Seeta IV polling station involving one Namutebi Joyce, L.C.I Secretary for information and campaign agent of the 2nd appellant, who was found distributing cards at the polling station. Counsel argued that the learned trial judge was unfair to wholesomely reject the evidence of Namutebi Joyce for containing obvious lies. Mr. Lukwago submitted that by using the word “wholesomely” counsel seem to suggest that at least there were some aspects of her evidence which were not false. According to Lukwago, counsel for the appellants do not point them out. They simply argue that if Namutebi held cards for children who were above 18 years, it would not be an exaggeration. Campaigning at Kiwumu, Nakapinyi, Ntinda I and Kyampisi Polling Stations. The finding of the trial judge on the issue of campaigning at the above polling stations is 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”. Counsel for the appellants contend that the above finding was erroneous. It is the submission of Mr. Lukwago that the trial judge properly analysed the evidence on record from pages 48 to 52 of the judgment and came to a proper finding. Counsel Lukwago pointed out that counsel for the appellants are silent about Namilyango and Kikandwa polling stations which fall in the same category. In his view, counsel for the appellants are satisfied with the judge’s findings as far as those polling stations are concerned. Declaration of Results Forms and Falsification of Results Counsel for the appellants contend that those Declaration of Results Forms “must have been obtained from the petitioner’s supporters and agents” and that the normal practice is for the petitioner to ask for certified copies from the Electoral Commission or opening the ballot boxes to retrieve the Declaration of Results Forms therefrom. According to Mr. Lukwago, the above argument is untenable for the following