NUP Lawyers Want ‘NRM Cadre Judge’ Simon Peter Kinobe Out Of Masaka Vote Recount Case
MASAKA: Lawyers representing National Unity Platform (NUP) candidate Rose Nalubowa have asked Acting High Court Judge Simon Peter Kinobe to excuse himself from hearing a judicial review application challenging the Masaka City Woman MP election vote recount.
Nalubowa filed the petition in the Masaka High Court, contesting the procedures that led to the recount of votes and the declaration of National Resistance Movement (NRM) candidate Justine Nameere as the winner.
The application, filed under Revisionary Clause Number 1 of 2026, seeks to revise the record of the Chief Magistrate and all related orders, including the declaration of Nameere as winner.
The hearing, which began Wednesday morning with Judge Kinobe presiding, quickly became a courtroom debate over judicial impartiality.
Lawyers for Nalubowa argued that Judge Kinobe’s past political engagement with the ruling NRM raised concerns about bias. Alexander Lule Nkima, one of the counsel, noted that the judge had participated in the 2021 NRM primaries and had publicly defended the party in media appearances.
“We have no information that when you were appointed a judge you resigned from NRM,” Nkima said. “Prior to your appointment, you were an active NRM supporter and antagonistic toward opposition parties, especially the NUP.”
Judge Kinobe, however, rejected calls to recuse himself, insisting that past political affiliations do not automatically imply bias. “For as long as I live as a judge, if I say hi to a person in NRM, I am assumed to be NRM,” he said, adding that judicial independence cannot be judged solely by previous political activity.
The debate highlighted the principle that parties cannot choose their judge and stressed the constitutional right to an independent tribunal. Counsel argued that public perception matters in ensuring trust in the judiciary.
The session also involved procedural discussions, with the judge allowing a brief adjournment for counsel to consult their client, but emphasizing the urgency of the matter.
Alleged Irregularities in the Recount
The revision application challenges the recount process, which Nalubowa’s lawyers say was fraught with procedural errors. Samuel Muyizzi, representing the NUP candidate, argued that the Chief Magistrate erred by conducting the recount outside the mandated four-day period, including over a weekend, and by ignoring his own orders regarding tampered ballot boxes.
Lawyers also raised concerns over the refusal to use the Biometric Voter Verification (BVVK) kit, which could have verified the authenticity of ballots. Muyizzi said this led to the counting of votes that should have been excluded.
“The Chief Magistrate had to personally determine which ballots were valid. That entire process was wrong in procedure,” he said. He added that contradictory rulings in Kalungu West, Bukomasimbi, and Masaka City further undermined the credibility of the recount.
The counsel concluded by reiterating the purpose of the revision application: to ensure that all procedural irregularities and unlawful orders are set aside and that the rightful winner of the election—Nalubowa—is recognised.