Ssemugenyi’s complaint along with others from aggrieved aspirants, and is processing them – assuring that decisions will be communicated “in due time” as preparations for the printing of ballot papers proceed.
During the nomination phase, EC reportedly received about 300 expression-of-interest forms from Ugandans, of which only 38 returned the mandatory signature documentation, and only eight aspirants ultimately met the full statutory requirements to be cleared for the 2026 presidential election.
If the High Court rules in favour of Ssemugenyi, it could force the EC to revise its list of nominated candidates – potentially widening the presidential field. But if the court upholds the EC’s decision, it would reinforce the Commission’s current approach to candidate vetting and nomination compliance.
