Lawyers representing Prof Morris Ogenga-Latigo, the Member of Parliament (MP) for Agago North Constituency in Agago district on Monday afternoon questioned the credibility of evidence that was presented before the High Court by witnesses to pin Prof Latigo on bribery allegations in the run up to the February 18 parliamentary elections.
Sixteen of the 23 witnesses lined up against Prof Ogenga- Latigo (FDC) by his rival, John Amos Okot (NRM) have alleged that they received money, garments, households items such as saucepan and water pipes for boreholes in an attempt to influence them so that they vote for him (Latigo).
In his petition filed at Gulu High Court, Okot, through his lawyer Frank Kanduho says there were 16 incidences were agents of Ogenga- Latigo with his (Latigo’s) knowledge used money in an attempt to influence voters in his favor.
According to Okot’s lawyer, on some occasion, packets of salts, bars of soaps and rice were distributed by Latigo himself or were channeled through his agents.
Kanduho further argued that the election was not conducted in line with provisions of the law. He accordingly asked Justice Matovu to set aside the election of Latigo and order for new election for Agago North Constituency saying Latigo and his agents contravened sections 21 (b), 71 & 73 of the parliamentary election act.
Prof Latigo won the poll with 14,079 votes to become the first Member of Parliament for the newly created Agago North constituency. His challenger, Okot polled 10,420 votes.
Latigo’s Lawyer Fires Back
But Dan Wandera Ogalo, the lead counsel for Ogenga-Latigo criticized the evidence tendered before Mbarara resident High Court judge, Justice David Matovu and described it as a deliberate lies against his client (Prof Ogenga-Latigo).
Wandera Ogalo described all the evidence against his client as hearsay. Ogalo told Justice Matovu that the witnesses were inconsistent and contradictory and therefore their testimonies cannot be relied up on.
Wandera Ogalo noted that the petitioner (Okot) failed to prove the ingredients of bribery since the witnesses failed to prove that they are registered voters.
Citing Dr Kizza Besigye versus electoral commissioner and President Yoweri Museveni in the election petition of 2006, Wandera Ogalo explained that the individuals who claimed to have received bribes from Latigo or his agents with intention to influence their decision should have proved to court that they are voters by attaching a photocopy of their voters’ cards.
Meanwhile Peter Mulongo, the Electoral Commission’s lawyer faulted Okot and said there is no evidence that he (Okot), brought the complains he is raising in court formally to the knowledge of the electoral body.
Mulongo says Okot has failed to prove that the election was marred with irregularities and that the result substantially affected the results of the parliamentary elections in Agago.
He also noted that none of Okot agents complained during the voting that polling stations closed before the statutory time.
Justice Matovu has set June 23, 2016 at 9AM as a date he will deliver the ruling into the election petition.
