Lamwo | A leadership dispute in Lamwo district has deepened into a looming legal battle after 20 councillors, describing themselves as the “majority of the district council”, formally notified district leaders of their intention to sue.
They intend to sue over the election and approval of the district vice chairperson and committee secretaries.
The councillors are challenging the manner in which the district executive was approved during a council sitting held on June 8, 2026, arguing that the process violated the Local Government Act, Cap 138, and the Standard Rules of Procedure for Local Government Councils (July 2019).
According to Oryema John Apire, the lead petitioner, the controversy traces back to the first sitting of the newly constituted district council on May 21, 2026.
That meeting, presided over by the Chief Magistrate Joseph Ekirita, successfully handled the swearing-in of councillors and the election of the speaker and deputy speaker before proceeding to the nomination and approval of the vice chairperson and secretaries.
The approval of the vice chairperson was, however, halted after the nominee allegedly failed to secure the two-thirds majority of all council members required under the Local Government Act, Cap 138.
The council later reconvened on 8 June 2026 to complete the formation of the district executive and it is during this session that the petitioners allege irregularities occurred.
Potika sub-county councillor John Apire Oryema petitioned district authorities, accusing the speaker and the district chairperson of misconduct and abuse of council procedures during the nomination and approval process.
The petition alleges that the dpeaker disregarded councillors’ calls to raise points of procedure and points of order which are ordinarily given priority before a ruling and instead proceeded with a voice vote using “Ayes” and “Nays” to determine the Vice Chairperson’s approval.
The petitioners argue that a voice vote could not accurately establish whether the nominee had attained the required two-thirds majority, and that the Speaker acted contrary to guidance from the district’s legal advisor.
The petition was received by several district and security offices, including the Resident District Commissioner (RDC), William Komakech, and the district security apparatus; the district chairperson’s office under Oyet Sisto Ocen; and the Chief Administrative Officer, Chuna Moses Kapolon.
In a written response dated June 16, 2026, addressed to councillor Oryem, CAO Chuna Moses Kapolon defended the conduct of the meeting, stating that his office provided technical guidance in line with the law.
He explained that when disagreement arose over how to determine the required two-thirds approval, he advised the speaker to invoke Rule 64(3) of the Standard Rules of Procedure for Local Government Councils (July 2019), which provides three methods of voting: voice voting, secret voting, and division.
“The speaker chose to use voice voting and, using this method, pronounced the nominated vice chairperson as duly approved,” the CAO stated.
The petition had also asked the CAO to halt the operations of the vice chairperson, Odongmadiki David and the Secretary for Finance, Planning and Administration Odur Justine Peace pending resolution of the matter. The CAO declined.
“Whilst your petition sounds precautionary against litigation, I have no power whatsoever provided by the law to halt such appointments,” he wrote.
Dissatisfied with the outcome, the majority councillors have instructed lawyers from DeMott Law Advocates to pursue legal action should the matter remain unresolved.
Through their lawyers, the councillors are seeking: A court declaration nullifying the election of the vice chairperson; an order for a fresh, transparent election conducted through secret ballot or physical counting of votes; and an injunction restraining the current vice chairperson from performing official duties until the dispute is resolved.
The lawyers contend that the approval process lacked transparency and failed to reflect the true will of council members, and have given district leaders an opportunity to address the concerns before the matter proceeds to court.
The Constitution of the Republic of Uganda defines the role of the Chief Administrative Officer in advising the council on the application of laws and policies.
The Local Government Act, Cap 138 governs the composition, election, and approval of district executive members, including the two-thirds majority requirement while the Standard Rules of Procedure for Local Government Councils (July 2019) particularly Rule 64(3), which prescribes the three permissible voting methods (voice voting, secret voting, and division).
While the standoff appears largely political, residents warn that prolonged wrangles could divert attention from pressing community needs: service delivery, road maintenance, healthcare, education, and agricultural support.
Local governance experts note that district councils provide oversight and make decisions affecting thousands of residents, and that leadership disputes often create uncertainty that slows development programs.
If no resolution is reached, the case is expected to test how local government laws and council procedures are interpreted in resolving leadership disputes within district councils.
As of press time, the speaker and the district chairperson had not publicly responded to the allegations.
Discover more from tndNews, Uganda
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
