The criticism of the learned trial judge’s finding on the averment that the Electoral Commission failed to provide light during the vote counting is unjustified. Mr. Lukwago pointed the evidence of Lumala Bukenya in respect of (Ntinda I), Sentongo Wasswa, (Kiwanga I), Christopher, (Nakapinyi A-M & N-Z), Sowedi Lwanga (Lutengo A & B) and Baliika polling stations respectively. Regarding disenfranchisement at Gwafu I and Gwafu II and other polling stations, the trial judge in her judgment stated thus: “After perusal of the evidence on this point, the court also finds that the allegation that a number of voters who were issued voters’ cards to vote at Gwafu I and II did not vote because they were told on polling day that their stations were non-existent is proved. The Court is satisfied from their evidence that they were denied the opportunity to vote for their candidate, namely the petitioner as a result of the removal of the two polling stations by the 2nd Respondent. Article 59 of the Constitution casts an obligation on the state to ensure that all Ugandans who qualify to vote vote. The Electoral Commission is charged with that duty under Article 61 of the Constitution. The other category of voters that were allegedly disenfranchised are those voters who alleged that they went to the polling stations and were openly told by the presiding officers that they were not on the voters register after the presiding officers hurriedly looked through the registers or at times, did not look at the register at all”. After perusing the evidence on record and considering the submissions of counsel for the parties, I entirely agree with the above findings of the learned trial judge. I have no justification to fault her on those findings. On the issue of illegible voters, the learned trial judge stated as follows: “In conclusion and based on the affidavits on record and the findings, court is satisfied that this allegation was proved by the petitioner”. I entirely agree with her finding